Just to remind everyone, here is what GM finally said concerning the "productivity" issue:

My "productivity" wording was part of a suggestion in reply to an invitation by USM Sympathizer not an accusation.  If it is not an issue, then it is not and issue.

This is perhaps not as forceful a concession as I (USMS) might have hoped for, but it's a concession.  Point # 2 of the twelve points GM originally made is now off the table: GM seems willing to concede that USM faculty are productive and do not consider productivity a dirty word.

Now we can move through the other 11 suggestions made by GM.

Here's one that I suspect most of us can readily accept (with perhaps one reservation):

3) Offer to help one of your alumni support groups to start building a bridge between the alumni and the faculty.  There is such a project underway, but few of you know anything about it.  You've been too busy attacking those groups. I understand that you will be hearing about it soon.

I (Sympathizer) can't imagine anyone on this board who wouldn't be sincerely interested in building a bridge between the alumni and the faculty.  The only quibble I have with GM's phrasing of point three is that penultimate sentence: "You've been too busy attacking those groups."  To this I would simply respond that most of us have been frustrated that the alumni groups have not spoken out more vociferously in support of sound academic management at USM.  (To be honest, I can't remember them speaking out at all.)  The only alumni we have heard from prominently have been big Shelby supporters, such as "Toy" McLaughlin and I few others.  However, if there really is an honest effort and desire from alumni groups to begin building bridges with the faculty, then that's a great thing, and I can't think of anyone on this board who would not welcome such an effort and contribute to it as much as possible.

By my count, then, we have now taken care of two of GM's 12 suggestions: the "productivity" issue is off the table, and the willingness to work with alumni groups is off the table.

Here's another one I think we can all agree on:

5) Understand that the majority of the community and the alumni are good folks just like most of you, and that you have some bad apples just as they do.

This point is so sensible that I can't imagine anyone dissenting from it.

Okay: three down and nine to go (obviously I am dealing with the easy ones first!).

Going down the list, # 8 also looks unobjectionable:

8) Try to open your minds to the possibility that among your alums are some bright, successful, honest individuals who might have a few good ideas and who might lend a lot of financial support.

So far, then, we've got four points of agreement (or at least of non-disagreement); in other words, we have now eliminated one third of the twelve suggestions ("eliminated" in the sense that I think we can all agree on them).

The rest of the suggestions involve matters that are more open to debate and disagreement.  Before commenting on them (and because I also have some work to do in order to maintain my own academic "productivity"), I am pausing now so we can all take stock of the fact that on at least one third of GM's suggestions, we now all seem to be in agreement.  Whoda thunk it? 

Gracie's Mother wrote:

---

Cossack wrote: I am dizzy from reading all of the posts all centered around Gracie's Mother and her responses. I have carefully analyzed her responses and I have come to one conclusion. I sure feel sorry for poor Gracie.   If you had any objectivity, you would be able to see that I'm am among a very few on this board that is not wallowing in bitterness and self pity.  You can't stand it because I'm not willing to take any crap or to let you spin me. I thank the few reasonable voices I've heard the last couple of days, and I encourage you to divorce yourselves from the others on this board before them imbitter you again the whole world. There are venues that would welcome your experience, advice, and assistence in getting USM back on track.  Shelby Thames will be gone before you know it, and USM will survive and prosper.  Most of you, however will still be blaming your inadequacies and failures on someone else.  You'll still be bitter, and you'll still be sitting on your pity pots. In the meantime, those of us that are qenuinely interested in getting this university back on the move will join together and get it going in the right direction.  You, as usual, will continue to have little effect on anything.  You'll just continue trying to make everyone else as miserable as you. You should be ashamed of claiming to have anything to do with the mainstream faculty.  The faculty is made up of good, outstanding men and women.  They would never allow their good names to be tarnished by associating themselves with this childish and selfish organization.  You should apologize to me for letting me waste my time.  You aren't worth it.  Some of you have said that I fit into some sort of pattern where people come on the site, talk about having a dialouge, get insulted, and leave.  You call us "trolls".  Even though that fits very neatly in your paranoid thinking, it is much more likely that that is actually what happens.  We come on hoping we can initiate reasonable dialouge, get insulted, and leave having our worst fears about the AAUP validated.  

---

it appears if you dont agree with gracie's mother you are childish and selfish.  mother knows best and dont you forget it

where did mom get all the answers....no opinions   just the facts mamme

Gracie's Mother wrote:

---

having our worst fears about the AAUP validated.  

---

Mom, the President of AAUP is a Professor of Anthropolgy. She is highly regarded by the USM faculty. She has held virtually every elected position possible, among them elected to the Faculty Senate, elected to the Academic Council, and elected to the Graduate Council. Those elections were campus-wide and by secret ballot. I need not draw a conclusion to what I have said because that conclusion speaks for itself.

You keep harping that posters on this board are not part of the main stream of USM's faculty. You seem to depict us as agitators outside the main stream of faculty. You seem to believe that things are all right at USM if it were not for a minority of agitators. I've heard that story before. As I understand it, back in the pre- civil rights era some said that blacks were happy and content with what life had dealt them. Those same people said that it was outside agitators who were stirring them up. I need not draw a conclusion to what I have said because that conclusion speaks for itself.

Mom, please stop embarrasing me.

foot soldier wrote:

---

If you like us and we like you, adoption would be a possibility.

---

foot soldier wrote:

---

I will now try to provide possible lurkers on this board information about the AAUP. The AAUP is a national organization of some 45,000 members which supports academic freedom and tenure. It has chapters at colleges and universities all across the country. It has state organizations as well. It publishes a magazine, Academe, and other newsletters. It holds conferences and workshops. It is not a tiny group of disgruntled USM professors. There are, in fact, university presidents who belong to the AAUP. I know of a major university where the president and the provost have been the speakers at the meetings of the AAUP. Many universities aminstrators consult the policies of the AAUP "red book" for assitance when making decisions on policy, because it is an extremely useful document. Here is the statement about the AAUP from their national website: "The mission of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) is to advance academic freedom and shared governance, to define fundamental professional values and standards for higher education, and to ensure higher education's contribution to the common good. Founded in 1915, the AAUP has helped to shape American higher education by developing the standards and procedures that maintain quality in education and academic freedom in this country's colleges and universities. The AAUP's Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure is the definitive articulation of these principles and practices, and is widely accepted throughout the academic community. The Association's procedures ensuring academic due process remain the model for professional employment practices on campuses throughout the country. AAUP's amicus briefs before the U.S. Supreme Court and federal and state appellate courts address significant issues of academic freedom, and our policy statements are frequently cited in court decisions. As a non-profit [501(c)(3)] organization, we serve the profession, rather than individual members, and our services are available to all members of the profession, regardless of membership status. More than a thousand faculty members call on AAUP each year for advice and assistance. AAUP is best known for assisting individual faculty members when there is the probability that academic freedom or due process rights have been violated. In addition to our "case work," the Association works with Congress and state legislators to promote effective higher education legislation, and promotes the profession and the purposes of higher education in the public eye. College presidents and administrators rely on Association-developed policy statements and procedural guidelines. The Association has recently issued statements on topics such asdistance education, intellectual property, graduate student education, and work and family policies. AAUP annually publishes a nationally acclaimed faculty salary report that includes a comprehensive analysis of faculty salaries and benefits. In addition to its regular programs, AAUP issues reports each year on subjects of special interest. Recent initiatives include reports on the use of part-time and non-tenure-track faculty, faculty workloads and state intervention, the future of Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and tenure in medical schools. Membership in the national organization is open to all faculty, librarians, and academic professionals at two- and four-year accredited public and private colleges and universities. Current membership is about 45,000, with over 500 local campus chapters and 39 state organizations. Leadership is provided by bi-annually elected national officers drawn from colleges and universities throughout the country. The Association is governed by an elected national Council that meets twice a year, and by an Executive Committee that meets four times a year." Note, again, that anyone can post on this message board and that their comments do not necessarily represent the opinions of the AAUP.

---

FS,

Thanks for providing this info.  On most campuses, the AAUP chapters have little to do, because most colleges and universities try to abide by sound (AAUP-endorsed) academic principles.  In fact, at many campuses an AAUP chapter doesn't even exist (none has ever existed on my campus) because faculty are basically content with the way the university or college is managed.  I'm not sure if people in the community understand how completely out of step with the rest of academe USM has been these last few years.  AAUP is not, at ALL, a "radical" organization, either nationally or at USM.  I will try to address this issue in more detail later, after I get some other work done, but in the meantime I wanted to thank you for helping to get us pointed toward some potentially productive discussion. 

GM,

Some folks on this board (myself and USM Sympathizer at least) have tried to be accomodating.  Heck, I even kind of tried to defend you in a way.  Getting into heated discussions with these folks is tough -- try going to a conference!  I felt that it was a bit wrong for you to get flamed so hard.  Well, egg on my face it seems.  You have not responded to those who tried to talk to you.  You only seem to want to argue and whine (yes the dreaded whine word) with those who fired back questions that attacked your belief system.  I feel that we agree (and that you agree with many on this board) on a great many points.  However, you are too deeply into confrontation mode to notice it.  Could you be doing exactly what you accuse faculty of doing -- whining and arguing instead of seeking a solution?

Swan Song,

Please do not take my previous post to mean that those from other places, or those who have left should not take part in discussions concerning USM.  They should.  Sometimes, though, I get a bit miffed when some tell me things like "no quarter" or raise the banner of revolution from afar.  Those things are harder to do when staring SFT in the face as a reality and having to worry about a family.  For personal reasons I have chosen to stay -- and will have to remain in the trenches as the shells fly overhead.  We do need your support and participation, just do not lose patience with us. 

Rabble wrote:

---

Swan Song, Please do not take my previous post to mean that those from other places, or those who have left should not take part in discussions concerning USM.  They should.  Sometimes, though, I get a bit miffed when some tell me things like "no quarter" or raise the banner of revolution from afar.  Those things are harder to do when staring SFT in the face as a reality and having to worry about a family.  For personal reasons I have chosen to stay -- and will have to remain in the trenches as the shells fly overhead.  We do need your support and participation, just do not lose patience with us. 

---

Rabble,

Thanks for another excellent post, and for a very timely reminder.  I can't imagine what it must be like to actually have to live, day in and day out, with a president like Shelby and the crew with whom he has surrounded himself (who, fortunately, eventually tend to drop off or get pulled off [I was going to say "like leeches," but I'll try to keep this civil ]).  All of you who are still at USM have earned the respect and admiration of everyone in the academic world who knows of your plight, and the people who have been lucky enough to escape have also earned respect for fighting a very valiant fight while there.  In fact, one thing that very much impresses me about some of these latter people is that they remain committed to the cause when it would be very easy for them to "put the past behind them."  I am thinking of people such as Professor Kimber, for example, who checks in from time to time.  It says a lot about their commitment to their old school, their old colleagues, and their academic ideals that they still make their voices heard even after having "escaped."  There are lots and lots of people around the country who know what is happening at USM and who admire the heck out of all of you for fighting this fight.

Citizen Gone2 wrote:

---

Foot Soldier,
Thanks so much for your first post. . . . This is like a large group of jilted lovers.  I don't think Citizen Gone is some lazy prof.  He/She is probably much like you, just trapped for now or maybe permanently. . . . Those that are talking about compromising with the people (loose use of the term) who caused this are asking the faculty to be saints.  Sorry, at least I can't make that cut.
FWIW, for me it means a lot to know that those who have gone have not forgotten.

---

Gracie's Mother wrote:

---

If you had any objectivity, you would be able to see that I'm am among a very few on this board that is not wallowing in bitterness and self pity.  You can't stand it because I'm not willing to take any crap or to let you spin me. I thank the few reasonable voices I've heard the last couple of days, and I encourage you to divorce yourselves from the others on this board before them imbitter you again the whole world. There are venues that would welcome your experience, advice, and assistence in getting USM back on track.  Shelby Thames will be gone before you know it, and USM will survive and prosper.  Most of you, however will still be blaming your inadequacies and failures on someone else.  You'll still be bitter, and you'll still be sitting on your pity pots. In the meantime, those of us that are qenuinely interested in getting this university back on the move will join together and get it going in the right direction.  You, as usual, will continue to have little effect on anything.  You'll just continue trying to make everyone else as miserable as you. You should be ashamed of claiming to have anything to do with the mainstream faculty.  The faculty is made up of good, outstanding men and women.  They would never allow their good names to be tarnished by associating themselves with this childish and selfish organization.  You should apologize to me for letting me waste my time.  You aren't worth it.  Some of you have said that I fit into some sort of pattern where people come on the site, talk about having a dialouge, get insulted, and leave.  You call us "trolls".  Even though that fits very neatly in your paranoid thinking, it is much more likely that that is actually what happens.  We come on hoping we can initiate reasonable dialouge, get insulted, and leave having our worst fears about the AAUP validated.  

---

Some of us--myself included--got taken for a ride by a moderately sophisticated troll.  Reconciliation with at least some parts of the community is on everyone's mind now--but it doesn't mean that everyone who purports to favor reconciliation actually wants it.

In the future, I think it will be best not to engage anyone who comes on this board insisting that the USM chapter of AAUP has a hopelessly bad reputation, can't represent the faculty,  is beyond the pale, etc.  Because when defenders of the AAUP take exception, the obvious followup will be like GM's: to huff and puff and insist that his or her worst fears about the AAUP were validated.  People who lead with such presuppositions know how to get other posters angry at them; they are not motivated to learn anything, and have no genuine interest in discussing anything.

I think we are going to see more trolls using GM's procedure: trying to drive a wedge between the alleged radicals in the AAUP or the Faculty Senate or on some other faculty body, and the "mainstream faculty."  To the extent that people like GM have an agenda beyond getting the folks on this board mad at them, the agenda's not to improve USM.  It's to divide the posters on this board, and, when possible, to divide the faculty.  Because for posters like GM, the worst university administration will never be nearly as bad as any group of professors who publicly object to that administration.

As for the accusations of bitterness, ineffectuality, and seeking external sources to blame for personal failures, they look like projection to me.

Isn't the greatest fear of posters like GM that the USM chapter of the AAUP and the Faculty Senate have been effective in leading the resistance to Shelby Thames, and will be effective in restoring normal university functioning to USM?

Robert Campbell

PS.  It would be interesting to compare GM's rhetoric with "USM Product's" a while back.  USM Product didn't care what the facts were, only what persons in authority decided they were.  But when the IHL Board (which USM Product insisted was the only group of people that could make informed judgments about the Thames' performance) put a two-year time limit on the Thames regime, the appeal to authority against anyone who dared to criticize him no longer worked.  GM didn't care what the facts were, either.  But since the Board had finally ruled against Thames, there had to be a new way to marginalize and vilify those who participated in the resistance against him. How better than to insist that those who resisted Thames are now standing in the way of reconciliation?