Be Logical

Date: Apr 28, 2004

Be Logical

Date: Apr 28, 2004

seahawk, you are right on. I also believe that, since Shelby brought the Pileum issue into matters, he potentially headed down a very dangerous road for himself. I suspect that part of Anderson's advice to him also included, "Shelby, if this hearing continues, you might find yourself as defendent in a criminal proceeding against the State of Mississippi." A friend of mine has suggested that when this is all over, this board should remain, not as "Fire Shelby," but as "Indict Shelby."

Date: Apr 28, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: elliott
"seahawk, you are right on. I also believe that, since Shelby brought the Pileum issue into matters, he potentially headed down a very dangerous road for himself. I suspect that part of Anderson's advice to him also included, "Shelby, if this hearing continues, you might find yourself as defendent in a criminal proceeding against the State of Mississippi." A friend of mine has suggested that when this is all over, this board should remain, not as "Fire Shelby," but as "Indict Shelby." "

Please tell more about Pileum. Rumor is they are the ones who would have been monitoring email messages, not the regular iTech folks. And since Pileum works directly for . . . A. Dvorak . . . well, you catch my drift.

Date: Apr 28, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: elliott
"seahawk, you are right on. I also believe that, since Shelby brought the Pileum issue into matters, he potentially headed down a very dangerous road for himself. I suspect that part of Anderson's advice to him also included, "Shelby, if this hearing continues, you might find yourself as defendent in a criminal proceeding against the State of Mississippi." A friend of mine has suggested that when this is all over, this board should remain, not as "Fire Shelby," but as "Indict Shelby." "

What is the Pileum issue? I heard it referred to today while watching the game room but didn't know what they were talking about.

(BTW it was a great feeling to see the spontaneous eruption of applause when Dr. Glamseur finished speaking).

Let Freedom Ring

Date: Apr 28, 2004

Yes, please clarify the Pelium (sp?) issue?

Date: Apr 28, 2004

Pileum home page:

<http://www.pileum.com/index.htm>

Date: Apr 28, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: elliott
A friend of mine has suggested that when this is all over, this board should remain, not as "Fire Shelby," but as "Indict Shelby." "

100% in agreement with this suggestion. The board should be renamed and kept up in any case. It's been a wonderful encouragement to the frank and open discusion of problems at USM.

Date: Apr 28, 2004

I visited the site. There is obviously a connection that I don't understand. Do you have a "....for Dummies" explanation?

Date: Apr 28, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: beentheredonethat
"I visited the site. There is obviously a connection that I don't understand. Do you have a "....for Dummies" explanation?"

Some of the basics were on a long-ago thread, but Pileum is a consulting company that was hired by SFT soon after SFT took office in 2002. They run iTech - literally. They make hiring/firing decisions (approved by A. Dvorak in order to stay within state law), decided on the OTR name change, required golf shirt uniforms of iTech employees, etc. Most importantly, they have access to all computer-related technology on campus. Jill Beneke heads Pileum and answers only to A. Dvorak.

Date: Apr 28, 2004

See the old Godwin Group thread -- four posts down -- for Pilieum stuff.

Date: Apr 28, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: beentheredonethat
"I visited the site. There is obviously a connection that I don't understand. Do you have a "....for Dummies" explanation?"

I don't remember the context of Thames' mentioning Pileum, but they have been working to revamp the former OTR into an organization that might create a better reputation for itself than the rep that the old OTR got saddled with.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but they are responsible for the name change from OTR to iTech, for implementing the liason concept of having a iTech person housed in every college, of implementing a dress code whereby iTech people wear common shirts, so they are very easily identified, oversaw the installation of gobs of new network equipment, and possibly also oversaw the choosing of a brand new Chief Information Officer (that position used to be Chief Technology Officer).

Date: Apr 28, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: beentheredonethat
"Yes, please clarify the Pelium (sp?) issue?"

From Pileum's website:

Welcome to PILEUM

Pileum Corporation is a service organization focused on providing the highest quality consulting, training and resourcing to our clients. Our mission is to enhance our clients’ profits through business process improvement, service differentiation and technology based solutions.

We have a reputation for maintaining high standards and providing solutions that are integrated, efficient and effective. Pileum works very closely with our clients to gain a clear understanding of their business requirements in order to propose appropriate solutions best suited for the situation.

Webster’s Dictionary defines Pileum as “the top of the head of a bird”. Our name reflects our goal of providing guidance to our clients with information and solutions that enable them to soar to the highest levels of performance … rather than becoming a sitting duck.

Jill Beneke
President and CEO
jillbeneke@pileumcorp.com
Jill serves as chief executive and president. Her leadership spans over 20 years of experience in developing, managing and marketing financial services to government and commercial clients. Recognized as a leader in the Financial Services Industry Jill has helped design and market technology based solutions that set her clients apart from their competitors. Her experience includes senior management positions at Deposit Guaranty National Bank, First American Bank, and Amsouth. She is a recognized speaker on various financial services topics across the United States and has served on the faculty of various Universities offering curriculums in non-traditional banking strategies.

Sandy Turnage
Director of Engineering
sandyturnage@pileumcorp.com
Sandy serves as the Director of Engineering is responsible for all PILEUM engineers and their customer engagements. Sandy’s distinguished 13 year career has been in the technology consulting business. He has been a leading consultant in technology planning, design, and deployment of complex LAN/WAN implementations for hundreds of companies. Sandy’s strong consulting practice and methodology in the area of security is used by clients throughout the Southeast.

Note: Based on a very limited Google search, I've found that Pileum is one of several IT vendors that has responded to RFPs from the Mississippi Department of Information Technology Services, the state agency that coordinates the procurement of IT for universities.

Date: Apr 28, 2004

Is ST's contract with Pileum to monitor internal e-mails--if that's really the case--really an indictable offense? It seems to me, although I'm not an attorney, that court decisions have pretty much confirmed the right of employers to monitor their employees' use of company property, including phone, FAX, e-mail whatever. Is there some wrinkle involved because this particular employer happens to be the state of Mississippi?

Date: Apr 28, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: livewobbly
" Is ST's contract with Pileum to monitor internal e-mails--if that's really the case--really an indictable offense? It seems to me, although I'm not an attorney, that court decisions have pretty much confirmed the right of employers to monitor their employees' use of company property, including phone, FAX, e-mail whatever. Is there some wrinkleinvolved because this particular employer happens to be the state of Mississippi? "

This is not just a workplace. This is a university. A university deals with knowlege and the exchange of knowlege through its many forms of communication. In fact, both the teaching function of the university and the research function of the university require the ability to communicate in ways that are open and free, subject only to concerns about private personal welfare and safety. If these forms are compromised, if we cannot believe that our communications can occur without being monitored, then the free flow and exchange of ideas that defines a university and makes it work possible then we simply cannot function: ideas will go unuttered and thoughts will go unexpressed. Since it axiomatic that we cannot predict which thoughts or ideas might eventually rise to create an impact or to produce a result, we are very much poorer when the field of discourse is made smaller because of reluctance, fear, or intimidation.

Stop talking about the university and the work we do as though it is the product of a factory or the faculty and students just so many laborers pushing buttons. It isn't. This distinction is what makes the university unique in any culture -- and that distinction should not be blurred -- in fact it needs to be given even greater definition and then it needs to be defended.

What I heard today was an attack not on what these men did, but upon what they thought. The Glamser and Stringer team drew a clear line between private opinion and public utterance. In no public utterance did the two professors defame the university, make any claim of illegality against the university or against Dvorak. In no public statement did the professors attack the university. Only in their private communications (captured by the Thames gang through monitoring and later through rifling through Gary's hard drive) did they reveal their doubts, concerns and anger. But it is not illegal to have opinions.

Is it possible to have opinions and yet be objective in one's public discourse and research? The university I belong to would say, yes. The education of scholars and researchers is to put opinion aside and yield to the truth wherever it leads.

Can some scholars and researchers allow their opinons to dominate their objectivity? Again the answer is yes, and the university has systems ("peer review"; "refereed journals," "tenure committees" etc.) to monitor and oversee these things. We recognize the distinction between public and private; we do not say that objectivity means that one cannot have opinions, only the one's opinions should not be allowed to obscure one's ability to be objective.

The Thames' gang strategy was not just an attack on these two men -- it was a not so subtle attack on the university and on the concept of objectivity. It could only undermine the professors' credibility by, in effect, breaking into their private thoughts (how much email is simply private conversation occuring in electronic text form?) But it failed to prove the link: that their private thoughts, their doubts and anger at the administration, translated itself into bad research.

So here is what we learn about life at usm.

1. Don't have any opinions that someone in power might not like.

2. If you are silly enough to have opinions, don't express them. And, oh by the way, don't express them by email, by phone, fax, conversation or publishing because someone will hear you and might one day use it against you.

3.If you are really stupid and not only form opinions, but also are silly enough to express them, then by all means DON'T act on them, because you might offend someone who signs your paycheck.

Now that you have no opinions, won't express any opinions and won't act on any opinions, do whatever you wish at usm -- after all, it's a free country.

Date: Apr 28, 2004

There is not much I can say but to agree with Stephen Judd's eloquent assessment of what a university is (at least some places). Thanks, Stephen.

If you haven't already read it, you might check out the reader submission, "A Square in Berlin, Dissent at USM," for the consequences of repression of freedom of expression.

We can not be too clear about how dangerous the actions of the Thames adminstration are. They are (and this is a word I never use) unAmerican.

Date: Apr 28, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: foot soldier
"There is not much I can say but to agree with Stephen Judd's eloquent assessment of what a university is (at least some places). Thanks, Stephen. If you haven't already read it, you might check out the reader submission, "A Square in Berlin, Dissent at USM," for the consequences of repression of freedom of expression. We can not be too clear about how dangerous the actions of the Thames adminstration are. They are (and this is a word I never use) unAmerican. "

and profoundly anti-university.

Thanks foot soldier. I also encourage to read "A Square . . . ."

It has been a long day but a good one. I am going to get some rest.

Tomorrow we start "Phase II." (FS will recognize where I "borrowed" this idea.)

Date: Apr 28, 2004

Very eloquent Stephen, and thanks. I would only add, as a friendly amendment, that Thames made his own sense of university loyalty crystal clear when he explained, falsely, how much money the university---i.e., he, Shelby Thames---had used to match the various NEH grants Stringer had gotten over the years. His unstated but undeniable point was that people whom he pays owe him loyalty! That applies to all of us on salary. Thames is properly humilated now. It remains to be seen how much longer his proposterous presidency will last. Many thanks to all who helped bring this tin-horn dictator down---Stephen Judd, Amy Young, Darlys Alford, Doug Chambers, and Anne Wallace among many other faculty who having much to lose nevertheless spoke the truth courageously; and the hordes of our magnificent students who fought this tyranny from Day One: you know a lie when you hear it, and that may be the most valuable lesson you have learned at USM. Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe you knew a lie all along and we just thought we were teaching you. Blessings on you all.

Depending on what the Board does with Thames's report, we may or may not have more work to do in the next few days. But we have reason now to celebrate and to be proud of our constructive dissent. Nice going, gang!

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
" This is not just a workplace. This is a university. A university deals with knowlege and the exchange of knowlege through its many forms of communication. In fact, both the teaching function of the university and the research function of the university require the ability to communicate in ways that are open and free, subject only to concerns about private personal welfare and safety. If these forms are compromised, if we cannot believe that our communications can occur without being monitored, then the free flow and exchange of ideas that defines a university and makes it work possible then we simply cannot function: ideas will go unuttered and thoughts will go unexpressed. Since it axiomatic that we cannot predict which thoughts or ideas might eventually rise to create an impact or to produce a result, we are very much poorer when the field of discourse is made smaller because of reluctance, fear, or intimidation. Stop talking about the university and the work we do as though it is the product of a factory or the faculty and students just so many laborers pushing buttons. It isn't. This distinction is what makes the university unique in any culture -- and that distinction should not be blurred -- in fact it needs to be given even greater definition and then it needs to be defended. What I heard today was an attack not on what these men did, but upon what they thought. The Glamser and Stringer team drew a clear line between private opinion and public utterance. In no public utterance did the two professors defame the university, make any claim of illegality against the university or against Dvorak. In no public statement did the professors attack the university. Only in their private communications (captured by the Thames gang through monitoring and later through rifling through Gary's hard drive) did they reveal their doubts, concerns and anger. But it is not illegal to have opinions. Is it possible to have opinions and yet be objective in one's public discourse and research? The university I belong to would say, yes. The education of scholars and researchers is to put opinion aside and yield to the truth wherever it leads. Can some scholars and researchers allow their opinons to dominate their objectivity? Again the answer is yes, and the university has systems ("peer review"; "refereed journals," "tenure committees" etc.) to monitor and oversee these things. We recognize the distinction between public and private; we do not say that objectivity means that one cannot have opinions, only the one's opinions should not be allowed to obscure one's ability to be objective. The Thames' gang strategy was not just an attack on these two men -- it was a not so subtle attack on the university and on the concept of objectivity. It could only undermine the professors' credibility by, in effect, breaking into their private thoughts (how much email is simply private conversation occuring in electronic text form?) But it failed to prove the link: that their private thoughts, their doubts and anger at the administration, translated itself into bad research. So here is what we learn about life at usm. 1. Don't have any opinions that someone in power might not like. 2. If you are silly enough to have opinions, don't express them. And, oh by the way, don't express them by email, by phone, fax, conversation or publishing because someone will hear you and might one day use it against you. 3.If you are really stupid and not only form opinions, but also are silly enough to express them, then by all means DON'T act on them, because you might offend someone who signs your paycheck. Now that you have no opinions, won't express any opinions and won't act on any opinions, do whatever you wish at usm -- after all, it's a free country."

Date: Apr 28, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: noel polk
"Very eloquent Stephen, and thanks. I would only add, as a friendly amendment, that Thames made his own sense of university loyalty crystal clear when he explained, falsely, how much money the university---i.e., he, Shelby Thames---had used to match the various NEH grants Stringer had gotten over the years. His unstated but undeniable point was that people whom he pays owe him loyalty! That applies to all of us on salary. Thames is properly humilated now. It remains to be seen how much longer his proposterous presidency will last. Many thanks to all who helped bring this tin-horn dictator down---Stephen Judd, Amy Young, Darlys Alford, Doug Chambers, and Anne Wallace among many other faculty who having much to lose nevertheless spoke the truth courageously; and the hordes of our magnificent students who fought this tyranny from Day One: you know a lie when you hear it, and that may be the most valuable lesson you have learned at USM. Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe you knew a lie all along and we just thought we were teaching you. Blessings on you all.

Depending on what the Board does with Thames's report, we may or may not have more work to do in the next few days. But we have reason now to celebrate and to be proud of our constructive dissent. Nice going, gang!"

Professor Polk, thanks for weighing in! As someone who is distant from Hattiesburg, I'd be interested if you could/would elaborate on the reasons you seem to feel so optimistic. We have had to listen all day to people claiming that the two professors will retire or resign, and claiming to be very confident that this will be the outcome. You, on the other hand, seem very confident that the precise opposite will happen. As someone who has spoken so forthrightly and bravely throughout this whole controversy, can you share more of your thoughts with us? Can you at least hint as to why you seem to feel so optimistic? Enquiring minds -- or at least one of them -- want to know. Many thanks, not only for your prospective response but also for everything you have done for USM throughout this mess.

Date: Apr 28, 2004

Dr. Polk, you should not be up so late. I want you to be all rested-up so that you can write the book about this episode!

Date: Apr 28, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: former-staffer
"Dr. Polk, you should not be up so late. I want you to be all rested-up so that you can write the book about this episode!"

SOMEBODY definitely needs to write a book about all this. The revelations today about e-mail snooping were chilling; it is hard to believe that this kind of thing can take place in the good old USA.

Date: Apr 28, 2004

Well, I thought I was being more measured than actually optimistic in these comments. I've been optimistic throughout the last several weeks because I had and have absolute faith in Stringer & Glamser and in the rightness of what they were doing; I've written more than once that they were not only not doing anything wrong, they were in fact doing their duty to the state of Mississippi, which employs us all (we are not Thames's employees, as he so has so ridiculously assumed). I dont know what Judge Anderson instructed Thames to write to the Board. During the afternoon session, I was sitting behind him; he looked like an old dog that had been kicked around and whipped good, so I can only assume that what he writes to the Board will not be good for him, but we can only wait and see what he writes and how the Board will respond to it. I of course want the Board to acknowledge their culpability in this mess by firing him outright; that may of course not happen, but the Board has to know that, left in office, he is still capable of doing harm, and we need to get him and the Kentucky mafia out of the dome so we can back to the business of education and scholarship. Somehow I continue to believe, after all, that reasonable people will do the right thing, finally. Call me a cock-eyed optimist!

Thank you all for your nice words and your support throughout.

quote:
Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
""

Date: Apr 28, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: noel polk
""

Well, let me say it again: thank YOU! And thanks to all the good folks at USM who have provided such inspiring examples in the last few weeks -- so many "profiles in courage." Just as I found the original recorded statements of G&S very inspiring listening, so I found their statements today.

Professor Polk, since you were at the hearings, was it also your impression, as one person reported earlier, that G&S seemed happy as they were leaving the building today? I am hoping and praying that things went well for them.

Date: Apr 29, 2004

Yes, profs. Glamser and Stringer both looked very happy late yesterday afternoon. I believe they were headed off to have a drink with friends.

Date: Apr 29, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: foot soldier
"Yes, profs. Glamser and Stringer both looked very happy late yesterday afternoon. I believe they were headed off to have a drink with friends."

Nope. Headed off into the sunset of retirement. Stick a fork in them because they are done! Just you wait and see.

Date: Apr 29, 2004

I didn't see them as they left the building, but they were smiling when they came back in after the long negotiations (which were 3 hours long, by the way, not 2---they ate no lunch). What was most noticeable was Thames's demeanour---from the back, where I was sitting, he looked like a whipped dog, a vision supported by a couple of pictures in the papers today of his face. It was not the face of a winner, but the face of a man who knew he had humiliated himself. Whether he knows how much humiliation he has wrought for everybody in this state is something only he knows.

quote:
Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
" Well, let me say it again: thank YOU! And thanks to all the good folks at USM who have provided such inspiring examples in the last few weeks -- so many "profiles in courage." Just as I found the original recorded statements of G&S very inspiring listening, so I found their statements today. Professor Polk, since you were at the hearings, was it also your impression, as one person reported earlier, that G&S seemed happy as they were leaving the building today? I am hoping and praying that things went well for them."

Fire Shelby · Status: Offline

quote:
Originally posted by: noel polk
""

Yes, but I think a little more humiliation is due him.

He ought to be forced by IHL to publicly say, "Because of my unchecked rage, I caused the taxpayers of Mississippi to spend ___________ dollars on this 'bogus charade,' which originated only because I irrationally wanted a couple of pounds of flesh. I apologize to the USM community and the taxpayers of this state."

Fire Shelby · Status: Offline

quote:
Originally posted by: elliott
"A friend of mine has suggested that when this is all over, this board should remain, not as "Fire Shelby," but as "Indict Shelby." "

LOL! I'll consider that.

Date: Apr 29, 2004

I attended a workshop for the last two days, but was able to keep up with the ongoing happenings at USM. I am at this point optimistic in regards to the overall outcome.

While at the workshop, one of our keynote speakers is a professor from Huntsville Alabama, and he used this quote, which I feel is appropriate for this thread. It was stated by Max Weber and for the record, the comments in the () are those of this writer. I quote " Institutions endure, thrive NOT because of one leaders charisma (or lack thereof), but because they cultivate leadership throughout the system"

USM will endure and thrive once Shelby is gone. Yes, it will take time to heal from his actions, but it will repair itself. And you, the members here will be, for the most part, participants in that healing process. The time to start the healing process will come once the IHL board hears the recommendations from Judge Anderson, even if they are being delivered by Thames (he can't screw with them, that would amount to contempt) and takes action. Now we need to pray that the board will do the right thing and ask Shelby to step down, as he has been an embarassment to them as well (Klumb excluded) Healing will in itself be painful because of what this man (and I use the term loosely) has done. Academic freedom was and to a point still is on the line here, freedom under the first admendment to the Consitution is at stake here. Look what he tried to do to the young woman from the Prinz. But, it can and will be healed.

Continue to stand firm in your beliefs, don't wavier, stay convicted to the ideal of what higher education is all about. God Bless each of you for having the courage to stand up for what you hold dear and true, especially in the face of such adversity. Our prayers seemingly have been answered, now we must pray for guidance for the IHL board, that they too will see the truth and act in justice.

Date: Apr 29, 2004

Thank you very much Patti. You know who I am. We just chatted.

We all appreciate your insight and sense of ethics and justice, even if from way out west. You have been here and you saw him.

Your words are both eloquent and germane to a situation that, had you been here, you would have been embroiled in the middle of the fray up front for sure. You make me very proud.

Date: Apr 29, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Greedy
"Thank you very much Patti. You know who I am. We just chatted. We all appreciate your insight and sense of ethics and justice, even if from way out west. You have been here and you saw him. Your words are both eloquent and germane to a situation that, had you been here, you would have been embroiled in the middle of the fray up front for sure. You make me very proud. "

I want to second that thanks from Greedy. We are in quite a stir here, anxious about tomorrow and beyond. Sometimes up and sometimes down. Your quotation is a good reminder that other people share a common view of the university. Your contributions from afar (now that I know) help us feel not so isolated. Thanks and thanks.