SFT in the SH - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jan 13, 2006

RE: SFT in the SH

Date: Jan 13, 2006

Standard Bearer wrote:

Now that you're here, you can make the best of it, move on, or stay and complain. Looks like you've chosen #3.

False choice, SB, as you would know if you had tried to understand what you read on this board instead of warping everything to fit your agenda. I think most of us are: 1) making the best of it; 2) staying; 3) complaining; 4) standing up for academic integrity; and 5) working for change. Beats your head-in-the-sand position.

Date: Jan 13, 2006

Are you too stupid to recognize when you've won? Thames is gone. His power is diminished. A new president is on the way. The IHL listened to our complaints. Continuing the negativity is hurting students, faculty, and staff. Continuing to complain about everything makes everyone else tune you out.

My head in the sand? Hardly.

Maybe you should remember what your job is and do it.

Date: Jan 13, 2006

SB--You are being naive. If the pressure is not kept on, SFT will convince the IHL that everything is hunky dorey and that he should stay until he dies.

Date: Jan 13, 2006

Standard Bearer wrote:

Relative strength has nothing to do with USNews rankings or any other ranking.

This is one for the ages!

Date: Jan 13, 2006

You obviously have no contact with anyone who has spoken to Meredith or the IHL.

Thames is gone. There will be no extension. Why do you think Thames is in full "reward my buddies" mode? Because his time is limited.

Date: Jan 13, 2006

Standard Bearer wrote:

Maybe you should remember what your job is and do it.

I posted my job description above: 1) making the best of it; 2) staying; 3) complaining; 4) standing up for academic integrity; and 5) working for change--on duty 24/7.

I don't know what Standard you're Bearing; but clearly it doesn't find a lot of resonance around here.

Date: Jan 13, 2006

Voter wrote:

Standard Bearer wrote:

Maybe you should remember what your job is and do it.

I posted my job description above: 1) making the best of it; 2) staying; 3) complaining; 4) standing up for academic integrity; and 5) working for change--on duty 24/7.

I don't know what Standard you're Bearing; but clearly it doesn't find a lot of resonance around here.

Why are you afraid of someone with a positive attitude?

Again...three or four buddies sticking together does not make a majority. Let me hear LVN, stephen judd, Invictus, or some of the other long-timers say that a positive attitude (with respect to our students, our research, and our service duties) is a bad thing and I'll acquiesce.

Date: Jan 13, 2006

Voter wrote:

I posted my job description above: 1) making the best of it; 2) staying; 3) complaining; 4) standing up for academic integrity; and 5) working for change--on duty 24/7.

I don't know what Standard you're Bearing; but clearly it doesn't find a lot of resonance around here.

Just where in this description are your teaching and research responsibilities?

Date: Jan 13, 2006

Well, to paraphrase you--are you so stupid that you can't see that my job description IS positive? And the folks you mention--LVN, Judd, Invictus et al.--relentlessly represent a positive attitude toward the academic profession. I think you're shadow boxing, SB. Get on with it--I got a job to do.

Date: Jan 13, 2006

OK, you've got Thames on the way out.

What are you doing that is positive beyond him?

Who will be the target for your negativity when Thames is gone?

Was A.K. Lucas good enough for USM? Was Fleming good enough for USM?

Date: Jan 13, 2006

Standard Bearer wrote:

If you were hired under the impression that USM has ever been anything other than #3 in the eyes of those who control purse strings, then you're as mislead as any individual I've ever heard of.

So you think USM has never been anything other than #3. That tells me you're a new on the block. Under President Lucas, in the 1980's and beyond, USM salaries were the highest in the state.