CL. 6/26/05: Judd on Klumb - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jun 26, 2005

CL. 6/26/05: Judd on Klumb

Date: Jun 26, 2005

Even better than I remembered.

Date: Jun 26, 2005

Remember, it was the combination of Mr. Klumb's use of his Board title in combination with this quote from his letter to the editor in last week's CL that really muddied the waters:

"Moreover, some on the state College Board want to put the issue of tuition increases on "automatic pilot," under the guise of planning, so they don't have to sweat the "yes" vote for tuition increases anymore."

Date: Jun 26, 2005

Great letter!

I believe it's also the first time that anyone has suggested in print, in a Mississippi newspaper, that Klumb is biased against USM.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jun 26, 2005

Add my "amen" to the chorus: great letter!

Date: Jun 26, 2005

WHOO HOO!!! Terrific letter. Made my day.

Date: Jun 26, 2005

Let's start a campaign, "Stephen Judd for IHL Board".

Date: Jun 26, 2005

Stephen, marvelous letter!! I stand up and applaud your response. Articulate, precise, and right on target, your letter was to the point, and I thank you for writing it.

Date: Jun 27, 2005

Emma wrote:

Stephen, marvelous letter!! I stand up and applaud your response. Articulate, precise, and right on target, your letter was to the point, and I thank you for writing it.

Thanks everyone -- every once in a while I get the urge to take a swing (literary of course!) at the Biloxi Woodsman. It is just ever so difficult to resist. I doubt that he'll reply . . but if he does I hope some one of you amazingly articulate folks will take him on . . . .!

Date: Jun 27, 2005

stephen judd wrote:

Emma wrote: Stephen, marvelous letter!! I stand up and applaud your response. Articulate, precise, and right on target, your letter was to the point, and I thank you for writing it. Thanks everyone -- every once in a while I get the urge to take a swing (literary of course!) at the Biloxi Woodsman. It is just ever so difficult to resist. I doubt that he'll reply . . but if he does I hope some one of you amazingly articulate folks will take him on . . . .!

Hepzibahen mah fella, ah prefer thet yo' answer comments about yer letter. ah's not nearly as articulate as yo'. Yer letter was great! Fry mah hide!

Date: Jun 28, 2005

I presume that, given the lack of titles after the name, this letter was submitted by "private citizen" Stephen Judd. (Pretty cool tactic, perfesser!)

Date: Jun 28, 2005

Invictus wrote:

I presume that, given the lack of titles after the name, this letter was submitted by "private citizen" Stephen Judd. (Pretty cool tactic, perfesser!)

Nothing "cool" about it, Invictus. Many faculty submit letters without their titles because they are not representing USM. That is the correct procedure Mr. Klumb did not follow.

Date: Jun 28, 2005

Go get 'em, Stephen! Great work, as always.

I haven't been able to log on here much, but I see the good work continues. Y'all hang in there--and, as always,

NO QUARTER.
Anne Wallace

Date: Jun 28, 2005

Nit Picker wrote:

Invictus wrote:
I presume that, given the lack of titles after the name, this letter was submitted by "private citizen" Stephen Judd. (Pretty cool tactic, perfesser!)
Nothing "cool" about it, Invictus. Many faculty submit letters without their titles because they are not representing USM. That is the correct procedure Mr. Klumb did not follow.

Dear Nit,

What was "cool" was the contrast -- it puts Klumb's faux pas in double underlined bold faced type, metaphorically speacking.

And BTW, more than a few USM faculty have slapped their titles after their names on letters to the editor over the past year. In fact, I'm not 100% sure that "Citizen Judd" hasn't put his title on such a letter before.

Date: Jun 28, 2005

Invictus wrote:

Nit Picker wrote: Invictus wrote: I presume that, given the lack of titles after the name, this letter was submitted by "private citizen" Stephen Judd. (Pretty cool tactic, perfesser!) Nothing "cool" about it, Invictus. Many faculty submit letters without their titles because they are not representing USM. That is the correct procedure Mr. Klumb did not follow. Dear Nit, What was "cool" was the contrast -- it puts Klumb's faux pas in double underlined bold faced type, metaphorically speacking. And BTW, more than a few USM faculty have slapped their titles after their names on letters to the editor over the past year. In fact, I'm not 100% sure that "Citizen Judd" hasn't put his title on such a letter before.

I'd doubt that I have -- these small rituals of public and private are fairly important to me -- and I also am very careful not to involve the program that I head in my own political causes. I don't even think I have ever signed USM faculty . . .

On the other hand, if I did do such a thing it would be in full awareness that I was, for example, taking exception to some kind of accusation that there were no USM faculty members who did not support the bond. In that case, I'd have felt perfectly entitled to make the point by using an identifier (USM faculty) but not a title (Director of Theatre).