RE HUDSON!!!

Date: May 11, 2004

RE HUDSON!!!

Date: May 11, 2004

I posted this tidbit earlier on a separate thread, but will duplicate it here, in the FWIW department. A member of Hudson's immediate family informed me last week, about the time Hanbury was fired, that Tim had withdrawn his application at Slippery Rock, ostensibly to dramatize to the IHL his commitment to USM, and demonstrate his strong desire to replace Thames as President. I have no idea whether this is "true", as he may well have withdrawn from the SR candidate pool because he knew he was out of the running, and saw this action as a face saving gesture. In any case, clever manipulator that he is, I'm sure that he views this as an opportunity to remain in the starting blocks, should the IHL decide to remove Thames.

Date: May 11, 2004

If Tim Hudson is appointed by the IHL as the next USM President, he will face the same problems as did Dr. Thames two years ago. He will have no faculty support. I hope the IHL has learned a lesson from the past two years.

Dr. Hudson was asked by the Faculty Senate last summer to help defend the faculty when they are attacked in the media. He has failed to do so. We are left to defend ourselves and fortunatley we have people like Amy Young who do so very well.

Hudson is notorious for his temper, scathing E-mails to faculty members and his general lack of respect for the faculty. Actually, he may be the exact type of guy the IHL likes.

Date: May 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Moving On
"If Tim Hudson is appointed by the IHL as the next USM President, he will face the same problems as did Dr. Thames two years ago. He will have no faculty support. I hope the IHL has learned a lesson from the past two years. Dr. Hudson was asked by the Faculty Senate last summer to help defend the faculty when they are attacked in the media. He has failed to do so. We are left to defend ourselves and fortunatley we have people like Amy Young who do so very well. Hudson is notorious for his temper, scathing E-mails to faculty members and his general lack of respect for the faculty. Actually, he may be the exact type of guy the IHL likes."

Thanks moving on for that reminder about Hudson's promise to respond to public attaks on the faculty. He made that promise at the beginning of this academic year in an end of the summer Senate one day retreat.

Date: May 11, 2004

Movin On and Stephen:

You are both right and Thank You!

I do not recall that promise but that is his way of operating. Heck, not only does he not defend us but he is the first one to balme folks such as Myron and others for his poor judgment calls.

Thanks-- Stephen If my job were not at risk I would come out in the public! We will talk soemday about this.

Date: May 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Quiet-but-Perceptive
"Movin On and Stephen: You are both right and Thank You! I do not recall that promise but that is his way of operating. Heck, not only does he not defend us but he is the first one to balme folks such as Myron and others for his poor judgment calls. Thanks-- Stephen If my job were not at risk I would come out in the public! We will talk soemday about this."

I look forward to it. In the day of the Free University of Southern Mississippi.

Date: May 11, 2004

VUSM DAY!!!

Date: May 11, 2004

What happened to the PERKS thread?

Date: May 11, 2004

The PERKS thread was one of several that got troll-zapped yesterday.

On page 2 of this message board you can still find a couple of threads that refer to the perks that Hudson purportedly enjoys.

I'm once again reminded that those on this board who want Thames and his henchcrew out almost universally want Hudson out.

But it doesn't follow that everyone who wants Hudson out wants Thames and his henchcrew out.

Robert Campbell

Date: May 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"The PERKS thread was one of several that got troll-zapped yesterday. On page 2 of this message board you can still find a couple of threads that refer to the perks that Hudson purportedly enjoys. I'm once again reminded that those on this board who want Thames and his henchcrew out almost universally want Hudson out. But it doesn't follow that everyone who wants Hudson out wants Thames and his henchcrew out. Robert Campbell "

I'm not sure that is true at all - think that's a divide and conquer diversionary tactic - by the Hudson camp and by the impatient. The issue is one of timing and, more importantly, sequencing. End game hasn't changed.

Date: May 11, 2004

I'd like to remind folks who don't already know, that nursing faculty have stated that Hudson has been completely unsympathetic to their needs, which are rather desperate at this point.

Date: May 11, 2004

A question to USM faculty & staff on this board:

How badly do you want to see Shelby Thames out of the Dome?

If the option is Hudson as interim for some period of time, would you prefer to have Thames stay in office?

Have I just given you the proverbial choice between cancer or polio?

Date: May 11, 2004

I think we are all desperate at this point.

I'm with Robert. I count myself in the "anybody but Thames" camp because (a) the cabal won't survive without Thames and as a team they are as bad as it can get in academia and (b) Hudson, whatever he believes, is a critically flawed candidate for anything other than an interim presidency.

I'll concede my possible naivite to those who might know better -- but can there possibly be anyone on this campus with less credibility that TH (oh, well, other than AD. Considering how huge this insurgency has been and how much chaos presently exists on this campus I simply find it impossible the Board will foist TH on Southern Miss unless there really is an all-out agenda to bring the university down.

I'm pretty cynical but not quite cynical enough for that.

Date: May 11, 2004

I feel the desperation and the frustration in Present Professor's post and see the devil's bargain raised by Invictus. This website, for all it's great benefits these past two months, has made us all a little manic and short-sighted. There is a kneejerk reaction to every little bit of news; there is an increasing amount of misinformation posted by trolls and posted by those pushing their own agendas (which may or may not coincide with the two goals stated by FireShelby at the outset) and there is clearly a disagreement about the process to clean out the dome.

I do not support Shelby Thames. I am profoundly disappointed that someone with enough power has not been able to come forward with a slate of dome administrators to say to the Board - here we are and we can take over temporarily, soothe the campus, halt the exodus, and conduct a credible search. Frankly, I had hoped Aubrey Lucas was going to do that. He did not. I certainly don't know the reasons and won't presume to speculate. There are lots of other names that have been raised - frankly, they were acceptable as well - all that is except for Tim Hudson. Tim Hudson, by the way, is saying those things but he is not capable of making them happen.

Here's where I will probably lose many of you. I would rather see a weakened Shelby Thames (and have no doubt that he is weakened with the settlement, the media, the unrest, the constant pressure, the loss of his chief henchman Hanbury, the increased watchfulness of the IHL board...) than to see Tim Hudson take the President's role for even a minute. I think Shelby is going to be forced to get rid of Angie Dvorak. Mark will follow. I'm not sure there is enough support on the IHL Board to force his resignation, even with the new faculty senate resolution. I think that in the worst case, it leaves him in office two years. The more likely case is that he will have another toe-shooting episode before then and it will blow up sooner. The pressure on him is not going to stop - he is not going to be allowed to continue on his destructive path. Weakened, closely monitored, and temporary.

I could accept any number of alternative solutions that don't involve Tim Hudson or Shelby Thames but if these two are the only choices then, yes, I guess I've chosen my poison.

Date: May 11, 2004

They've all got to go,

It remains to be seen whether Thames will jettison either Mark or Angie Dvorak in return for 2 years (or less) of lame-duck presidency. Backers of his like Roy Klumb don't want him to get rid of anyone in the cabal. No doubt Klumb thinks that anyone Thames hires is a righteous instrument of "house cleaning."

But if he were compelled to get rid of some prominent henchpersons, I don't think the situation would remain stable. Thames would resent the restrictions placed on him, would make ham-handed attempts to nullify or neutralize them, would shoot off his mouth in some newly embarrassing way, etc. A weakened Thames almost certainly wouldn't last the 2 years that his backers thought they were buying for their agenda.

In any event, the most recent group of trolls (JC, Otis, Dazed & Confused, ???, and Quiet-but-Perceptive) are taking a pro-Dvorak position, and not just an anti-Hudson one.

Maybe Hudson is so bad that a weakened Thames would be better. But does anyone else here really believe that Mark and Angie Dvorak are part of any solution, instead of part of the problem?

Robert Campbell

Date: May 11, 2004

I missed Dvorak support by Quiet but Perceptive...let me look...

Date: May 11, 2004

Note Quiet-but-Perceptive's ambiguous reference to Otis, whom QbP claims to know, on the thread concerning Angie Dvorak's ever being a member of the bar.

Robert Campbell

Date: May 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: They've all got to go
"I missed Dvorak support by Quiet but Perceptive...let me look..."

On a quick review of recent posts, I don't see it - I'll read more thoroughly later. I do, however, believe the post by Ree quite a while ago that alleged Angie was originally brought in to become the next president. I think her credibility has been so compromised that there is no fear of that but she must go, nonetheless.

Date: May 11, 2004

I could see a dream-team of Don Cotten (who appears to be available now), Jim Hollandsworth, Mary Ann Stringer (former dean of the former College of The Arts), and others, with either Dr. Lucas as Interim President (given his president emeritus status), or, yes, even Tim Hudson.

Everyone would agree to be a caretaker administration, in order to conduct national searches for: President, University Provost (just 1 for all of USM, as is normal practice), V-P/Research, re-created V-P/Gulf Coast; all definitely must come from outside, and be seasoned and experienced and sound administrators - selling point would obviously be, come here and help us recover, rebuild, as we have so much potential (which is/was being squandered).

As importantly, to also oversee/conduct a thorough review of the bloated administrative structure of USM under Thames with an eye to immediate reductions, in order to put the REAL SAVINGS to classroom instruction, hiring/retaining faculty, and investment in the Library to achieve ASERL membership.

Lastly, it appears that there must an immediate accounting of the estimated $9 million recently written off (apparently) by the USM Foundation due to accounting irregularities (whatever the hay that means). Some time ago, the word was that Lee Gore had said something along the lines of, if the Faculty really knew what was going on "they would riot." No rioting is necessary - just a full audit, perhaps through the AG/Miss. office?

In the end, I think that Tim Hudson could serve honorably as an interim president; clearly by any measure he would be a reasonable alternative to Thames (indeed, almost anyone would). Let's be realistic.

Date: May 11, 2004

They've,

When you have a little time to review the thread on Angie Dvorak's not being a member of the bar, see this post from QbP to me:

If this is the same Otis that I know he is legit. He has just started with us. Not a late bloomer but wanted to join the fray to bring as he says "closure to A$$9 rumors."

He is not a threat to us but just worries that some of the as he says "garbage makes us look bad."

He is just a little AR!

And QbP's explanation for Otis' departure from the board a couple of posts farther down.

Robert Campbell

Date: May 11, 2004

Prozac? Dr. Dana Thames proudly carries a coffee mug with that name on it....anyone sense a connection?

Date: May 12, 2004

Good observation Nextstate!

I think we need to start asking questions about Hudson's Perks and the Castle.

Also, a bird says Hudson put the screws to some on the P&T deal again.

Again ROBERT CAMPBELL will get mad but sources say that Hudson did this and now has no scape goat like he did when he put the screws to Kuskin and burned Dvorak. I think it is time to poke around and find out if Hudson really was responsible for Dr. Kuskin's demise.

Date: May 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Quiet-but-Perceptive
"Good observation Nextstate! I think we need to start asking questions about Hudson's Perks and the Castle. Also, a bird says Hudson put the screws to some on the P&T deal again. Again ROBERT CAMPBELL will get mad but sources say that Hudson did this and now has no scape goat like he did when he put the screws to Kuskin and burned Dvorak. I think it is time to poke around and find out if Hudson really was responsible for Dr. Kuskin's demise."

Okay, now I see the troll remarks. Sorry, QbP.

But a statement of fact here...Dr. Kuskin is not in a state of "demise." Last I heard, he was alive and well, and just got well-deserved tenure in the USM English Dept.