I think its best to leave Frank and Gary alone. They've moved on, like so many of us. They were both put through the meat grinder, and I'm sure they don't want to relive those days. I don't think its right to expect them to mount some public campaign on USM issues.

Glamser and Stringer should be invited to set the record straight publicly. If, having "moved on," they wish not to speak out, so be it; indeed there should be no expectations imposed on them. On the other hand, either or both might be only too happy to speak once the muzzle is removed.

Truth and Reconciliation time at USM. There wil be no "moving on" without it.

A full, impartial investigation into the attempted firings of Stringer and Glamser would be a good place to start. A lot of folks here have a feeling that Frank and Gary settled only because they were too tired and beaten up to pursue genuine redress, not because they did anything that could legitimately be construed to warrant termination. And not because the Thames administration wasn't guilty as sin.

Given the cozy relations between the current administration and the political powers that be, though, it's difficult to say who such an investigation would be commissioned by. FS might could agitate for an something in "independent prosecutor" mode. There may be some USM alumni who have not fallen under the Thames spell, some of them may be in the legislature, or other influential positions in the polity and private life (?).

At least we wont be paying them anymore for not working here!

What is needed for reconciliation is some truth from the IHL Board or the commissioner. Someone in Jackson is going to have to find a way to subtly admit that their presidential selection process was flawed and that they made a monumental mistake. The IHL  should also apologize to the faculty and staff for the grief the Board put them through by sticking with their boy in spite of contrary damning evidence from year one. Part of the process of reconciliation would be to place an adequate number of respected faculty on the search committee for the next president and listen to them. Failure to take these steps will perpetuate the bad blood, the bad publicity, and the continuing departures of good faculty.

Broom in the Closet wrote:

---

What is needed for reconciliation is some truth from the IHL Board or the commissioner. Someone in Jackson is going to have to find a way to subtly admit that their presidential selection process was flawed and that they made a monumental mistake. The IHL  should also apologize to the faculty and staff for the grief the Board put them through by sticking with their boy in spite of contrary damning evidence from year one. Part of the process of reconciliation would be to place an adequate number of respected faculty on the search committee for the next president and listen to them. Failure to take these steps will perpetuate the bad blood, the bad publicity, and the continuing departures of good faculty.

---

I think that admission has been "subtly" made. The shift to a commissioner to whom the Presidents directly answer; the fact that they get performance reviews each year from the commissioner; the admission that the board is a "lay" board and needs to do be less involved in the micromanaging of the universities and focus more on the larger picture (i.e policy); the stepping down of Roy Klum (my guess is that he found the changed climate unwelcome once he was out of the Board Presidency) are all subtle signs, I think.