Let Us Try A New Strategy - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jul 9, 2004

Let Us Try A New Strategy

Date: Jul 9, 2004

SingleDigit,

Four months before Thames' contract is due to expire...that's January 2006.

So the best way to end Thames' misrule is to shut up and support him between now and then?

Robert Campbell

Date: Jul 9, 2004

I think that I require a quickie course on the USM presidential search in '02, particularly with respect to the Thames default presidency. How was the search conducted? I'm assuming it was a "national" search? Was the search a sham, with Thames already assured of the position? Was there a paucity of candidates for the job? It's hard for me to accept the idea that the USM position is so unattractive that quality candidates could not be found. And yet, from what I read here, that seems to have been the case. Am I wrong?

AE

Date: Jul 9, 2004

i'll add in what little i can. there was a national search in '02, as i recall handled by a headhunter firm. i don't know the pool since i wasn't on the committee. SLT started on the search committee, but at some point threw his hat in the ring. it's like a person at a poker game getting to see everyone else's hand and then saying "deal me in." about that time SLT began making his rounds of local Xmas parties. at least two local faculty initially applied--Tim Hudson and Don Cotten. Tim was cut earlier (i think), and Don was interviewed by the board, but didn't make the finalists. at some point, MSU began it's presidential search and i think the board wanted to conclude our search ASAP and get on to a more important one.

Date: Jul 9, 2004

quote:

Originally posted by: SingleDigit "If they were to fire him before his contract was up, they would practically be admitting they made a mistake, something that human nature keeps us from wanting to admit."

My guess, SingleDigit, is that the IHL's refusal to admit they made a mistake is not human nature (e.g., it is not innate). I suspect that it is learned behavior. Thus, the IHL should be able to learn from or profit from their mistake. If their refusal were simply human nature, I would be far more pessimistic.

Originally posted by: SingleDigit:

"Your previous actions have alienated the old IHL. Now with your continual scathing letters and self-centered comments you are alienating the new IHL members."

I recall that it was AN IHL member did the initial public alienation, SingleDigit. Specifically, I believe that it was Roy Klumb who, in a letter published in the Clarion-Ledger (June 12, 2002) and representing himself therein as ". . . .a member of the College Board," (1) referred to ". . . that arcane rule of tenure," (2) cited a personnal matter which should not have been publicaly disclosed in the newspaper ("Dr. Henry was eased back into the faculty pool . . ."), advised Dr. Thames with the words "My advice to Dr. Thames is, to borrow a phrase, "Damn the toppedos; full speed ahead," and (4) suggested to faculty who cannot embrace some ideas Klumb specified, "It's time to retire." That letter certainly played an early role in contributing to what has become USM's EAGLEGATE.

Date: Jul 9, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Eaglegate
""

The date in the above posting should have been June 12, 2003 - not 2002.

Date: Jul 9, 2004

Singledigit,

I'm afraid I disagree with your analysis. Pressure on the IHL is probably the main factor in ensuring that things have developed as positively as they have. When the board initially tried to rig the hearing for GS and FS, pressure helped ensure a change to a fairer proceeding. The judge presiding over the hearing, probably realizing that the IHL would rule in SFT's favor, engineered a solution that gave FG and GS two years' pay whether or not they continued to teach. SFT was then called before the IHL for a closed-door session, and, after that, members of his inner circle began to depart and he has been trying to act as if he is on his best behavior ever since. (Most of it is probably phoney, but then he never even felt the need to put on a show before this.)

I doubt that any of these good things would have happened if the IHL had not been flooded with letters and if the issue had not been kept constantly alive in the press (through letters to the editor, for example). I'm sure they hate hearing from us anti-Shelby folks, and I'm sure we have made some of them (especially Klumb) angry; but the noisy wheel gets the grease, and I shudder to think what SFT would have gotten away with by now if pressure on the IHL had not been as intense and continuous as it has been. One way or another, Shelby will eventually lose this stand-off, because whoever succeeds him will want to define himself or herself as quickly as possible as The Anti-Shelby.

Date: Jul 9, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: SingleDigit
"...Now with your continual scathing letters and self-centered comments you are alienating the new IHL members. You could not get Thames fired, so now you are going to try to get the IHL fired? Brilliant. You turned the public against you, then you attacked the public when they responded negatively. Brilliant. You cannot teach here, so you want to take steps that ensure no one else will teach here either. ...
"

SingleDigit is too harsh in his criticism here. We are individuals and write letters as individuals to the media. Dr. Ower, who wrote to The Chronicle, is a retired professor who has never been affiliated with USM, afaik. He was giving his professional advice to colleagues across the country from his observations of the situation in MS.

SingleDigit makes it sound like the faculty are unionized and speak with ONE voice according to a planned agenda. Democracy doesn't work that way. Seldom (twice?)has the faculty Senate been able to accomplish this, and even then letters are written to the media with diverse opinions on the issues.

Dr. Parker's letter is often mentioned because he used "name calling". (Too bad people don't remember that he was being critical of people making statements not supported by facts.) That was his style and his letter. Too bad if you don't like it, but that IS free speech.

Are you suggesting we intimidate people to write only letters we approve? I hope not.

Date: Jul 9, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: proUSM
""

"ProUSM," How precisely did I fail the AAUP at Clemson? I'm sitting in my office at Clemson University as I write this. So much for getting "ran out." Robert Campbell

Date: Jul 9, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
" "ProUSM," How precisely did I fail the AAUP at Clemson? I'm sitting in my office at Clemson University as I write this. So much for getting "ran out." Robert Campbell"

A particularly nasty Troll Alert. ProUSM, please go find another forum that shares your characteristics.

Date: Jul 9, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: proUSM
""

ProUSM (which is oddly close to "ProUST," as in Marcel),

Please leave your soundproof room during daylight and try exploring the subjects about which you write. Perhaps the seclusion has kept you from achieving the uncanny introspection of Marcel.

DG

Date: Jul 9, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
I doubt that any of these good things would have happened if the IHL had not been flooded with letters and if the issue had not been kept constantly alive in the press (through letters to the editor, for example).

But the goal was to get Thames out of office. It was not to get him to notice us. This is an example of the leader focusing on something that is right rather than what is wrong. This is also another reason why we need a change please.