Fourth Tier Question - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jul 16, 2005

RE: Fourth Tier Question

Date: Jul 16, 2005

Troll Patrol wrote:

Above the Mire wrote: Gollleeee, TA. You are really the sharpest blade in the pack aren't you. "sharpest blade in the pack." How utterly profound. This must be the same troll that rattled on yesterday about a flea and an elephant or something like that. I guess it is the same troll. They all say the same thing. Over and over.

I didn't "rattle on" yesterday about a flea and an elephant. I chastised AtM for taking credit for the work of others and I made fun of him (her) by using his own words from 5 days ago.

Date: Jul 16, 2005

Legend in his own mind wrote:

Troll Patrol wrote: Above the Mire wrote: Gollleeee, TA. You are really the sharpest blade in the pack aren't you. "sharpest blade in the pack." How utterly profound. This must be the same troll that rattled on yesterday about a flea and an elephant or something like that. I guess it is the same troll. They all say the same thing. Over and over. I didn't "rattle on" yesterday about a flea and an elephant. I chastised AtM for taking credit for the work of others and I made fun of him (her) by using his own words from 5 days ago.

I caught your message, but I swear I missed all that legendary monolouge. Isn't there someone that reads this board that sees the lack of varacity in all these nebulous arguments? I mean, damn! Don't you even read this stuff?

Date: Jul 16, 2005

Faculty Grande Dame wrote:

I guess I'm the lone ranger (rangerette?) here, but I think ATM is correct about the futility of continuing to flog the already dead horse. . . . Thames is history. It's time to look forward.

Thames is a little beyond the halfway mark in his presidency. Unless the fates intervene he'll be around another 30 months or so, won't he? I'm having trouble "looking forward" beyond such a long time interval. And if you're right and he is a "dead horse", what progress can the university make with a moribund president?

Date: Jul 16, 2005

Robert Campbell wrote:

Faculty Grande Dame wrote: I guess I'm the lone ranger (rangerette?) here, but I think ATM is correct about the futility of continuing to flog the already dead horse. I also wouldn't rule out his being a member of the faculty. He sounds much like some of our colleagues I've spoken with since Thames' departure date was announced by the IHL. They don't see any value in spending more time stewing over past injustices, and frankly neither do I. It takes too much time and energy, both of which are in short supply in my world. Thames is history. It's time to look forward.

FGD, Your only previous appearances that I can recall on this board claimed to vouch for Gracie's Mom. On stylistic grounds, I am pretty confident that Gracie's Mom was one manifestation of the same troll who also went as Mama Troll and USM Product--and very likely some further handles that I didn't notice. And Mama Troll's comments on tenure had to come from administrator. Now you show up supporting Above the Mire's claim to be a member of the USM faculty. Why should anyone here find that more credible than Gracie's Mom claiming to be a person from Hattiesburg with no USM affiliation? If you are truly a faculty member, you ought to be able to come up with some concrete ideas about how USM can change for the better. Plenty are needed. But it will have to be something besides exhorting everyone to knuckle under to Thames till May 2007, and to keep the remaining members of his henchcrew in power after that. Robert Campbell

Robert,

I'm flattered that you recall my previous posts as they were few, and in my opinion not particularly important or memorable. I'm certainly not in the same league as Stephen Judd or Jameela Lares, or LVN, or the many other thoughtful contributors to this forum, names too numerous to recite. As you point out, I'm not a regular reader of or contributor to this board, and I'm unable to comment on whatever similarities you may perceive between posters with various screen names. I don't recall Mamma Troll or USM Product, or what agenda they were advancing. I will say that I'm very disappointed that for whatever reason, you've badly mischaracterized my meager comments. Since you've singled me out, I'd urge that you take the time to re-read what I actually said. I think you'd find it an instructive exercise. Here's a tutorial to get you started.

1. I did not claim to "vouch for Gracie's Mom." I said that I knew her identity, and I did not believe her to be a troll, as defined by the conventions of this message board. You may have a different opinion, to which you're entitled. I'm truly sorry that the dialogue with her turned into a train wreck. Whether she's posted under other screen names, I do not know. She may have. I can tell you that she is not a USM administrator.

2. I did not "show up supporting Above the Mire's claim to be a member of the USM faculty." I don't believe he even made such a claim, but rather posed a rhetorical question concerning that possibility. I have no idea who ATM is. I merely opined that it wasn't an unrealistic possibility, given the similarity of certain of his comments to those of some USM faculty members with whom I regularly speak. Maybe he's faculty, and maybe he isn't. I don't know, and neither do you. I would suggest that inasmuch as I "show up" on campus daily, and have done so for almost 30 years, my speculation on this matter is as meritorious as is yours.

3. You have no inkling as to my discipline, my research, my committee responsibilities, and the contributions, however modest, that I've made to USM historically, and more recently under the Thames reign of terror. You don't know what concrete ideas I've advanced, or what I've contributed in the effort to oust Shelby Thames. I hardly think it's your place to lecture me or anyone else here in the trenches about what we ought to be doing. We know what we ought to be doing, and we're doing it as best we can under extreme duress.

4. "Exhorting everyone to knuckle under to Thames until 2007, and to keep the remaining members of his henchcrew in power after that." What an unmitigated crock of $hit. I never said, suggested, or implied that anyone should do any such thing. This is the most offensive utterance I've heard from you. I'd certainly have expected better. I hope you were simply having a bad day.

That's all I've got. It's way past this girl's bed time.

Best Regards,

Faculty Grande Dame

Date: Jul 17, 2005

FGD,

I'd be sincerely interested in your responses to the questions I posed to you further up on this thread. Thanks.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

PS to FGD,

Here is the exchange alluded to in my most recent posting; it includes the questions I mentioned just now:

RE: Fourth Tier Question

Faculty Grande Dame wrote:

I guess I'm the lone ranger (rangerette?) here, but I think ATM is correct about the futility of continuing to flog the already dead horse. I also wouldn't rule out his being a member of the faculty. He sounds much like some of our colleagues I've spoken with since Thames' departure date was announced by the IHL. They don't see any value in spending more time stewing over past injustices, and frankly neither do I. It takes too much time and energy, both of which are in short supply in my world. Thames is history. It's time to look forward.

FGD,

AtM consistently refuses (a) to indicate what he would do to improve USM in the post-Shelby world or (b) to respond to his pleas that others should offer solutions. He is the one mainly responsible for keeping the focus on Shelby in this thread.

As to whether "Thames is history," I hope you're right, but we have posters here who think that this may not be the case, and some who even claim to be organizing on his behalf. What do you think of these possibilities? Some people (I suspect) will not be confident that "Thames is history" until he stumbles out the door and turns out the light. Can you let us know why you are so confident that his era really is over?

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Robert Campbell's Risk Manager wrote:

Don't think you are female. Don't think you have an inkling of sense (or you might be female). You are scared because the good ol'boy system is about to tank. Be cantankerous about it - but don't bust somebody's in depth reports because it scares the Bejeesus out of you and that phony Thames. He lost his Vice Presidency because of WHAT?? Integrity isn't his middle name. He became President because of WHAT? It wasn't his intellectual or ethical integrity. Don't diss anybody unless you can defend the perfect aholyone who now is called USM's Prez.

Whoa. If you're not more careful in the future, I'll have to cite you for PUI, Posting Under the Influence. This time I'll let you off with only a warning, but the next time it'll be breathalizer and field sobriety tests, or a mandatory trip to the drunk tank, followed by double secret AAUP board probation. Maybe you should think about getting into a 12 step program?

Date: Jul 17, 2005

USM Sympathizer wrote:

FGD, I'd be sincerely interested in your responses to the questions I posed to you further up on this thread. Thanks.

USMS,

I'm in a bit of a hurry just now. I must drop my grandchildren off at church and then head for a meeting in New Orleans. I will answer your questions when I return on Wednesday. Thanks for your continuing efforts to maintain a civil and constructive dialogue.

FGD

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Above the Mire wrote:

I keep trying unsuccessfully to explain that the SFT saga is at an end.

AtM, it is not an an end. You seem to have little comprehension of the magnitude of what has transpired. Faculty who have been intimidated and grievously mistreated will never forget. Faculty who have disrupted the lives of their families to go elsewhere will never forget. There are nine deans who will never forget. Those whose locks were changed will never forget. Frank and Gary who were depicted as criminals after giving the bulk of their adult lives to USM will never forget. Bud Kirkpatrick will never forget how his lifetime of service to USM ended. The student editor of the Student Printz will never forget how she was treated at a public hearing. There can be no doubt that these things will be remembered well into the 21st century as a dark stain on the history of USM. It will not end until these and many other events are gone and forgotten. There is too much baggage to forget. The IHL has set the date the rebuilding will begin. They set the rebuilding date two years later than some of us had anticipated.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Texas hold 'em wrote:

Above the Mire wrote: I keep trying unsuccessfully to explain that the SFT saga is at an end. AtM, it is not an an end. You seem to have little comprehension of the magnitude of what has transpired. Faculty who have been intimidated and grievously mistreated will never forget. Faculty who have disrupted the lives of their families to go elsewhere will never forget. There are nine deans who will never forget. Those whose locks were changed will never forget. Frank and Gary who were depicted as criminals after giving the bulk of their adult lives to USM will never forget. Bud Kirkpatrick will never forget how his lifetime of service to USM ended. The student editor of the Student Printz will never forget how she was treated at a public hearing. There can be no doubt that these things will be remembered well into the 21st century as a dark stain on the history of USM. It will not end until these and many other events are gone and forgotten. There is too much baggage to forget. The IHL has set the date the rebuilding will begin. They set the rebuilding date two years later than some of us had anticipated.

AMEN brother!!

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Texas hold 'em wrote:

Above the Mire wrote: I keep trying unsuccessfully to explain that the SFT saga is at an end. AtM, it is not an an end. You seem to have little comprehension of the magnitude of what has transpired. Faculty who have been intimidated and grievously mistreated will never forget. Faculty who have disrupted the lives of their families to go elsewhere will never forget. There are nine deans who will never forget. Those whose locks were changed will never forget. Frank and Gary who were depicted as criminals after giving the bulk of their adult lives to USM will never forget. Bud Kirkpatrick will never forget how his lifetime of service to USM ended. The student editor of the Student Printz will never forget how she was treated at a public hearing. There can be no doubt that these things will be remembered well into the 21st century as a dark stain on the history of USM. It will not end until these and many other events are gone and forgotten. There is too much baggage to forget. The IHL has set the date the rebuilding will begin. They set the rebuilding date two years later than some of us had anticipated.

I think I do understand. I am not camped on a mountain top looking at the situation through a telescope. I have observed many things on both sides that I find distasteful.

How many times have I had to forget wrongs that others have inflicted on me. If I hadn't sucked it up and moved on, I would still be back where I began and miserable. The only point upon which I am inflexable is that we need to somehow put this stuff behind us and try to move forward together.

If we continue to argue over what Shelby Thames did or didn't do, we'll continue to spin our wheels in the mud. My biggest problem with the aaup and this board is that most of you seem absolutely rigid in your opinions. It seems that nothing short sentencing Shelby to the gas chamber would satisfy you.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Above the Mire wrote:

My biggest problem with the aaup and this board is that most of you seem absolutely rigid in your opinions.

Integrity must not be compromised. If you call that rigid, so be it.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Robert Campbell's Risk Manager wrote:

Don't think you are female. Don't think you have an inkling of sense (or you might be female). You are scared because the good ol'boy system is about to tank. Be cantankerous about it - but don't bust somebody's in depth reports because it scares the Bejeesus out of you and that phony Thames. He lost his Vice Presidency because of WHAT?? Integrity isn't his middle name. He became President because of WHAT? It wasn't his intellectual or ethical integrity. Don't diss anybody unless you can defend the perfect aholyone who now is called USM's Prez.

I don't have a risk manager, and I sure as hell wouldn't make the point the way this person did.

But I do question FGD's bona fides.

I'll believe that FGD is for real when she lays out some semblance of a plan for moving USM forward while protecting the university from further damage during Thames' lame-duck period.

So far FGD has produced none. And she has that in common with Gracie's Mom, Above the Mire, and other phony advocates of reconciliation.

Getting faculty members to shut up and stop criticizing Thames will not move USM forward or protect the university from further damage.

Trying to marginalize those who have led the resistance to him will not move USM forward or protect the university from further damage.

Let's start a new thread to discuss how to move USM forward. There are plenty of ways to counter Thames and his remaining henchpeople without being merely reactive to them.

FGD can then contribute to that thread--or join Above the Mire and other trolls in an attempt to disrupt it.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Texas hold 'em wrote:

The IHL has set the date the rebuilding will begin. They set the rebuilding date two years later than some of us had anticipated.

This is a truly excellent point. If Shelby were gone right now, or really getting ready to leave in the VERY near future, the rebuilding could seriously begin. However, as many of us said when his contract was extended for an extra year, the IHL has put USM in a holding pattern in which nothing productive can really be accomplished. Apparently some members of the board DID want him gone at once, but Roy and his buddies threw a hissy fit.

AtM, can you address the questions I posed to FGD a few posts above? She is gone for a few days, but I would be interested in your answers. Thanks.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Above the Mire wrote:

... I have observed many things on both sides that I find distasteful. ...

ATM, "Texas hold 'em" listed several of the grievous things done to the faculty. You continue to down play this as "distasteful", as if it is only a matter of taste or opinion. You have been corrected on this point several times. Violation of academic principles of governance is not just a matter of taste.

You say "both sides" did distasteful things. Yet in the past when we ask what infractions the faculty have done you never supply anything of substance. Rather you just say things that bother you, like posters on the AAUP board. It is an insult to the faculty fighting for USM for you to state repeatedly that the violations of SFT as just a matter of opinion.

My biggest problem with the aaup and this board is that most of you seem absolutely rigid in your opinions. ...

Your problem is not that people are rigid in their opinion, but rather you do not recognize that it's a matter of principle and not opinion. (But this has been pointed out many times to you.) Just state what opinions you consider posters are holding rigidly to and we can see if the facts require this of them.

You, ATM, are the one who has held the unsubstantiated opinion that the faculty is the blame for something that you never state. This thread started with you claiming the faculty were not taking responsibility for the USN&WR tier drop. Your error was pointed out and you just continue as if nothing you said was rebutted.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Robert Campbell wrote:

I don't have a risk manager

Bob, trust me: everybody needs one of these. I know one who's out of work right now if you're interested.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Above the Mire wrote:

The only point upon which I am inflexable is that we need to somehow put this stuff behind us and try to move forward together. If we continue to argue over what Shelby Thames did or didn't do, we'll continue to spin our wheels in the mud. My biggest problem with the aaup and this board is that most of you seem absolutely rigid in your opinions.

Shelby's past aside for the moment, let's just consider the here and now.

If there are lies, program-damaging lies, continuing to be disseminated, would ignoring them be moving forward? If bad decisions, through ineptness, vindictiveness or neglect, are continuing to be made should these be unchallenged in a campaign to move forward? If information necessary for all interested parties to make good decisions is being withheld, should the repeated requests be stifled in order to move forward? If resources, needed to recruit, retain, and support faculty members, are being diverted, should the affected departments not make the devastating effects known in an effort to move forward? If decisions with long-term consequences, such as those dealing with hiring, tenure and promotion are being made such that shared governance principles are circumvented, should these decisions not be brought under some scrutiny in order to move forward?

For those more knowledgeable than you about what "Shelby Thames did or didn't do" it is unreasonable to trust that Shelby at the helm for the next 22 months will not result in additional institutional damage. Therefore, Shelby's past cannot be put aside as long as he is in office. You are either incredibly naive or you are politicing for more of the same under the guise of a change in leadership.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

USM Sympathizer wrote:

PS to FGD, Here is the exchange alluded to in my most recent posting; it includes the questions I mentioned just now: RE: Fourth Tier Question Faculty Grande Dame wrote: I guess I'm the lone ranger (rangerette?) here, but I think ATM is correct about the futility of continuing to flog the already dead horse. I also wouldn't rule out his being a member of the faculty. He sounds much like some of our colleagues I've spoken with since Thames' departure date was announced by the IHL. They don't see any value in spending more time stewing over past injustices, and frankly neither do I. It takes too much time and energy, both of which are in short supply in my world. Thames is history. It's time to look forward. FGD, AtM consistently refuses (a) to indicate what he would do to improve USM in the post-Shelby world or (b) to respond to his pleas that others should offer solutions. He is the one mainly responsible for keeping the focus on Shelby in this thread. As to whether "Thames is history," I hope you're right, but we have posters here who think that this may not be the case, and some who even claim to be organizing on his behalf. What do you think of these possibilities? Some people (I suspect) will not be confident that "Thames is history" until he stumbles out the door and turns out the light. Can you let us know why you are so confident that his era really is over?

I have not "refused" to indicate what I would do to improve USM. I have chosen to not open another can of worms. I am sure that my ideas would meet with nothing but opposition in this format, and since I'm not an educator, some of my ideas might not be effective. Since I don't plan to apply for the job, I can't see what fantacizing would accomplish except to give you fodder for negative criticism that I've already heard.

I haven't asked a single time for other suggestions about what should be done, and I have repeatedly pleaded to stop the Shelby madness.

Where do ya'll come up with this stuff?

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Above the Mire wrote:

I have not "refused" to indicate what I would do to improve USM. I have chosen to not open another can of worms. I am sure that my ideas would meet with nothing but opposition in this format, and since I'm not an educator, some of my ideas might not be effective. Since I don't plan to apply for the job, I can't see what fantacizing would accomplish except to give you fodder for negative criticism that I've already heard. I haven't asked a single time for other suggestions about what should be done, and I have repeatedly pleaded to stop the Shelby madness. Where do ya'll come up with this stuff?

In other words, you have no constructive ideas whatsoever, so far as USM is concerned.

You merely want to see this board shut down, the AAUP chapter disbanded, and all criticism of Shelby Freland Thames brought to an end as soon as possible.

After that, you don't care what happens.

Maybe you aren't pro-Shelby after all. Maybe you just like destruction for the sake of destruction.

So much for your pride in "your" university.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Robert Campbell wrote:

You merely want to see this board shut down .

About the only good thing that has come from these sordid events at USM is that there is now communication on this message board about important issues. Prior to the establishment of the message board, meaningful communication across faculty lines was virtually non-existant. The message board will survive long after a new administration is inaugurated. It probably won't be under the aegis of the AAUP, but it will survive. AtM's suggestion that the message board be shut down will never come to fruition.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

We are very disappointed in AtM's production. He has not been able to quiet discussion. We will order him back to Iraq for more training. Maybe we can train him to infiltrate the AAUP.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Above the Mire wrote:

I have not "refused" to indicate what I would do to improve USM. I have chosen to not open another can of worms. I am sure that my ideas would meet with nothing but opposition in this format, and since I'm not an educator, some of my ideas might not be effective. Since I don't plan to apply for the job, I can't see what fantacizing would accomplish except to give you fodder for negative criticism that I've already heard. I haven't asked a single time for other suggestions about what should be done, and I have repeatedly pleaded to stop the Shelby madness. Where do ya'll come up with this stuff?

AtM,

Mea culpa. You did indeed agree to some of the proposals I made earlier, so I should not have reposted my evenearlier message without drawing attention to your subsequent comments. I would still be interested to know, though, what your own ideas are for improving USM (other than assenting to a few of my suggestions and dissenting from one of them). Please feel free to post your own additional ideas on the thread created for that purpose. Thanks.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

"Where do ya'll come up with this stuff?"

Mire boy - any warm-blooded Southern American male knows that the contraction for you all is spelled y'all, and not ya'll. I typically allow you and Seeker to spell poorly without any problems, but I can't let you make this mistake any more - it might damage your credibility....

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Here's a link to a magazine that may help you be a better Southern Man (or woman, should that be the case), Mire - http://www.yall.com/

Enjoy - you can thank me later.

See y'all later....

Date: Jul 17, 2005

You got into someone else's email, who has been a major topic of interest. Don't worry, we're watching that person's back.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

People are human, just like Dana and Brittany. No problem. We're at the point that all laws apply to everyone.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

RCRM wrote:

"Wow. My Apologies. I don't like people putting in words in people's mouths when it isn't true.Wrote it truly coherent, but will never be as insulting again. Sorry for my inappropriatness. Next time. More clever and consise or nothing at all. SORRYnThe ugly post about busting me for drunk and disorderly contact: as far as posting was pretty silly since I don't drink or do drugs ((I will hang on to that post for another day if we go head to head). Don't feed the trolls . My greatest respects.

Again, I don't know who this person is, and I haven't asked for his or her support.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jul 18, 2005

The Rock wrote:

the contraction for you all is spelled y'all, and not ya'll.....

You Rock!

I've been teaching this point in my classes for decades (some of my students would probably say "hammering.") Since it has little or nothing to with my subject matter, I suppose I can expect to be investigated. I would appear to be violating the rules of academic freedom under the narrow interpretation of SFT & Co.

Date: Jul 18, 2005

William Odom wrote:

I would appear to be violating the rules of academic freedom under the narrow interpretation of SFT & Co.

I trust before you're investigated you make it clear to the students that "y'all" is a distinct 2nd person plural (along the same lines as "vosotros" in Spanish or "ihr" in German). Regular Yankee English lacks this subtlety.

I might add that this would probably qualify as a cross-disciplinary factoid & it would be difficult to argue that it wouldn't be fair game in most any class. Another great subtlety of Southern English -- which would simply qualify as a joke & thus be admissible in most classes -- is the dual pronunciation of the word "naked." Pronounced with a long "A," it means "unclad." Pronounced "nekkid," it means "unclad & up to something."

As the great Southern wit Lewis Grizzard once illustrated: "If Darlene is 2 years old & running around the house unclad, she is "NAY-KED," but if Darlene is 21 years old & running around the house unclad, odds are she is "NEKKID."

We may be a benighted backwater, but our language is a lot more fun. Does anybody in English specialize in "Northern Literature?"