quote:

---

Originally posted by: tvscene
"I was told by someone involved that Shelby was going to get castrated and one of each of his nuts was going to plaqued and given to Glamser and Stringer as mantle pieces."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Missi
"Who wants a marble on a plaque? "

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by: tvscene
"Not the rumor I heard.  I was told by someone involved that Shelby was going to get castrated and one of each of his nuts was going to plaqued and given to Glamser and Stringer as mantle pieces.  Ouch, I hope they give him a sedative.  I hear that decision (sedative or not) is up to Virginia Shanteau-Newton. bouncing boy, did you hear this too in any of the rumor swirl?"

---

USM Alum,

Thanks for a particularly thoughtful message; you are absolutely right about the kind of environment needed to support serious academic work.  If I were a faculty member considering staying at or coming to USM right now, my decision would be a no-brainer.  Can't the IHL realize how depressing and demoralizing the environment at USM now is?  Why would they possibly want this to continue?

quote:

---

Originally posted by: USM Alum
"It would be like committing scholarly suicide, which I don't think they'll do.  They have both stood up for their rights as tenured faculty members, academic scholars, and citizens and I think that accepting retirement would be tantamount to admitting complete guilt on their parts in their case.

---

I think they will be reinstated and then retire, that they will read the reinstatement as vindication, and that Thames will privately say (and leak) that this what what he had to accept to be rid of them. Just a guess, and a pessimist's guess at that, that Stringer & Glamser (not to mention all the rest of us) have been snookered, proving once again that the powerful play by different rules and play better (in terms of getting what they want) than we do. Shelby will then serve out his term (2 years) and retire, having damaged the university significantly in his term as president.

I don't know about all the never give up stuff about shelby, but it wouldn't surprise me. If Shelby's testimony was sum and substance of his case against Stringer and Glamser, then I think clearly S & G settled far too readily and/or got poor legal advice.  Of course, if they got huge financial settlements, well, I guess that's another story. It would certainly change the picture significantly, however.

Ask yourself: Why should Shelby be allowed to save face?  Why wouldn't G & S want to "finish the job" on him? How does it help the university if Shelby is allowed to save any face at all? Doesn't it further damage the university of Shelby is allowed to maintain, even privately, that the professors did something wrong?  has no one been reading the news reports?  Shelby's spin machine is still pounding out the news and, to a certain degree, selling it to the media and therefore the public.

USM president: Professors' actions were dishonest and misleading

was the headline in the 4/29 Sun-Herald. Don't we have to wake up and at least wonder if we've been had? In a world where all the power is at the top, what do you think happened in those closed door meetings? You think Glamser and Stringer put the wood to Shelby, with Judge Judy's help, and got everything they wanted? Or do you think the Judge said, "C'mon, boys, let's play nice," knowing full well that any setttlement would most benefit the parties in power over the parties accused? Did Glamser's and Stringer's rebuttal testimony seem like great declarations of triumph and victory and justice? Or did they seem small and hollow--we have the right and responsibility to investigate each other's credentials?  Excuse me?  That's real collegial of you, partner.

We all got behind the Stringer/Glamser matter because it looked like a winner in our larger struggle to get rid of Thames and all his cronies and family members and buddies and butt-kissers and risk managers and all the hateful, small-minded, dictatorial, self-aggrandizing, "I am a hero in my own mind" grandstanding, all the intellectual poverty, all the PR spin crap from his stupid mouthpiece Lisa Mader, all the sneaky business-based meanness and short-sightedness, and buck-hungry crap that have turned a nice little southern university into a parody of some used car dealership. We want to be shut of Shelby Thames, and if the Stringer/Glamser settlement is not part of the solution, my fellow inmates, then it is part of the problem.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: USM Alum
"What will happen?  While I have no specific inside info to offer, I have some speculations, based on personal knowledge of one of the players: 1.  Glamser and Stringer will be reinstated, because SFT did not prove anything at the hearing except that he and his cronies like to read other peoples mail.  G&S were able to refute each of his "charges" so, while I don't know them personally, I can't imagine them accepting a deal that would prove to be any kind of black mark on their academic reputations.  It would be like committing scholarly suicide, which I don't think they'll do.  They have both stood up for their rights as tenured faculty members, academic scholars, and citizens and I think that accepting retirement would be tantamount to admitting complete guilt on their parts in their case. 2.  SFT will not be leaving, at least not this semester.  I have known him and his family for almost 30 years.  I went to Junior High and High School with one of his sons, and have met his wife and other children on numerous occasions.  The term "Elitist Snobs" comes to mind.  These people believe that they and their kind are "above" all of us "little people."  We've been put here to serve the likes of them.  In their minds, we should all just be quiet and listen to our betters. For SFT to accept anything that involves apologizing or stepping down would, in his view, be worse than having his genitals removed.  His most important value is how he is looked upon by others in his "clique."  His entire ego and self-worth is wrapped around this idea, that he must appear perfect in the sight of others, so anything that involves the slightest admission of failure, mistake, or bad judgement on his part will be violently rejected by him.  In his world, it is simply not possible for him to be wrong, because he has surrounded himself with family, friends, and colleagues who are constantly telling him how great he is, how wonderful his ideas are, and how everyone else is stupid not to realize these things.  In the end, when he does finally leave, he will have to be forced out, because he will never be able to admit to himself that he could not get the job done. 3.  The academic exodus will continue, probably at an even faster rate, now that everyone knows that private communications on campus are not possible.  It is not a giant leap of the imagination to consider that, along with e-mails being read at the discretion of an administration that is anything but trusted, telephone calls could be monitored, classrooms and offices could be "bugged", and computer hard drives could be scanned without notice or warning.  There are devices available on the open market that allow the user to listen to private conversations from several hundred feet away, sometimes through closed windows.  I agree that some of this sounds paranoid, but I think that most of you would agree that, after yesterdays staggering admission of e-mail monitoring of both faculty and students, there is nothing that the Thames administration is not capable of attempting.  I don't trust them as far as I could spit them. Professors, scholars, and academics cannot and will not work and thrive in such an environment.  Thiers is a world that is dependant upon the ability to express themselves freely, while being able to conduct research and write books and papers in relative privacy.  Like all human beings, professors do not want to be embaressed or humiliated.  therefore, much of their research, museings, books, and papers are prepared privately, after much careful thought and preparation, so that they can be confident in their research, opinions, and conclusions.  I don't think that I would feel very free or confident knowing that my computer hard drive could be taken or scanned at any time, for any reason, with no notice at all. Likewise, many of these people are in positions that require them to make judgements on the hiring, firing, promotion, or reccomendation of associate and/or non-tenured professors.  Those discussions, letters, e-mails, meetings, or conversations should remain private, so that the faculty members have to freedom to make decisions without worrying about whether or not they are being spied upon.  After the hearing, we all know that this is no longer possible on the USM campus.  I believe that this knowledge will lead to more faculty members leaving as well as few outside professors stepping in to take their places.   That's enough for now.  I have some more thoughts on this subject, but it's late, so I'll come back to it later."

---

This is just what I've been thinking.  I believe G&S will be reinstated, but nothing will happen to Thames...at least not yet.

I, for one, am ready to sign up for Phase II.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: cockeyedoptimist
"Is it not possible that Dr. Thames opened up the possibility of major legal trouble for the board with his email policy (did it follow procedure for such policies legally),  "slander"(the student editor,criminal charges, etc.), his public reading of  incoming email, and wrongful termination of tenured faculty? Remember the lack of edidence and the public statements? Did Judge Anderson warn the board-did they determine the settlement, not Dr. Thames??"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Salesperson
" Other people have said it and said it far more eloquently that I but I'm going to add my voice nonetheless.  The hearings were very specific and confined to the single topic of the proposed terminations of the two professors.  As a result of what was scheduled to be a two-day hearing, there were going to be three recommendations sent forward to the IHL Board, which would then exercise its right to terminate or not.  Shelby Thames had promised the administration, faculty, students, alumni, and friends of the University that we would be "amazed" by his case when the true facts were brought to light.  He promised us a shock and awe campaign.  We were told that the behavior was criminal.  We were told that a criminal investigation couldn't be concurrently held (that, of course, was later refuted by a ranking law enforcement officer!) We were amazed all right by his testimony on Wednesday - amazed that there was no smoking gun - amazed that there was nothing there!  We were shocked by the depth of his spying - shocked by the bad advice he apparently received by his risk manager to whom he twice referred as the university attorney - shocked at the way he brought innocents, like Rachel Quinlevin, into his case.  Finally, we were in awe of Justice Anderson - in awe that he had the good sense to stop the circus and broker a settlement - in awe that he gave the professors the opportunity to have the final word. My opinion is no better and no more knowledgeable than anyone else's but I believe that the professors got all they could hope for from the limited scope of the hearings.  That they got it after only a couple hours instead of a couple days is a credit to them.  For a community so torn by mismanagement and corruption in the dome, perhaps a settlement that does not address a change in administration or financial remuneration to the professors is a disappointment.  It shouldn't be.  These issues were beyond the scope of the hearings. That's why there will be a Phase II."

---