Bring me up to date - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Aug 1, 2005

Bring me up to date

Date: Aug 1, 2005

I know that there has been no outcry whatsoever about the destruction of our excellent nursing program and I am seriously dismayed and disappointed at the indifference of our local doctors.

As for Dean Farrell, she is a department head in California. I'm glad at least she is not being silent.

Date: Aug 2, 2005

Any answer to the Beneke question?

Date: Aug 2, 2005

hasn't been around for some time.

Date: Aug 4, 2005

So it looks like the G/S travesty was not in vain. We got rid of the Kentucky mafia plus Beneke and that gang too.

Date: Aug 13, 2005

Long ago and far away wrote:

is Jill Beneke and that whole crowd that handled the e-mail monitoring still around or has she been replaced? Is there still unease that phone and e-mail is being monitored?

Thought she was affiliated with USM only as a consultant - part of the two-contracts deal in late summer 2003. The only time I ever saw her on campus was accompanying Shelby at the hearing in late spring 2004. That was shortly before Homer Coffman was hired as CIO in early summer 2004. Haven't heard her name or Pileum's in a long time, probably not since Homer's hiring.

Don't know if "unease" is the right word; most people I know just assume they are being monitored.

Date: Aug 14, 2005

Aladdin's Lamp wrote:

Long ago and far away wrote: is Jill Beneke and that whole crowd that handled the e-mail monitoring still around or has she been replaced? Is there still unease that phone and e-mail is being monitored? Thought she was affiliated with USM only as a consultant - part of the two-contracts deal in late summer 2003. The only time I ever saw her on campus was accompanying Shelby at the hearing in late spring 2004. That was shortly before Homer Coffman was hired as CIO in early summer 2004. Haven't heard her name or Pileum's in a long time, probably not since Homer's hiring. Don't know if "unease" is the right word; most people I know just assume they are being monitored.

Perhaps Beneke and Company were actually hired to deal with "security" issues? That would have helped because, as has been clear, some ITech people were unhappy in being asked to play the role of "monitors". Having served its purpose in the G&S affair, Pileum's work was done --- this isn't unusual in the private sector. Bring in an outside agency to keep your own hands "clean" and create plausible deniability.

Date: Aug 14, 2005

stephen judd wrote:

some ITech people were unhappy in being asked to play the role of "monitors

I guess ITech is not needed to monitor anything now that Spud says he is monitoring the board.

Date: Aug 15, 2005

The University of Southern Mississippi owns your computers and the campus system on which they operate. It is usual and customary for the owner of such a system to monitor email and internet usage for two reasons: to protect itself from potential legal liability and to make sure that employees are not misusing the system.

You, the employees, are still being monitored. Wonder why HC says iTech doesn't have money for new technology? It's because so much money goes into monitoring email. Trust me, it's what I do all day. If the faculty would learn that the campus network is a work environment and not a playtime environment, then a lot of this monitoring wouldn't be necessary.

Date: Aug 15, 2005

No problem with nursing program from local physician point of view. Usm nursing graduates are administrative types. Good for paperwork. You want a non degree RN for taking care of patients.

Date: Aug 15, 2005

Local maedical wrote:

You want a non degree RN for taking care of patients.

It sounds like you want a hand maiden to take care of you.

Date: Aug 15, 2005

Local maedical wrote:

No problem with nursing program

There seems to be a BIG problem with the nursing program when about one-quarter of its graduates fail the NCLEX!

Date: Aug 15, 2005

Wireless Keyboard wrote:

You, the employees, are still being monitored.

Now hold on a minute, Nellie. I thoght that PUC asked the boss directly if e-mail surveillance was still in effect and he responded that it was not. I must be missing something. Please clarify.

Date: Aug 15, 2005

Eyes & Ears wrote:

Wireless Keyboard wrote: You, the employees, are still being monitored.

Now hold on a minute, Nellie. I thoght that PUC asked the boss directly if e-mail surveillance was still in effect and he responded that it was not. I must be missing something. Please clarify.

Wireless is also clueless. iTech does not have the time or the tools to be monitoring everyone's email. Do you have any idea how many hundreds of thousands of emails go through the system each week? They are not monitoring, they are not storing. They have enough to do right now in keeping things running on a tired mail server.

Even if they were monitoring it should be recognized that your email, if it was stored, could be legally requested and delivered to any citizen. In happens in other states and may happen here before too long. University email should never be considered private. If you operate under some illusion that it is private, you may find that you regret it at some point.