Amazing---new thread begins here - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Aug 8, 2004

Amazing---new thread begins here

Date: Aug 8, 2004

Against my better judgement, I'm responding to you, but only to tell you to read the post above from Amy Young. As the Web Master stated, please contact her if you have any problems with the way this board is moderated.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Online Prof
" I have talked to several people on campus about this board over the last week or so. I suspect you are going to be seeing a few more posters on this board whose opinions differ markedly from yours. If you cannot talk to them constructively and professionally, you really should just ignore them. I know it hurts finally to realize that there are many people on campus who actually disagree with your tactics and ideas, but it is reality. Trying to scare them off with personal attacks and insults is no way to solve a problem or convince them of your cause. "

"Online Prof,"

You post copiously and seem at no loss for words.

Yet you still refuse to offer your own evaluation of Shelby Thames' performance. I've asked you twice. Others have asked you.

Have you decided not to respond because you approve wholeheartedly of what Thames has done?

I haven't proposed blocking your IP address. This is not my board; I am a guest, just like you, and I have no more power to block anyone's IP address than you do. But I do wonder why anyone on this board should take you seriously when you won't tell us whether you are pro-Thames.

Robert Campbell

Date: Aug 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
"Against my better judgement, I'm responding to you, but only to tell you to read the post above from Amy Young. As the Web Master stated, please contact her if you have any problems with the way this board is moderated."

This board is not moderated….it is abused.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
" "Online Prof," You post copiously and seem at no loss for words. Yet you still refuse to offer your own evaluation of Shelby Thames' performance. I've asked you twice. Others have asked you. Have you decided not to respond because you approve wholeheartedly of what Thames has done? I haven't proposed blocking your IP address. This is not my board; I am a guest, just like you, and I have no more power to block anyone's IP address than you do. But I do wonder why anyone on this board should take you seriously when you won't tell us whether you are pro-Thames. Robert Campbell"

Why should anybody take you or anybody else seriously on an anonymous bulletin board?

Date: Aug 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"

"Online Prof,"
You post copiously and seem at no loss for words.
Yet you still refuse to offer your own evaluation of Shelby Thames' performance. I've asked you twice. Others have asked you.
Have you decided not to respond because you approve wholeheartedly of what Thames has done?
I haven't proposed blocking your IP address. This is not my board; I am a guest, just like you, and I have no more power to block anyone's IP address than you do. But I do wonder why anyone on this board should take you seriously when you won't tell us whether you are pro-Thames.
Robert Campbell"

I think it is kind of impressive that he can ignore trolls like you. I also think it is also impressive that he keeps using the same name knowing very well the response he is going to get from trolls on this board.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: keepin' it real
"

I think it is kind of impressive that he can ignore trolls like you. I also think it is also impressive that he keeps using the same name knowing very well the response he is going to get from trolls on this board. "

Are you saying OP uses only one name? That's the joke of the day. I bet OP spends hours trying to think up names s/he hasn't used.

You really are too funny, but a huge waste of time as far as intelligent discussions are concerned.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Otherside
" Are you saying OP uses only one name? That's the joke of the day. I bet OP spends hours trying to think up names s/he hasn't used. You really are too funny, but a huge waste of time as far as intelligent discussions are concerned. "

There has been only one time that I used a name other than Online Prof and that was just when I needed info about Eagle Talk. No matter what the webmaster sends some of you in email, this is the only name I have ever used.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: keepin' it real
" I think it is kind of impressive that he can ignore trolls like you. I also think it is also impressive that he keeps using the same name knowing very well the response he is going to get from trolls on this board. "

Anybody using their real name on this board cannot accurately be called a troll, so that is not why I ignore him. I ignore him for the following reasons:

1) The fact that he is following me all over this board intimates he is taking my posts seriously. That in itself indicates that there is credibility in my posts.

2) He is in self-defense mode now, which also means to me that the content of my posts must be getting through. What I do not understand though is why he is just addressing me and not these other posters who disagree with his tactics and message? That might be because he knows I am faculty and has a good idea who I am.

3) He is trying to bring me down to his attack level and to the adolescent level of these other posters on this board, but I will not behave like that. There is a professional way to criticize a person and that person’s policies, but no one on this board knows how to do it.

4) No matter what I say or do, it will not change his mind and it will not change the atmosphere of this board. Unlike the people here, I keep my mind open and no ego precludes me from changing my mind. For example, I changed my opinion completely about the 099 classes, although it was not for the reasons these other people lambasted those classes.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

I am not associated with USM in any way shape or form. I have friends who are and that is how I first discovered the Fire Shelby site, and then made the transistion here. Which leads me to my question.

How is all of this bickering and arguing helping the cause of USM? How is that helping to unite the faculty to continue the crusade for a better working environment? How is it going to help your students come fall semseter? I can answer my own question, it isn't going to help, its gonna hurt. If SFT has done nothing else he has managed to divide the faculty, which will make the conquering part much easier. I cannot for the life of me remember who said this, but it is so true. United we Stand, Divided we fall. (Memory wants to say Abe Lincoln, but unsure)

I don't know at this point who the trolls are,(cause all of you at this point are posting that way) and a definition of a troll is someone who intentionally posts and then aruges even when someone agrees with him or her. I do know that you shouldn't feed the trolls, and you can tell after three or four posts who they are. The other bulletin board I am on, and a moderator with, can block ISP's, ban a person for life if necessary. At least here, each person has the right to express his or her own thoughts and emotions without that threat. You don't have to agree with the posting, but for the love of pete, stop this infernal arguing and get back to business of doing whatever you can to help USM rise from the depths in which she has plunged. By doing that, you will in fact help the very people you were hired to help, the students. As Invitics said, you cannont have a university without faculty and students. And you can have faculty, but where would yall be if you didn't have students?

And just so you know OP, I do use my real name when posting here.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Patti
"I am not associated with USM in any way shape or form. I have friends who are and that is how I first discovered the Fire Shelby site, and then made the transistion here. Which leads me to my question. How is all of this bickering and arguing helping the cause of USM? . . . . And just so you know OP, I do use my real name when posting here."

I agree Patti. This is really getting boring. There are lots of people posting on this board who are reasonable and thoughtful. Statements like "no one on this board knows how to do it . . . " and other hyperbolic declarations are just juvenile. Can all of us please cut the posturing, the "she said/he said" stuff and the veiled threats about identities and get on with it?

By the way, people who shift identities in order to avoid taking responsbility for what he/she says, or in order to cloak themselves as friend or foe . . . this is the worst thing you can do on a board. Our ability to speak to one another with some possibility of understanding is completely dependent on trust. Trust in a virtual community is a very fragile thing. This board is not as actively moderated as the FS website was -- I think users ought to try not to take advantage of that. In fact, all of us need to go out of our way to be even more scrupulous in saying what we mean and in maintaining relatively stable identifties.

Unless, of course, the object is to destroy the site. If that is the case then a site like this is really at the mercy of the unscrupulous.

OP, I am reminded that you wanted to create a site for members only. No offense, but some of your current discourse seems intended to render this one unusable . . .

If you want to form a members only board please do so, But try to leave this one intact for those of us who don't want to belong to Skull and Bones . . .

Date: Aug 8, 2004

SJ and P -- excellent posts. You voiced what's been disturbing me a bit all afternoon. I think the core of this MB grounds itself in believing that we want a healthier USM, a USM that thrives academically (and - actually economically too) and has a strong student body and personnel force. Just like it would be stupid to post on Eagle Talk and try to drive the conversation on shutting down the athletic program, it is equally stupid to post on this MB and try to change the agenda by attacking faculty and staff. Many of us believe that USM will be a better place once we see the end of the SFT glad handing. Critique that last statement of mine if you want to, but don't attack me personally because I said it. If SFT hadn't come in and created this atmosphere of suspicion and fear, we could all post with our real names. However, if this debacle hadn't happened - maybe we wouldn't be talking at all.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

SS,

Why 'attack' you for speaking the truth? We are all here for the common good of USM. USM will be better off without the glad handling of SFT, and I don't even live there! But I have read enough on this message board and on the Fire Shelby site to understand what this man is partially capable of. I don't even begin to say that I understand everything, but I can smell a rat when I see one. And SFT is a BIG one.

I mentioned the other board that I am on before, and I want to add this, on it, personal attacks are not tolerated, you are warned and if you ignore you are out the door. We tell the posters, attack the issues not the poster.

What are the issues here? A bad administration, faculty coming under fire for doing their jobs, a PR machine that is out of control with its spinning, snooping into personal emails and possibly phone conversations. These are some of, not all of, the issues that this board needs to be addressing. Not personalities (exception, SFT and Klumb), not specific colleges. The same rule should apply here, the issues, its all about the issues. I may not agree with everything said here, but I am not going to attack that person, and I normally don't post unless I feel I have something to add.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

Patti --- My punctuation and paragraph skills are a bit off. I was just telling you and SJ I appreciated your posts and then I went into my own little rant over the posters that attack people personally. You and SJ were not being singled out by me at all then (how could you be, you all are great). I was thinking about a few others who have been prominent in the "let's get down and ugly" postings - that I totally believe are put in to make the MB look bad and get those of us who are committed to a healthier USM to be thrown off task/track.

Sorry for the confusion.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Swan Song
" Patti --- My punctuation and paragraph skills are a bit off. I was just telling you and SJ I appreciated your posts and then I went into my own little rant over the posters that attack people personally. You and SJ were not being singled out by me at all then (how could you be, you all are great). I was thinking about a few others who have been prominent in the "let's get down and ugly" postings - that I totally believe are put in to make the MB look bad and get those of us who are committed to a healthier USM to be thrown off task/track. Sorry for the confusion."

No problem here SS -- and I appreciate Patti's reminder about trying to avoid personal attacks -- although it is perilously difficult to disagree with someone's opinion w/o seeming to be attacking the holder of those opinions . . .

John Huizinga wrote a pretty interesting book about the role of play in history. And one thing he said sticks with me -- and that is that the best "players" are those who try to keep the game going rather than those who stop it. An example would be the kid who runs away with the football -- kills the game. Keeping your eyes open while counting during hide and seek isn't so much about cheating as it is that it destroys the very foundation upon which the game is built.

Sometimes arguments advanced here seem like that too. As in: "any right thinking person will agree with what I am about to say . . . " sort of kills the spirit of the argument by creating an argumentum ad hominum before the counterargument has even been offered.

Having said that, it is still probably more true than not that this Board tends, like its FS progenitor, to be contra administration. I think that is inevitable given the personalities of the early posters and the history of this controversy. It is also appropriate because the role of the AAUP is to protect the learning environment of the university and in so doing protect, not academic freedom per se, but the necessity of discourse that is not subverted by the misuse of power or authority. That can come from anywhere and is not limited to out-of-control administration. As has been pointed out elsewhere, that abuse can happen Dean to Chair, Chair to faculty member, senior faculty member to junior faculty member, faculty member to student, faculty to staff . . . etc.

My point is that even as we critque the administration for its abuses, which are egregious because it has so much authority compared to both the faculty (and staff) as groups and as individuals, it is probably also wise to be a bit humble and remember that any of us can find ourselves the abuser when relationships of power are unequal. I think that is what some folks on the board have been trying to say . . . or at least that is what I have interpreted.

None the less, we also have to be very clear that the scope of an individual faculty member's potential to abuse others is extremely limited as opposed to the weight of an administration that carries with it the full authority of the state, a huge budget, a press office, and the ability to hire and fire. The differecne is is ciritcal : in the first we have personal abuse; in the second we have institutional abuse.

Personal abuse is not only likely to have a smaller circle of consequence, it is also usually much easier to deal with. Institutional abuse is much more complex because it is rooted in greater heirarchies of authority which have much more at stake.

Sorry to have rambled here: I've spent a huge part of my academic life watching the workings of power within academic institutions and it is fascinating. The problem with fascinating is that it is the kind of word I'd use if I were an outside observer instead of one of the objects of power's gaze and control.

It is incredibly interesting to me to contemplate how electronic culture has fulfilled Foucault's analysis of power in Discipline and Punish . . .

Best wishes and a restful night to everyone.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Swan Song
"
Patti --- My punctuation and paragraph skills are a bit off. I was just telling you and SJ I appreciated your posts and then I went into my own little rant over the posters that attack people personally. You and SJ were not being singled out by me at all then (how could you be, you all are great). I was thinking about a few others who have been prominent in the "let's get down and ugly" postings - that I totally believe are put in to make the MB look bad and get those of us who are committed to a healthier USM to be thrown off task/track.
Sorry for the confusion."

I too must apologize SS. My comments previous were not directed at you. I was directing them at those in which you so aptly named the "lets get down and ugly" posters.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
" It is incredibly interesting to me to contemplate how electronic culture has fulfilled Foucault's analysis of power in Discipline and Punish . . . Best wishes and a restful night to everyone. "

I am already working on an article for a research journal contextualy focued in the area of power plays. By your astute observations, you should be too.

Date: Aug 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Swan Song
"I am already working on an article for a research journal contextualy focued in the area of power plays. By your astute observations, you should be too. "

I'm complimented but I know my limits . . . it's enough for me to try to get shows up and teach. However, I did write an article in 1991 for the Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence about power relationships between academia and the intelligence community. So I can pretend to have some really modest beach head in the world of those who really are scholars.

I'll look forward to yours . . .

Date: Aug 8, 2004

Thank you Patti, Stephen Judd, and Swan Song for your intelligent and thoughtful posts. I could care less whether people post anonymously or not on this board...as long as the posters are as thoughtful as the 3 of you, I'll keep on reading!

Truth