Here's my latest note to a member of the Alumni Board, from whom I received a sincere response to an earlier note.  He and I obviously do not see eye-to-eye, but he is the second board member from whom I first received a "hot" reply and then a more civil response when I wrote back.  This kind of progression gives me some (slight) reason for hope!

========================

Dear ---------------,

Thanks very much for your thoughful and obviously sincere reply.  I should first make clear that I am not Jim Hollandsworth; I merely forwarded his letter to all the members of the Alumni Board because I felt that he made some excellent points that board members should consider.  I am a (former) admirer of USM from out of state who is dismayed by what has happened to a great university and who still admires the faculty for standing up for the highest ideals of shared governance, academic freedom, opposition to nepotism and cronyism, and resistance to such tactics as e-mail snooping.  I would say that in less than two years, Dr. Thames has damaged the university's state, regional, national, and even international reputations to a degree that it is probably hard for someone outside of Hattiesburg to appreciate.  He has thus made it very probable that (a) distinguished faculty will continue to leave in droves; (b) excellent new potential faculty members will be reluctant to venture anywhere near Hattiesburg; (c) superb graduate students (who do much of the basic teaching) will go elsewhere or not come; and (d) the best students will depart from and/or avoid USM.  (Indeed, there is apparently hard evidence that average ACT scores of incoming freshmen have fallen significantly in the last two years.)

The overwhelming vote of no confidence in Dr. Thames by the faculty reflected not only their dismay at his abrupt, irregular (and ultimately unsuccessful) effort to fire Drs. Glamser and Stringer but also their cumulative sense of profound distrust in his administration.  As you probably know, it is hard to get 400 faculty members to agree on ANYTHING; doing so is like trying to herd cats.  The fact that so many faculty agreed about the vote of no confidence is extremely telling.  Do you honestly feel comfortable dismissing the opinions of 400 different highly intelligent individuals, many of whom had previously tried to give Dr. Thames a chance to prove himself?

I know that you sincerely love USM, which is why I find it hard to understand why you cannot see that Dr. Thames has done much to ruin the reputation of a university for which I and many others had always had enormous respect.  I have to be honest and say that the only way the university can even begin to win back its reputation is for Dr. Thames to return to what he obviously does best.  I also have to say that the worst for USM is yet to come, because if Dr. Thames is still president when the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools begins its reaccreditation process, I truly fear that USM will lose its accreditation, and thus its federal funding, and thus many of its students, grants, faculty, and programs.  I cannot understand why more supporters of USM do not realize this huge threat that is looming on the horizon.  SACS will not tolerate much of what has been happening at USM; the Glamser/Stringer affair will seem a footnote in comparison.  I sincerely ask you, as a person who obviously feels great affection for your university, to consider whether maintaining President Thames in his present position is worth the costs USM has already paid as well as the real risks it faces.

I forgot to mention that one thing I am noticing more and more in my correspondence with supporters of SFT is that they are increasingly reluctant to admit being supporters of SFT.  Nearly every one of them now begins by saying something like, "I have not endorsed the management style of Dr. Thames" or "Admittedly Dr. Thames is not the best manager," etc.  People who, a few months ago, were probably rock-solid supporters of SFT now seem to feel the need to make at least a rhetorical concession that he may not be the very best man for the job.  Even the person who runs EagleTalk.net has, I think, conceded that SFT must go, and even Seeker, one of the most anti-faculty posters on this board has, I think, made the same concession.  In other words, a progressive alteration of people's attitudes DOES seem to be occurring.  We should bear this in mind whenever we feel discouraged.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: present professor
" That is excellent. Thanks for that news. Are you talking about Lannie Mixon? Haven't heard from him for awhile . . . that thread hasn't popped up recently. Have you been on EagleTalk.net?"

---

 

I think he made this concession at least a week or so ago on this board.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: ram
"  My concern is that things will quiet down over the summer, and many will think that all has healed.  Who will keep the actions of this administration in the public eye? "

---

These are good questions.  I suspect that the members of this board will do their best; does anyone have any specific suggestions about how to counteract the inevitable inertia of summer?