today's PUC agenda

Date: May 26, 2004

today's PUC agenda

Date: May 26, 2004

Thanks to whomever for putting the election proposal on the agenda. This COULD turn into a valuable (and rare) lesson in democracy: an appointed body essentially votes itself out of existence in favor of a body of truly elected representatives. I hope this is what happens.

Date: May 26, 2004

I hope that the PUC-watchers (peanut gallery) are planning on attending the meeting. In my opinion, if the PUC does not vote to disband itself at this meeting, I will officially give up hope of the PUC being anything more than Shelby's shill (definition: "One who poses as a satisfied customer or an enthusiastic gambler to dupe bystanders into participating in a swindle." from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company).

Date: May 26, 2004

A PUC rep told me this morning that SFT will not allow the body to be comprised of elected reps. In fact, he is going to expand the appointments to include various admins.

Date: May 26, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: tomcat
"A PUC rep told me this morning that SFT will not allow the body to be comprised of elected reps. In fact, he is going to expand the appointments to include various admins."

Then anyone with any concept of shared governance should resign immediately or risked being a "shill for life." Can't they see through this obvious SFT ploy? They are being used, used, used.

Date: May 26, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
"Then anyone with any concept of shared governance should resign immediately or risked being a "shill for life." Can't they see through this obvious SFT ploy? They are being used, used, used."

From what I hear, they won't resign, for various reasons. I don't understand it myself/

Date: May 26, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: tomcat
"From what I hear, they won't resign, for various reasons. I don't understand it myself/"

You mean, NONE of them will resign? What are the various reasons?

Date: May 26, 2004

Will someone be summarizing the PUC proceedings on the FS board this afternoon? I'm assuming it's another open meeting, and that it'll be kosher to publish the details? Thanks...

AE

Date: May 26, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: tomcat
"A PUC rep told me this morning that SFT will not allow the body to be comprised of elected reps. In fact, he is going to expand the appointments to include various admins."

If this is true, and if it is also true that none of the members will resign, then I emphatically apologize to anyone on the board who claimed from the beginning that the PUC was a completely cynical ploy by SFT. I guess I should have known better than to hope otherwise, but I am still naively hoping that a report will come along soon and say the members did the honorable thing and refused any longer to participate in the PUC as presently constituted.

Date: May 26, 2004

None of these issues need to pass and kind of scrutiny. If these issues get resloved at the PUC then you can thank Mizzy Mader! The PUC is her baby!

Faculty Senate needs to be the one to take the charge up the hill!!

Date: May 26, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
"If this is true, and if it is also true that none of the members will resign, then I emphatically apologize to anyone on the board who claimed from the beginning that the PUC was a completely cynical ploy by SFT. I guess I should have known better than to hope otherwise, but I am still naively hoping that a report will come along soon and say the members did the honorable thing and refused any longer to participate in the PUC as presently constituted."

The staff members may find it hard to resign since they were appointed by their boss, their Dean. I agree the faculty members should resign.

Date: May 26, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Otherside
" The staff members may find it hard to resign since they were appointed by their boss, their Dean. I agree the faculty members should resign."

Otherside,

Thanks for making this important qualification. I agree with you. The appointment of unelected staff, who have even less protection that faculty, is just another reason to regard the PUC as a cynical ploy by SFT.

Date: May 26, 2004

Is that damn PUC meeting still in session? I just heard the plaintive wails of what I first thought was a Texas steer castration over in College Station, but then isolated the sound as having actually emanated from Hattiesburg. Is that Dr. T, reacting to the proposal to dissolve his beloved ad hoc committee?

AE

Date: May 26, 2004

AE,

Check here:

http://www.activeboard.com/forum.spark?forumID=24082&subForumID=36767&action=viewTopic&commentID=602141