SFT's Legal Representation - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Mar 12, 2006

SFT's Legal Representation

Date: Mar 12, 2006

Now here's an interesting sentence from this article: "Whiting sued Thames; his daughter, psychology department chairwoman Dana Thames; and others.

Date: Mar 12, 2006

Please note the article linked above is from 2004.

Date: Mar 12, 2006

Old Stuff wrote:

Please note the article linked above is from 2004.

Unless my memory has slipped out of gear, I don't think she was chair of psychology in 2004. The sentence is still inaccurate isn't it?

Date: Mar 12, 2006

dana thames has not been in psychology and has never been chair. come one folks!!

Date: Mar 12, 2006

What was the point of this thread? An old article with a mistake in it? What gives?

Date: Mar 12, 2006

stinky cheese man wrote:

dana thames has not been in psychology and has never been chair. come one folks!!

The university structure is reorganized so frequently that it's hard to keep up with who's on first.

Date: Mar 12, 2006

dumb bunnies!

Date: Mar 12, 2006

stinky cheese man wrote:

dumb bunnies!

SCM, you're assuming that all viewers of this message board are familar with the names of faculty members and the positions the various adminstrators hold.

Date: Mar 12, 2006

That didn't even sound like stinky cheese man.

Date: Mar 12, 2006

no lvn it was me-however, if folks don't have a good sense to check some things (and you can online from the usm website), and if it's so far wrong, i'll respond. 'nuff said.

Date: Mar 13, 2006

bye, bye.

Date: Mar 16, 2006

The information in this thread might be old but, Jim Keith dated Dana Thames and Adams and Reese handle all IP for SFT's polymer issues!

Date: Mar 16, 2006

Ah - a point well made. Also this article explains the nature of how SFT is represented in lawsuits against him and the university. Lest we forget that it was a person from Adams & Reese who was initially supposed to be the "judge" in the Glamser/Stringer termination affairs.

Date: Mar 16, 2006

Yes. Point well made! Look at the fees paid and the outcome of each issue. Seems personal interest took the place of the interest of the University and employees.

Date: Mar 16, 2006

Come to Order, if USM had had its way -- Keith would have been the one to make the "decision" about Glamser and Stringer's termination. Keith works for that Jackson law firm, used to date the Prez's daughter, and clearly has a conflict of interest. Nonetheless, the IHL seemed "perfectly" content to let him be the decision maker in the debacle of March 2004- FireShelby scooped everyone on it btw. Another important point about that article: it refers to the FireShelby message board -- giving it well deserved credence. Keith did not preside over that hearing and . . . well the rest is legend.

Before people are quick to dismiss postings as irrelevant because they don't jump out directly to people slamming in "the point", we need to think about the subversive message. Since some of the more vocal people on this board who have given their names appear to be the ones that, when the going gets rough for the SFT gang -- suddenly become the targets for personal attacks -- we need to consider those attacks, the timing of the attacks and the targets of the attacks and decide NOT to let the SFT cronies determine how this board continues to be administered.

NO QUARTER