Calling B.S here - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jun 13, 2005

RE: Calling B.S here

Date: Jun 13, 2005

USM Sympathizer wrote:

Momma Troll, I was just teasing when I asked if you were Gracie's Mom. If you'd like to have a serious discussion, I think you'll find that a lot of us will be glad to engage in one with you. Thanks for visiting the board.

I am as serious as a heartbeat. You people would sell your mothers to protect your precious tenure. That is what this is about. Stop trying to make something grander and more respectable out of it. You don't have the least desire to engage in a serious discussion with anyone who might question this outdated concept. That is really what scares you so badly about Shelby Thames. You fear that if he stayed around long enough the concept of tenure might be threatened. All this "holier than thou" is just smoke screen. Admit it and we might be able to have a very serious discussion, but I am frankly not sure I would want to waste my time. This is an established fact. What is there to be discussed?

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Hmm, I wonder how Thames would have reacted if anyone had threatened HIS tenure? He sure didn't volunteer to give it up. And as I recall, the whole Angie D. thing was over her claim to have been tenured at U of KY. So, some people seem to think tenure is important.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Mama Troll wrote:

USM Sympathizer wrote: Momma Troll, I was just teasing when I asked if you were Gracie's Mom. If you'd like to have a serious discussion, I think you'll find that a lot of us will be glad to engage in one with you. Thanks for visiting the board. I am as serious as a heartbeat. You people would sell your mothers to protect your precious tenure. That is what this is about. Stop trying to make something grander and more respectable out of it. You don't have the least desire to engage in a serious discussion with anyone who might question this outdated concept. That is really what scares you so badly about Shelby Thames. You fear that if he stayed around long enough the concept of tenure might be threatened. All this "holier than thou" is just smoke screen. Admit it and we might be able to have a very serious discussion, but I am frankly not sure I would want to waste my time. This is an established fact. What is there to be discussed?

MT,

Our discussion isn't getting off to a very good start, but I'll make the attempt nonetheless.

MT, do you know why tenure was created and why it is almost universally practiced, even at private schools?

Date: Jun 13, 2005

For MT and anyone else who might be interested:

http://www.umich.edu/~urecord/9798/Apr08_98/faculty.htm

Date: Jun 13, 2005

More for MT:

http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/12076.html

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Yet more for MT:

http://www.merage.uci.edu/~mckenzie/tenure.html

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Yet once more, O ye MT, and once more ye Myrtle Brown:

http://www.oah.org/pubs/nl/2005may/knight.html

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Mama Troll wrote:

You people would sell your mothers to protect your precious tenure. That is what this is about. Stop trying to make something grander and more respectable out of it. You don't

Mamma Troll, tenure is designed to protect academic freedom. It's purpose is not to protect jobs. Tenured faculty members can be and are fired. Take it from me. I've seen it elsewhere first hand. And much closer than from a nose's length. And that with the counsel and blessings of National AAUP. Actually, schools that subscribe to AAUP principles have a much easier job in terminating tenured faculty members with cause. Schools often incorporate the AAUP principles relating to termination into their Faculty Handbook and other official university documents. Unfortunately, USM never seemed to have the presence of mind to do that and it actively discouraged the formation of an AAUP chapter. When I listened to my dean give his views of AAUP I knew I had come to the wrong place. USM would not be in this cesspool of a mess had it subscribed to AAUP principles.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

An especially interesting link, since it mentions Richard Crofts:

http://mtprof.msun.edu/Fall2000/bor.html

Date: Jun 13, 2005

MT,

If tenure were abolished at USM, there would simply be a "brain drain" away from USM and toward other state universities that retain tenure. If tenure were abolished at all state universities, there would simply be a "brain drain" away from state universities and toward private universities. Tenure is one of the very few reasons a highly qualified person might want to apply for a job at USM. Eliminate it, and you will simply (to use the technical term) be "pulling a Shelby" -- i.e., shooting off a another toe in order to create a wurl class foot.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Mama Troll wrote:

Well you sound like Pewee Herman to me, but that you say I sound like someone else is relevent only in that to admit that I might be still another community member that has little respect for your goup would be unacceptable to you. You obviously think of yourself as a gallant crusader of some sort, but you are actually a boring tyrant wannabe. Obviously the people at Clemson don't think much of you, or you wouldn't spend so much of your time here. Let's get to the bottom line. It's not about Shelby. It's cetainly not about Mr. McLaughlin. It's about you precious tenure. You just don't have enough confidence in your ability to hold down your jobs without it. Come on, Dr. Peewee. Come clean. I am referring as many people as I can to this site to see for themselves what you and your minions are about. Let them decide for themselves. You are perhaps the best PR man Shelby Thames ever had.

Take a look at RC's vita and you'll see that he is highly productive. His visits here are just breaks between his normal work.

You mentioned earlier that the AAUP folks make the "good" faculty look bad. Can you name anyone among the "good" faculty who do not support tenure?

For that matter, can you name more than a handful among the "good" faculty who support Shelby Thames?

These are serious questions; please try to answer them without resorting to name-calling.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Mamma Troll,

It's easier to terminate a faculty member than it is to terminate public employees who are under the Mississippi Merit System. And thank heavens for that. From what I have seen at USM the staff needs all the protecton they can get. If I told you what my dean once instructed me to do, it would blow the hairpiece off your head. I should have turned in my keys and left on the spot. When people that are not nice get in control, the little person can suffer.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Mama Troll wrote:

I am as serious as a heartbeat. You people would sell your mothers to protect your precious tenure. That is what this is about. Stop trying to make something grander and more respectable out of it. You don't have the least desire to engage in a serious discussion with anyone who might question this outdated concept. That is really what scares you so badly about Shelby Thames. You fear that if he stayed around long enough the concept of tenure might be threatened. All this "holier than thou" is just smoke screen. Admit it and we might be able to have a very serious discussion, but I am frankly not sure I would want to waste my time. This is an established fact. What is there to be discussed?

Mama Troll, let's start with a good definition of terms so that we don't end up talking pass each other. USM Sympathizer has supplied reading for anyone who wants to get up to speed on tenure.

For me the bottom line on tenure is that faculty can't be fired without a good reasons, specified in the contract. Evidence has to be presented in a hearing where the burden is on the administration to show that the faculty member should be fired for the reasons specified.

Tenure does not mean "employment for life", as some lay people describe it. Post tenure review exists and the policies specify what steps need to take place.

Faculty have responsibilities in teaching, research and service. But they don't all devote equal efforts to all areas during their careers. Younger prof usually spend much more effort on research than teaching and service. The older profs many times devote most of their time to teaching and service, especially as they approach retirement age.

Most departments work as a team. The overall effort is divided so that each prof does most of the work in the area they are most productive.

I believe the confusion arises when people think that profs should only do research and bring in money. That is what SFT taught the public, because that is what he did. But the primary purpose of a university is education.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

LeftASAP wrote:

Mama Troll, let's start with a good definition of terms so that we don't end up talking pass each other. USM Sympathizer has supplied reading for anyone who wants to get up to speed on tenure. For me the bottom line on tenure is that faculty can't be fired without a good reasons, specified in the contract. Evidence has to be presented in a hearing where the burden is on the administration to show that the faculty member should be fired for the reasons specified. Tenure does not mean "employment for life", as some lay people describe it. Post tenure review exists and the policies specify what steps need to take place. Faculty have responsibilities in teaching, research and service. But they don't all devote equal efforts to all areas during their careers. Younger prof usually spend much more effort on research than teaching and service. The older profs many times devote most of their time to teaching and service, especially as they approach retirement age. Most departments work as a team. The overall effort is divided so that each prof does most of the work in the area they are most productive. I believe the confusion arises when people think that profs should only do research and bring in money. That is what SFT taught the public, because that is what he did. But the primary purpose of a university is education.

Thanks for a fine contribution to the discussion. I really do hope that MT will want to discuss these matters seriously and temperately. I guess we'll find out!

Date: Jun 13, 2005

LeftASAP wrote:

Mama Troll wrote: I am as serious as a heartbeat. You people would sell your mothers to protect your precious tenure. That is what this is about. Stop trying to make something grander and more respectable out of it. You don't have the least desire to engage in a serious discussion with anyone who might question this outdated concept. That is really what scares you so badly about Shelby Thames. You fear that if he stayed around long enough the concept of tenure might be threatened. All this "holier than thou" is just smoke screen. Admit it and we might be able to have a very serious discussion, but I am frankly not sure I would want to waste my time. This is an established fact. What is there to be discussed? Mama Troll, let's start with a good definition of terms so that we don't end up talking pass each other. USM Sympathizer has supplied reading for anyone who wants to get up to speed on tenure. For me the bottom line on tenure is that faculty can't be fired without a good reasons, specified in the contract. Evidence has to be presented in a hearing where the burden is on the administration to show that the faculty member should be fired for the reasons specified. Tenure does not mean "employment for life", as some lay people describe it. Post tenure review exists and the policies specify what steps need to take place. Faculty have responsibilities in teaching, research and service. But they don't all devote equal efforts to all areas during their careers. Younger prof usually spend much more effort on research than teaching and service. The older profs many times devote most of their time to teaching and service, especially as they approach retirement age. Most departments work as a team. The overall effort is divided so that each prof does most of the work in the area they are most productive. I believe the confusion arises when people think that profs should only do research and bring in money. That is what SFT taught the public, because that is what he did. But the primary purpose of a university is education.

Thanks to you and Sympathizer for your civil responses. That is unexpected and refreshing on this venue. As long as we're defining terms, please define "academic freedom". Is academic freedom what that idiot in Colorado was practicing? Is it that silliness that is going on at Harvard? Is it the right to preach political idealolgy in none political classrooms? Is it the right to make unfounded accusations against administration and alumni? Is it the right to be consistently and constantly negative about most everything about the institution from which you receive a paycheck? Is it the right do very little actual teaching or research, but to just ease by? I read your reply, but I don't think working at a part time level and getting paid full time pay ever got a tenured professor fired at USM. I am not being sarcastic. I'm trying to help define terms.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Mama Troll wrote:

One of the points that escape you is that Toy McLaughlin is a good man who is respected for his work ethic, his honesty, his fairness, his community service, his character, and his wonderful humor. Perhaps his side of this story would be worth listening to if you had a mind to be fair. It's obvious that you don't, however. You just want to keep things stirred up even when it is clear that SFT is leaving. You'll find something to attack even after Shelby.

MT,

This may all be true. But the statements that Toy McLaughlin made about the USM faculty on EagleTalk don't show fairness. They don't show wonderful humor. If he is well informed about USM, they also don't display honesty.

Maybe McLaughlin was acting out of character, because he had been sold a bill of goods by Shelby Freland Thames, and his biggest weakness was being gullible.

But if that is the case, he needs to admit that he doesn't really know what most USM professors are like--instead he just knew what Thames had told him most USM professors are like.

And all I have to go by, besides the original statements he made on EagleTalk, is his published apology, in which he admits to doing nothing wrong and getting nothing wrong.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Third Witch wrote:

Hmm, I wonder how Thames would have reacted if anyone had threatened HIS tenure? He sure didn't volunteer to give it up. And as I recall, the whole Angie D. thing was over her claim to have been tenured at U of KY. So, some people seem to think tenure is important.

I realize it's hard to keep up, Witch, but we're trying to discuss tenure here, not Thames. They both start with T's so it's probably confusing, but there is a difference.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

USM Sympathizer wrote:

Mama Troll wrote: USM Sympathizer wrote: Momma Troll, I was just teasing when I asked if you were Gracie's Mom. If you'd like to have a serious discussion, I think you'll find that a lot of us will be glad to engage in one with you. Thanks for visiting the board. I am as serious as a heartbeat. You people would sell your mothers to protect your precious tenure. That is what this is about. Stop trying to make something grander and more respectable out of it. You don't have the least desire to engage in a serious discussion with anyone who might question this outdated concept. That is really what scares you so badly about Shelby Thames. You fear that if he stayed around long enough the concept of tenure might be threatened. All this "holier than thou" is just smoke screen. Admit it and we might be able to have a very serious discussion, but I am frankly not sure I would want to waste my time. This is an established fact. What is there to be discussed? MT, Our discussion isn't getting off to a very good start, but I'll make the attempt nonetheless. MT, do you know why tenure was created and why it is almost universally practiced, even at private schools?

You will have to give me a while to wade through all this, Symp. I'll be back with you as soon as I finish. Forgive me if it takes a while. Maybe in the meantime I'll send you a copy of my tax return to read. Maybe then you will be able to see why I am having trouble with the concept of protecting the "academic freedom" of some of the bottom dwellers in your profession, and pleeaaaseee don't come back with some lame argument about not having any.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Mama Troll wrote:

Third Witch wrote:
Hmm, I wonder how Thames would have reacted if anyone had threatened HIS tenure? He sure didn't volunteer to give it up. And as I recall, the whole Angie D. thing was over her claim to have been tenured at U of KY. So, some people seem to think tenure is important.
I realize it's hard to keep up, Witch, but we're trying to discuss tenure here, not Thames. They both start with T's so it's probably confusing, but there is a difference.

MT,

Do you realize that the whole time that Shelby Freland Thames has served as an upper administrator, from 1980 to 1986 and again since 2002, he has held a tenured faculty title?

Do you realize that, without a tenured faculty position to fall back on, Thames would almost certainly have been fired outright in 1986, when he was removed from his Executive Vice President position? Or that, without that tenured faculty position, he would be forced to retire from the university when he stops being President of USM? In other words, he would have been like nearly every company president or vice-president who gets fired.

You've previously insisted that professors hate Thames because of his belief that tenure is outmoded. So Thames is perfectly relevant in this context.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Mama Troll wrote:

You will have to give me a while to wade through all this, Symp. I'll be back with you as soon as I finish. Forgive me if it takes a while. Maybe in the meantime I'll send you a copy of my tax return to read. Maybe then you will be able to see why I am having trouble with the concept of protecting the "academic freedom" of some of the bottom dwellers in your profession, and pleeaaaseee don't come back with some lame argument about not having any.

Thanks for taking the time to read the material I suggested. I appreciate it. In the meantime, I will readily concede that there are indeed bottom dwellers in academe, although I think there are better ways to deal with them than eliminating tenure. The latter approach strikes me as throwing the baby out with the bathwater. In the meantime, thanks again for reading.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Robert Campbell wrote:

Mama Troll wrote: One of the points that escape you is that Toy McLaughlin is a good man who is respected for his work ethic, his honesty, his fairness, his community service, his character, and his wonderful humor. Perhaps his side of this story would be worth listening to if you had a mind to be fair. It's obvious that you don't, however. You just want to keep things stirred up even when it is clear that SFT is leaving. You'll find something to attack even after Shelby. MT, This may all be true. But the statements that Toy McLaughlin made about the USM faculty on EagleTalk don't show fairness. They don't show wonderful humor. If he is well informed about USM, they also don't display honesty. Maybe McLaughlin was acting out of character, because he had been sold a bill of goods by Shelby Freland Thames, and his biggest weakness was being gullible. But if that is the case, he needs to admit that he doesn't really know what most USM professors are like--instead he just knew what Thames had told him most USM professors are like. And all I have to go by, besides the original statements he made on EagleTalk, is his published apology, in which he admits to doing nothing wrong and getting nothing wrong. Robert Campbell

All you have to go by, Professor Peewee, is what you have been told by you highly biased and deeply imbittered minions. You chose to accept the story of a couple of small minded individuals who were out of line and were nailed for it. Instead of just accepting it they reacted like most of you do on this site. They acted like my bridge partners who are all aging women with frequent PMS. You are being laughed at by most all of the people of Hattiesburg who have either read this site or heard about you.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

USM Sympathizer wrote:

Mama Troll wrote: You will have to give me a while to wade through all this, Symp. I'll be back with you as soon as I finish. Forgive me if it takes a while. Maybe in the meantime I'll send you a copy of my tax return to read. Maybe then you will be able to see why I am having trouble with the concept of protecting the "academic freedom" of some of the bottom dwellers in your profession, and pleeaaaseee don't come back with some lame argument about not having any. Thanks for taking the time to read the material I suggested. I appreciate it. In the meantime, I will readily concede that there are indeed bottom dwellers in academe, although I think there are better ways to deal with them than eliminating tenure. The latter approach strikes me as throwing the baby out with the bathwater. In the meantime, thanks again for reading.

You are more than welcome. Please give me at least through tonight to give me enough time to be fair. I am trying very hard to open my mind, but some of the people on this site make it very difficult.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Momma Troll,

One reason they suspect you may be Gracie's Mom is because you share her deep contempt to RC. For some reason both she and you seem unable to address the substantive points RC makes; instead you descend into vitriol, which only makes you look bad. He doesn't call you names, so why do you have to call him names? It don't look good, momma.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Mama Troll wrote:

All you have to go by, Professor Peewee, is what you have been told by you highly biased and deeply imbittered minions. You chose to accept the story of a couple of small minded individuals who were out of line and were nailed for it. Instead of just accepting it they reacted like most of you do on this site. They acted like my bridge partners who are all aging women with frequent PMS. You are being laughed at by most all of the people of Hattiesburg who have either read this site or heard about you.

Mama Troll,

Maybe you want us to believe that Toy McLaughlin is a man of good character and a good citizen of his community because he despises professors and supports Shelby Thames...

Who were these "small minded individuals"? The two who criticized Thames' record on EagleTalk and suggested that recruiting Marcus Raines was another bad decision in a long chain of them?

And what were the "small minded individuals" supposed to accept? False and misleading statements about the condition of USM? Unsubstantiated charges of criminal behavior against Frank Glamser and Gary Stringer? Threats of bodily harm?

I'm surprised you haven't given Toy McLaughlin your PMS lecture.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Robert Campbell wrote:

Mama Troll wrote: Third Witch wrote: Hmm, I wonder how Thames would have reacted if anyone had threatened HIS tenure? He sure didn't volunteer to give it up. And as I recall, the whole Angie D. thing was over her claim to have been tenured at U of KY. So, some people seem to think tenure is important. I realize it's hard to keep up, Witch, but we're trying to discuss tenure here, not Thames. They both start with T's so it's probably confusing, but there is a difference. MT, Do you realize that the whole time that Shelby Freland Thames has served as an upper administrator, from 1980 to 1986 and again since 2002, he has held a tenured faculty title? Do you realize that, without a tenured faculty position to fall back on, Thames would almost certainly have been fired outright in 1986, when he was removed from his Executive Vice President position? Or that, without that tenured faculty position, he would be forced to retire from the university when he stops being President of USM? In other words, he would have been like nearly every company president or vice-president who gets fired. You've previously insisted that professors hate Thames because of his belief that tenure is outmoded. So Thames is perfectly relevant in this context. Robert Campbell

Sounds like an absolute, iron clad, irrevocable argument against tenure to me. Looks like checkmate for me.

I rest my case counselor.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Mama Troll wrote:

Sounds like an absolute, iron clad, irrevocable argument against tenure to me. Looks like checkmate for me.
I rest my case counselor.

OK, you're against tenure for anyone who works at a university, including Shelby Thames.

So you'll be telling everyone in Hattiesburg that Thames should be off the USM payroll the minute he departs from the Dome?

Robert Campbell

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Mamma's boy wrote:

Momma Troll, One reason they suspect you may be Gracie's Mom is because you share her deep contempt to RC. For some reason both she and you seem unable to address the substantive points RC makes; instead you descend into vitriol, which only makes you look bad. He doesn't call you names, so why do you have to call him names? It don't look good, momma.

Hold on. We teach from day one at Troll Army bootcamp to hold deep contempt for those who need others problems to be happy. Did I hear one time that Dr. Campbell is writing a book about our situation? That would make more sense.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Mamma's boy wrote:

Momma Troll, One reason they suspect you may be Gracie's Mom is because you share her deep contempt to RC. For some reason both she and you seem unable to address the substantive points RC makes; instead you descend into vitriol, which only makes you look bad. He doesn't call you names, so why do you have to call him names? It don't look good, momma.

First of all I don't care what "they" think. "They" can take a judgemental attitude if they like, but it won't sway my opinion one iota.

Professor Pee Wee is on your side, so naturally you are going to give him more leeway than he deserves. Because he agrees with you, you see him through different eyes than otheres.

He is presumpious, arrogant, self centered and not connected to USM in any way. Other than that he is a wonderful person. If you think I might be Gracie's Mother because I can't stand the boorish ass, that's your problem. As a matter of fact, he is in fact your problem. People just don't like him. He is sort of like the obnoxious USM fan at the ball game. You give him a pass because he's yours.

I couldn't care less about what he thinks. As a matter of fact, I think I'll just quit responding to him. You do seem to have a few rational people here that maybe I can have a decent coversation with.

Date: Jun 13, 2005

Robert Campbell wrote:

Mama Troll wrote: Sounds like an absolute, iron clad, irrevocable argument against tenure to me. Looks like checkmate for me. I rest my case counselor. OK, you're against tenure for anyone who works at a university, including Shelby Thames. So you'll be telling everyone in Hattiesburg that Thames should be off the USM payroll the minute he departs from the Dome? Robert Campbell

I doubt I'll be able to talk with eveybody in Hattiesburg, PW. You don't know much about our town, of course, but it is a little too big for one person to get around to everybody, but I am against tenure, and I couldn't care less about what Shelby Thames does. Shelby is a big boy and should have to fend for himself just like I do, and just like you should have to do. The point is that you don't.

You made my point beautifully for me in your message just above, and now you are trying to weazel out of it by trying to saddle me with a Shelby Thames' argument. Why should I spend my precious time going around town arguing about what to do with him? What a ridiculous statement.