Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
 
USM Forum -- Message Board -> AAUP-USM MESSAGE BOARD -> What's your strategy"
Post Info TOPIC: What's your strategy"
first man out!!!

Date:
What's your strategy"
Permalink Closed

I was fortunate enough to leave USM in 2002.

I have followed events and I am pleased to know that a change in administration is on the horizion.

My questions are: Does the decimated facuty that is left have the fire left in their belly to to save this instituition? Will the preset faculty really have any influnce regarding the new appointment of your new president?

You do not seem to be very active. What wrong with you? Look at the past history. Look at the past...look at the politics....and SJ...guys like you could make a difference!

safely away.




__________________
LeftASAP

Date:
RE: What's your strategy"
Permalink Closed

first man out!!! wrote:

... Does the decimated facuty that is left have the fire left in their belly to to save this instituition? Will the preset faculty really have any influnce regarding the new appointment of your new president? You do not seem to be very active. What wrong with you? Look at the past history. Look at the past...look at the politics....and SJ...guys like you could make a difference! safely away.

What do you have in mind, First Man Out?  Faculty Senate is alive and well.  They meet in a retreat in August to plan for the coming year.  There is very little Faculty Senate activity during the summer. Many faculty are during research etc. and aren't on campus in the summer.


I believe faculty will have major input in the selection of the new president and will be listened to this time.  The IHL Board has been reorganized in a way that will benefit the state if the politicians leave it alone.  AAUP is going strong.  I expect you will hear from them during the academic year.


 



__________________
Last Woe-man Standing

Date:
Permalink Closed

Turn out the lights, close the door.

__________________
Invictus

Date:
Permalink Closed


Last Woe-man Standing wrote:
Turn out the lights, close the door.


That's pretty close to a Bob Dylan quote.

__________________
stephen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

Last Woe-man Standing wrote:

Turn out the lights, close the door.

Yet another thread uselessly started by someone who seems to be on the faculty side but in reality is a provocateur. Phrases like "it doesn't seem as though much is going on . . " followed by challenges to a sfaulcy to have "fire in their belly" and the proverbial variation on the theme of  "where are they now" are dead givaways of the technique. We've seen this before -- followed up by an obscure one liner that is simply defeatist.


These are the kind of threads that could just as easily get axed as far as I am concerned -- they never go anywhere and just crowd more legitimate threads down the list.


 


 



__________________
Learning in Retirement

Date:
Permalink Closed

I think I concur but first, what is a sfaulcy"

__________________
stephen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

Ah . . . I'm glad this was you and not Invictus . . .

how about s'faculty . . . no, no . . I meant "challenges to a faculty"

__________________
Learning in Retirement

Date:
Permalink Closed

stephen judd wrote:

Ah . . . I'm glad this was you and not Invictus . . . how about s'faculty . . . no, no . . I meant "challenges to a faculty"
I did consult the OED before asking, thanks.

__________________
Doubting Thomas

Date:
Permalink Closed


stephen judd wrote:
Last Woe-man Standing wrote:
Turn out the lights, close the door.

Yet another thread uselessly started by someone who seems to be on the faculty side but in reality is a provocateur. Phrases like "it doesn't seem as though much is going on . . " followed by challenges to a sfaulcy to have "fire in their belly" and the proverbial variation on the theme of  "where are they now" are dead givaways of the technique. We've seen this before -- followed up by an obscure one liner that is simply defeatist.
These are the kind of threads that could just as easily get axed as far as I am concerned -- they never go anywhere and just crowd more legitimate threads down the list.
 
 


Aha! Another example of faulty logic! Everyone who uses these phrases must be a troll! Shame on you, SJ, for perpetuating and condoning this type of behavior. Where is the keenly crafted rebuttal?

__________________
incognito

Date:
RE: What's your strategy&;
Permalink Closed

Doubting Thomas = Above the Mire?

__________________
Invictus

Date:
RE: What's your strategy"
Permalink Closed


Doubting Thomas wrote:
Aha! Another example of faulty logic! Everyone who uses these phrases must be a troll! Shame on you, SJ, for perpetuating and condoning this type of behavior. Where is the keenly crafted rebuttal?


Would you care to define "logic" sometime, bubbasatva? Is "logic" violated when someone other than yourself issues a little ad hominem?

Well, I certainly never understood this place to be a debate tournament. I thought it was some sort of cross between a coffee shop, a comedy club, a literary society & a group therapy session.

And speaking of the latter, maybe you need to take yourself a little less seriously. Nobody else does.

__________________
Too much coffee

Date:
Permalink Closed

Invictus wrote:

Well, I certainly never understood this place to be a debate tournament. I thought it was some sort of cross between a coffee shop, a comedy club, a literary society & a group therapy session.
Best description since LVN used the analogy of FS's house... 

__________________
Doubting Thomas

Date:
Permalink Closed


Invictus wrote:

Doubting Thomas wrote:
Aha! Another example of faulty logic! Everyone who uses these phrases must be a troll! Shame on you, SJ, for perpetuating and condoning this type of behavior. Where is the keenly crafted rebuttal?


Would you care to define "logic" sometime, bubbasatva? Is "logic" violated when someone other than yourself issues a little ad hominem?

Well, I certainly never understood this place to be a debate tournament. I thought it was some sort of cross between a coffee shop, a comedy club, a literary society & a group therapy session.

And speaking of the latter, maybe you need to take yourself a little less seriously. Nobody else does.

Not taking myself seriously at all. Just pointing out that when I use a little
ad hominem as you say, I get "rebutted" but nobody seems to have a problem letting certain posters live on such thought processes. In short, if the establishment of the board is going to have "rules," then the rules should apply to everyone equally. When you fail to apply rules or standards equally, you appear to be unfair.

I have read this message board for some time. After all the diatribes against the unfair treatment that Thames hands out (e.g., no-bid contracts, G/S affair, merit raises, MIDAS), this board would be hypersensitive to such issues, but I guess not. Just pointing out an internal inconsistency. If everyone chooses to ignore it, then so be it. Just know that if you abide a double standard system, then you are telling people it's OK. And then, logically, Thames' double standard system is OK, too.

__________________
View from a Distance

Date:
Permalink Closed

Invictus,

I love it!

__________________
Joker

Date:
Permalink Closed

Doubting Thomas wrote:

...Just pointing out that when I use a little ad hominem as you say, I get "rebutted" but nobody seems to have a problem letting certain posters live on such thought processes. ...
Good Morning, DT.  I see you studied your lessons last night.  I'm proud to see now "rebutted" =/= "attacked".  Congratulations! 

__________________
Internet Highway Patrol

Date:
Permalink Closed

incognito wrote:

Doubting Thomas = Above the Mire?

Troller ID = incognito


Note to incognito/Troller ID: Don't you have anything better to do? Your ID the Poster game got old a couple of weeks ago.


In case you haven't noticed, unlike ATM, Doubting Thomas can spell, and reason. He/she just hasn't figured out that insults are de rigour, this board is not an internet version of a debating society, and that no particular rules of engagement apply. Once that sinks in, he/she will throw in the towel and go away.



__________________
Invictus

Date:
Permalink Closed


Joker wrote:
Doubting Thomas wrote:
...Just pointing out that when I use a little ad hominem as you say, I get "rebutted" but nobody seems to have a problem letting certain posters live on such thought processes. ...
Good Morning, DT.  I see you studied your lessons last night.  I'm proud to see now "rebutted" =/= "attacked".  Congratulations! 


I think the correct word in this context is "rebuffed." DT doesn't get "rebutted" here as much as s/he gets "rebutted." (I don't think DT has received enough of an a$$ chewing around here to merit a "rebutting." )

__________________
Invictus

Date:
Permalink Closed

The second "rebutted" in the preceding post should be "rebuffed."

But continuing with the theme, DT might find a rebuffing would be cheaper than a complete rebuttal. Detail shops are usually less expensive than body work.

__________________
truth4usm/AH

Date:
Permalink Closed


Invictus wrote:



Would you care to define "logic" sometime, bubbasatva?


BUBBASATVA! Omigoodness, Vic, I nearly lost it on that one (would have spewed coffee if I drank it!). You know, I'm a huge Steely Dan fan, and I'll never hear their song "Bodhisattva" the same way again now.

If this board is indeed a comedy club, you just won the night's prize in my book. Keep 'em coming...

Truth

__________________
Doubting Thomas

Date:
Permalink Closed

The only reason I used the word "rebutted" in that context (and, please notice the quotes in the post above) is that I was accused of using "attacked" in the place of "rebutted," although my attempts to receive a logical discussion of my critique of Kate Green's letter ARE currently being "rebuffed" in favor of jokes and name-calling.

__________________
Troller ID

Date:
Permalink Closed

Internet Highway Patrol = Above the Mire

__________________
Little old lady

Date:
Permalink Closed

Troller ID et. al. I think DT is Hanbury, as stated on another thread. Just a wild notion. As to which troll is whom, who gives a flip? At least we can tell they're not Seeker.

__________________
Doubting Thomas

Date:
Permalink Closed


Little old lady wrote:
Troller ID et. al. I think DT is Hanbury, as stated on another thread. Just a wild notion. As to which troll is whom, who gives a flip? At least we can tell they're not Seeker.


Sorry, Little Old Lady, but I'm not Hanbury.

__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
USM Forum -- Message Board -> AAUP-USM MESSAGE BOARD -> What's your strategy"
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard