A variety of students are talking about having a rally or other public protest on campus, to address the lack of ethical University response to the death of Laura Dickinson and to demand the resignation of Dr. Fallon (which that radical, extremist newspaper, THE DETROIT NEWS, has called for). And at least one student is talking about having a “support EMU” rally that would be neutral on the Hill Hall case, while attempting to show that EMU community members love EMU. This student, who I barely know, asked me about it last week, making her one of a half dozen who I heard talking about one kind of campus rally or another in a week’s time. I am very sympathetic to her goals, because the good work that EMU students, faculty, staff, and administrators do everyday is being overshadowed by the huge scandal over the cover up of the Hill Hall murder.
Students and others should, in my view, organize whatever kind of lawful protest they want; it’s the great American way of petitioning “for a redress of grievances,” as the First Amendment puts it. (The first campus protest I was part of at EMU was in 2000, when a lesbian student of mine was attacked by bigots outside of PrayHarrold, and the rally was a good means for healing and education.)
When anti-Fallon students recently asked me what I thought, I discouraged the idea that was floating around 10 days ago of having a protest at the Regents meeting. I saw no point in that, as the Regents are not the parties responsible for EMU’s unlawful deception about Ms. Dickinson’s death. That idea was set aside, and I credit the student activists for thinking the issue and the timing thru in a mature fashion. They are devoted to EMU, and devoted to the truth and to accountability; they are engaged, and they are the kind of people who make EMU proud.
Now they are talking about holding a rally on the 2nd anniversary of John Fallon’s arrival on campus as president. I think that’s July 15 or thereabouts. The idea, as i understand it, is to make a vocal objection to his failure to act like a responsible president during the crucial week in which Ms. Dickinson was killed and in the half year since, and to call for his resignation or firing.
Some students have told me that they are certain that there will be a rally demanding Fallon’s ouster. I am also told that a prominent broadcast news organization would like to know in advance of such a protest, in order to film it for national broadcast. But I remain unsure of whether such public protests, at this time, are prudent, and I am always skeptical of TV coverage. Print reporters do a far better job of getting facts and context right.
As a historian of the civil rights movement, I am acutely aware of the need for protests to be carefully timed and stratetegically planned. I am flattered that some EMU student activists, who are not even taking my classes, ask to hear my views on such matters. But they will of course make their own decisions.
So I make this post on EMUTalk to create a place for people to have their say on what purpose, if any such protests could serve; of arguing for or against the “EMU support” rally idea that would try to duck any controversial issue; and to suggest what would be required to make an EMU “Fallon must go” demonstration or a rally successful.
People who are considering the Fallon second anniversary idea have given me permission to mention that notion here. They welcome feedback on the idea.
Bear in mind that the Administration’s cover up of Ms. Dickinson’s death has made the EMU scandal a national and international news story. It is typically being covered with an undertone of astonishment — “how stupid can a University be?” — with an edge of outrage. Given the facts, none of this is suprising.
When the accused killer goes on trial in October, the story will be reprised again, even if it has gone quiet sometime before then. Will EMU still have the same officials in charge then as it does now? If so, the October stories will be worst for EMU than if a thorough house cleaning has been instituted.
My own view, if anyone hasn’t heard it, is that Fallon must go, as must other officials who knew that all evidence pointed to a murder, and yet did not make the truth known. Being employed in positions of influence at a University impose obligations far deeper than being loyal to one’s supervisor – universities are devoted to the truth, and Dr. Fallon and a variety of his subordinates failed to fulfill their moral duty.
Given the perfect storm, and entirely predictable, wave of terrible publicity for EMU, it is doubtful that a demonstration of any size calling for Fallon to go will create more negative publicity for EMU than has been created by the Fallon administration itself. Indeed, the more attention given to how much the “real EMU” of students, faculty and staff object to such high-level dishonesty, the better our beloved University may look in the public eye.
A tiny comment:
I tossed in a “read the rest of this entry” split in Mark’s post so that other posts keep appearing.
My own opinion is that I think this might be a great idea and terrificly difficult to organize/pull off during the summer. But I still support it.
Sitedad,
Thanks for adding the “read more” split to this post….A real improvement. How does one add those nifty things while making a post?
T’would make more sense to me if the “Support EMU” rally was more along the lines of promoting Private Donations and Support for Academics on campus.
Perhaps a “Get off your lazy butts, EMU Administrators, because we need some progress on this” rally is in order?
I’m wondering if painting my Skin “Black” might get me more progress with the EMU FOUNDATION other than: “Thanks for your call, the Director will contact you later, (DIAL TONE)”
I’m thinking of doing my own Protest now in front of the EMU FOUNDATION building on Huron Street.
“NO NO! ME WON’T GO!” “Accept my Private Donation or I raise the volume!” “NO NO! ME WON’T GO!”
And maybe I’d move the Protest to take place in front of President Fallon’s Office.
“NO! NO! ME WON’T GO!” “PRIVATE DONATIONS CAMPAIGN NOW! Any Delays and I’ll have a COW!”
Jeff, Jeff, Jeff….
And you were doing so well.
I’m the steward for ICT, and a number of the people there (some of them date back to the Golden Days of Goddard Lab) have reported something like a disturbance (it’s more like a stale cheap beer and mystery meat taco flatus) in the Force. It seems to correspond with some of your postings.
Might you be the very same Jeff MacMillan that worked ever so briefly in Goddard Lab? And then moved on to, among other things, Randy Hockey’s ResNet shop?
It would certainly explain a lot if you are.
Jeff, maybe you don’t care, but the rest of us would prefer it if moderated commenting was NOT put back on – multiple posts + dragging everything back to your donation problems is going to equal moderated comments.
As for the protests…I’m not sure how I feel about it. The rallies in the fall during the strike were effective because we could get a decent sized group of students together (easy because everyone was already near campus and clearly had nothing else planned during the day!) but as Steve mentioned in his comment, getting such rallies together during the summer would be much more difficult (and possibly send the wrong message: either that students really don’t care about EMU, or it’s only a radical few who are calling for Fallon’s ouster, depending on the stand the rally itself takes).
However I do know that I strongly oppose notifying the major media in the event of a rally. I really feel that this is something that should be dealt with from within the EMU community. Whenever there have been tragedies that the mainstream news media has focused on, I’ve always felt terrible for the communities: not only do they have to deal with the aftermath of a tragedy, but they have reporters from all over the country (sometimes the world) invading their territory when the community members are at their most vulnerable. While the cover up scandal around Laura Dickinson’s murder is not on the level of tragedy that Virginia Tech was, I don’t feel that this is the time to be purposefully attracting negative attention to our community. We are hurt and outraged that people we are supposed to trust betrayed us; we don’t need a voyeuristic nation peeking over our shoulders while we try to recover.
Dear Aginghippe (who sometimes issues insults towards others in his comments and gets away with it because he’s friends with Contributors on here),
No I am not that individual.
I’ll try to behave more like a Left-Leaning, John Kerry voter from now on… But, I am not very good at it.
Dear Angela,
I am merely talking about what I wish to talk about.
And I do not see what the big deal is with posting a lot.
Instead of me posting an entire screen size full of text, I sometimes separate my comments into 2 separate posts.
Should we start policing Word Count?
But Jeff, don’t you think net etiquette contributes to better communications? Good etiquette would indicate that comments should relate to the post or to previous comments.
Angela,
Thanks for your thoughts on the public protest issue. I share many of your concerns, and certainly the summer makes it harder for large groups to gather.
As for major news media outlets – EMU is a story, and one need not contact them in order for the media to be on the story. EMUTalk.org is a source for the media – it’s how several reporters have heard of me and contacted me. (Yes, I talk to reporters who contact me.)
The New York Times has run a story on the EMU “no foul play” handling of Laura Dickinson’s murder. Thus the EMU story is certified as both signifcant, nationally, and legitimate. There will be no end to the news stories on EMU until two conditions have been fulfilled: 1) the trial of the murder suspect is over with, and 2) the administration officials who failed to see that Ms. Dickinson’s parents were told the truth have been properly disciplined for their violation of both the law and common decency.
I completely agree that we in the EMU community do not need a voyeristic nation peeking at us as we try to recover…but what can we do to keep the media away? Not much, I am afraid. Refusing to talk to reporters who are covering the story just ensures that the only side of EMU that is represented in the news is the Welch Hall side….well, at least that’s been the case until the Butzel Long report.
A few years ago, during the University House scandal, “EMU” in the Michigan media meant “university that unlawfully spent millions on a president’s house” — but once faculty and students started publicly objecting to the values of the Kirkpatrick administration, the other side of EMU, the “real university,” was also represented in some stories. And that really helped protect EMU’s reputation: A good school can have a failed administration and still be a good school.
Jeff, when I wanted to post about topics that interested me, I asked if I could become a contributor. If that doesn’t work for you, it isn’t hard at all to set up your own blog. Or wait until you pet passions are in fact on topic (for example, the current thread on attempting to get funding from Lansing).
As for the multiple posts, it’s not just a matter of etiquette anymore; it has been explicitly laid down in the rules of the “Warning card” post that’s still on the front page. I quote:
*Please limit your posts and comments to 2 or 3 a day.
*Stay on topic.
It doesn’t get much clearer than that.
Mark – you’re right that the media is going to show up whether we advertise to them or not, but I vote that we don’t make their jobs any easier for them. I’m not going to actively search out the contact information for the New York Times, CNN or anyone else should a rally calling for Fallon’s ouster happen. Now, if we’re going to rally to support EMU and we can be sure a good-sized crowd will actually show up, then I might consider it.
If the media seeks us out, then yes, talk to them (if you have something constructive to say – and this is a generic “you” at this point – I’m sure whatever you personally have said to the media falls under this provision) for just the reason you cited: to be sure the story is told fairly. However if we can’t present our best front to the world in the eyes of the media, then it would be way too easy for the story to be twisted.
When I first learned of a fellow student’s idea to host a rally to “support our university and demonstrate all the positive benefits of being a member of such a respectable community,” I thought that was a great idea! I still do. To see people, Mark Higbee in particular, continue to co-opt this idea to turn it into a “protest” is more than a little disturbing and frustrating. Why can’t you support students’ ideas, or leave them alone, without using them for your own purposes?
And, why do you have to attack and verbally abuse anyone who disagrees with you or points out your true colors?
I mean verbal abuse literally. When I inquired about Mark Higbee’s misuse of his professorial position in his e-mail to a student, Mark Higbee struck out at me personally. This is a debate fallacy called ad hominem, by the way. Higbee obtained my e-mail address from the administrator of this site, and proceeded to call me “gutless,” “a hack,” and a “paid patsy.” All this from a person who has never met me, and simply because I pointed out his own inappropriate and unethical actions in telling a student that she WOULD do things his way. I would still like to see answers to my earlier questions in the “heads should roll” post.
Please, Mark Higbee, recognize the value of anonymity in this forum… particularly as you have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, that my concerns about abuse at the hands of angry, bitter, powerful professors were well-founded!
Dear EMU Listener,
I did not obtain your email from the administrator of this blog, i got it from your posting a comment on a post I had originally made. This is a feature of the blog; authors of posts all get an email from each commentator on their post, automatically, when the post is made. This is part of the system. So please endeavor to get your facts right, OK, before leveling charges of misconduct.
As for your continued rants about me being “abusive” – All the offensives you allege against me pertain to free speech. I most certainly have not pressured students to act in any particular way about the campus crisis. I have expressed my views. What’s wrong with that?
You make a mountain of a mole hill: an EMU student who I did not know and who is not in my class asked me and a variety of other people by email what we thought about an idea of a rally, so I replied and shared my opinions. What’s wrong with that? My reply was respectful of her view point, and pointed out that a lot of other people have been talking about rallies/demonstrations/protests.
Perhaps EMU Listener and certain Welch Hall gang members think that holding a rally at EMU is an original idea that only one person can have, but they are wrong if they so think. They are also wrong to object to discussions of rallies at EMU that are not “neutral” on the Fallon must go question. (Freedom of expression and public protests are among the topics I study as a historian…I have never discouraged anyone from expressing their ideas in responsible ways, but i do professional engage questions of what ways are likely to be most effective. Hence this post.)
No student of mine has complained about me pressuring them to take political stands, and I have never done so. I do eagerly listen to student viewpoints on all kinds of topics — I learn a lot from hearing them – and I engage in conversations. What’s wrong with that?
EMU Listener is trying to create smoke where there is no fire, and he does so as a pawn of the collapsing Fallon administration and with the cover of anonymity and all the irresponsible smearing that permits in cyberspace.
My ideas, shared with that student last week and with the various administrators on her orginal email list, can readily be debated. I’d never expect, and certainly lack the power to compel, students to accept my ideas. I am all about debate and the exchange of ideas. Sharp debate, even, but genuine intellectual engagement. What’s wrong with that?
Replying to a student’s query is hardly abusive. Indeed, it would have been intellectually disrespectful of me to NOT reply to her honestly. Neither that student, nor anyone else on the “reply all” list have addressed any criticisms to me of what I said. Instead, somebody got EMU Listener to attack me in in a public forum. Such McCarthyism is unfitting for a university community.
Strangely, EMU Listener and his pals in the Administration is more upset by those of us who think Fallon and his fellow cover-up-ers of the Hill Hall murder are unworthy of their University positions than EMU Listener is upset about the fact that a cover up was carried out in the first place. But which act – unlawfully covering up a murder investigation or freely debating the merits of the Administrators who permited that cover up — is really most objectionable?
Each of us will answer that according to our own morals and positions in the University. Know the truth and it will set EMU free.
I will try, hence forth, to not reply again publicly to these totally false, fabricated , 100% BS allegations. To reply to smears publicly draws the smear out longer, and distracts from the real issues. ANd such distractions are the point of a smear.
We all have better things to do…but any reader of EMUTalk who wants to pose questions to me, please do so directly. My email is mhigbee at emich.edu.
And i thank the many EMUTalk readers who have privately shared their thoughts on this matter with me.
Although I think a EMU support rally is a good idea, I also think that it will feed right back into the media. No matter what happens, the media, at this time, will be a negative spin on EMU. In time, the administration will no longer be here. That time, is very soon.
Wow, Mark Higbee. McCarthyism – now that’s good one!
You’ve gotten far off topic from what I actually said. No problem, I understand your need to add smoke to the discussion here.
What I Said:
1. I said you had verbally abused __me__, not the other student. And you did. If calling me names and denigrating me and telling me to stop talking about something are not methods to “pressure” me to act a certain way, then I’d hate to see what your pressure tactics are!
2. I said you co-opted a student’s idea for your purposes, and that you told her how she WOULD conduct her rally. I said you told the student how she should view the situation. I said you directly insulted the president to this student. And you did.
3. I said your behavior __is__ relevant, because you have made yourself a public figure by publicly calling for people’s heads, and you should be expected to uphold the standards you hold out for others. And that’s true.
FYI – Just because I disagree with you, and point out the facts of your behavior, does not mean I agree with everyone in the administration. Like many students and others, I’m upset about the whole situation, and I want to get to the bottom of it… not just send out flames demanding heads to roll before we even know all of the truth. I’m waiting to see what the outcomes really are… LISTENING, as it were. If you do not want to respond to my questions regarding ethical behavior, fine. If you don’t understand how pressure through power affects people, fine… such as the difference between “responding to a student’s query” and telling her very directly what she WILL do. You’ve already proven the truth of my questions by your own actions. Thank you for that.
You’ve accused me in the past of trying to “silence” you. That was hilarious at the time, and now you have added a note of irony by trying to silence me – now I’m supposed to talk to you in private only. And why would I do that… so I could be called more juvenile names? I may need to take a class in your department. I expect to be treated professionally, and I expect that I will be, by your colleagues.
I’m wondering if you have anything to offer other than “fire them all.” Somehow, I don’t believe that everyone you despise will be fired. Some people probably will be, but you still won’t be happy. Eventually, the university needs to come together in PRODUCTIVE ways and focus on students’ education. Anyone who can help us reach that goal is far more valuable than those who stubbornly insist we can’t move ahead unless all their conditions (“fire everyone!”) are met.
Hang in there Mark–let’s have rallies everyday until the appropriate actions are rendered!
Whenever you’re over the target, you’re going to get flak. And when anyone DARES to aim at the targetS at warped ‘ol EMU, the flak pours out from all directions, is cloaked in all sorts of colors and exists only to take your eyes off of the goal. Don’t waste your time on it.
Protect yourself, your family, your career, your home, your car, etc., because they will stoop lower than low and will not stop until they think you are silenced and defeated. They know nothing but playing dirty and think nothing of diverting EMU’s, [the taxpayer's], resources to enable their assaults.
The vast majority is on your side–and they know it–hence the increased and ever-more shrill attacks.
I am far from being any EMU Administration and am certainly not influenced by them, but Higbee has made himself a public figure. Therefore, the freedom of speech arguement loses merit. On many occassions Higbee has claimed to be representing faculty and students (so when is Higbee representing someone and when is he just Higbee). So Mr. Higbee, stand up and represent yourself for who you are. As a profressor, you do have some implied authority over students and your comments or direction to them would most likely be followed. You often base everything on facts and DEMAND facts from others when they disagree with your viewpoint (both publicly on EMUTalk and privately through email). I asked before for you to post the email and your response so that everyone on EMUTalk can see what transpired and draw their own conclusions. Now I am DEMANDING that the facts be presented Mr. Higbee. Post the email, stop the smoke and mirrors game (the very thing you dispise of the EMU Admin), unless you have something to hide. Put this issue to rest.
To get back on the original topic- I think rallies are double edged swords. While they can be very useful, I have to agree that the media will put a negative spin on whatever happens at EMU right now. With tensions as high as they are on campus, the rally could draw out supporters of both sides (not that I think they are really clearly defined yet) which could turn very ugly. It is one thing to debate issues or viewpoints, but those things can turn violent quickly when emotions are running high. I would hate to see a “rally” (for either position) turn into something violent and create even more bad press for EMU. I think some of the actions that have been taken, such as posts here, attendance at the BoR meeting, and unfortunately, some of the media involvement is the right course of action. While I believe, in general, the EMU community is a fairly non-violent community, crowds/rallies/protests draw outsiders (especially on hot summer days). Some of those outsiders have only one purpose, to disrrupt the event and create mayhem, then the mob mentality takes over. I would use caution in how this idea is approached and take into consideration the outside influences to avoid an unfortunate incident.
EMU Listener, if you really have been verbally abused, and your allegations are based in truth, then you should run, not walk, to the department of history and philosophy, speak to the department head, and make your accusations through the proper channels, with the proper process, and to the proper authorities. Verbal abuse is a very serious charge, one that will be taken very seriously by all concerned.
If your allegations are unfounded, however, then what you are committing is libel. Libel has very serious penalties because it is so very easy to do and has such destructive repercussions. For example, if any of Prof. Higbee’s professional contacts in the field of history were to google his name, they would be led to this page, read these accusations, hear only one side of the story, and make poor decisions about his character based on these false accusations, accusations perhaps made in a heated moment when the entire campus is tense (or so the AP news reporters say).
We all know that Prof. Higbee is no teddy bear—he is a zealous defender of the rights of students, and he will defend those rights (and your own rights) however much it may bruise the egos of the powers that be.
The questions that Prof. Higbee raises in his post (and that students seem to have raised in conjunction with it) are a thousand times more interesting than debating the finer points of any given person’s character, whether a public figure or no. It is frankly uninteresting to me to have this important question of how to be a good citizen of our university derailed by such minor points as to what someone or another said in an email last week. You seem to be speaking on behalf of another student, yet that student nor any other student to whom that email was directed has made any like complaints. You thus seem to be more interested in searching for reasons an ad homonym attack, and diverting attention from the larger issues, than in debating the topics on hand.
Though right now I have little capacity to join in a serious debate, I appreciate the comments of Angela and others because I have since been contacted by the national media and I am trying to determine how best to respond to that media attention, how to avoid the voyeuristic impulse that Angela rightly worries will kick in once these events have been made more and more public. Please, let’s give these important issues a chance to be aired, work together to build a consensus, respect each other even when we disagree, and avoid the virtual dueling and personal attacks.
Thank you, Abby and Wayne, for your comments.
Abby, I can certainly appreciate your perspective on Googling people’s names, and I understand why the conversation so far has been uncomfortable for Mark. I’m sure that the public officials whose firing he is demanding feel very much the same, or worse. I will not use Mark’s full name in this post to avoid the Googling problem.
I don’t think you can accuse me of ad hominem, and certainly not libel, because my points are:
1. Directly relevant. I’m talking about a public figure/faculty member using his position to push students to do things outside of a class context; and that same person using verbal abuse as a weapon against those who disagree with him.
2. True, based on what is written in his own hand, digitally.
Here’s what I mean by verbal abuse: He directly called me a hack, gutless and a paid patsy, without ever having met me and knowing nothing about me. I still have the e-mail he sent me and could post the complete message, but I don’t think that would accomplish anything. I don’t believe Mark would dispute these statements.
I could also post the complete e-mail Mark sent to the other student, though as I said before, I believe that is his right and not mine, as that message was forwarded to me by someone else.
I have no interest in escalating this to the department and going through some sort of procedure that will distract from my studies and my life. Plus, I can get over the personal affront without all that.
All I’m looking for is integrity – for people to ACT in accordance with the standards they hold out for others, and for people to SPEAK in accordance with the values of the institutions they purport to represent. Frankly, I’d like to see some constructive suggestions, rather than always hearing how we should tear EMU down. This is the institution that’s going to be on my TRANSCRIPT and my RESUME, for crying out loud. And its own faculty (not all, of course!) are pushing students around and publicly denigrating everyone who leads it? Believe me, this will show up on Google–forever. No matter what the outcome of the situation we currently face.
How is this helpful, exactly?
EMU Listener,
Wouldn’t you say that working in Welch is coloring your viewpoint to some extent? Just through osmosis if nothing else?
I remember working *out* of Welch many years ago (and I referred to it as the “Hall of Brain Death” then–and now); I had to work elsewhere because it is NOT an atmosphere conducive to productivity, critical thinking, problem-solving, and creativity in the best of times.
I gotta think the Reality Distortion Field there pre-DoE report has gotta be affecting lots of people.
EMU Listener,
All your objections to what I’ve done are merely objections to free speech as I have practiced it. You made these objections within days of my reading a letter from faculty to the Board of Regents asking that Dr. Fallon be fired for cause. You object to the content of my speech, and you work in Welch Hall, in some capacity you choose to keep secret while implying you are a regular EMU student.
You claim, falsely, that I use my position to compel students to take political stands. Yet you decline to bring official charges against me in the appropriate official channels, as Prof. Coykendall has suggested. If you really think I have violated professional norms in some actionable way, please bring charges forward officially. Then I’d have a “court” in which to confront my accuser, and I am confident that your complaint would be found lacking in merit.
I have never pressured or compelled students of mine to take political stands.
I would, however, be glad to to have a public discussion of “Methods of McCarthyism – Historic and on Campus today” with you at a mutually agreeable time. Perhaps you could book us one of the Welch Hall conference rooms that is so close to where you file your emutalk postings from?
Peace.
You assume a bit too much about me, which is not surprising, but that’s okay. Now that spring term is done, I will not be around much any more. Perhaps that’s too bad. If you read what I said, you will see that it is entirely true, and I stand by it. I have no idea whether they student whom you told what she would do is one of “your” current students or not. It doesn’t matter. Arguing semantics clouds the issue.
You know what you’ve done. Live with it, in good conscience or otherwise.
Have a good summer.
Hey! EMU Listener! Wandered off to Halle to make your “farewell” post, eh?
For interested parties, here’s EMU Listener’s posting history:
Posted Jun 15, 3:22 PM from Welch
Posted Jun 15, 3:43 PM from Welch
Posted Jun 15, 10:21 PM *probably* from home
Posted Jun 21, 6:04 PM from Welch
Posted Jun 21, 10:06 PM *probably* from home
Posted Jun 22, 8:35 AM from Welch
Posted Jun 22, 11:07 AM from Welch
Posted Jun 23, 6:18 PM *probably* from home
Posted Jun 27, 8:13 AM from Welch
Posted Jun 27, 12:04 PM from Welch
Posted Jun 28, 11:56 AM from Welch
Posted Jun 29, 1:33 PM from Halle
Wow, aginghippie, thanks for the info! Is there any chance that ‘EMU Listener’ is still a student? Do students work in Welch, perhaps as GAs? I had suspicions about this person assuming a faux persona before, when the real information about Laura Dickinson’s rape and murder first started coming out, but I was not certain then. Should I be now? Check out the earlier exchange:
http://emutalk.org/?p=217
And yes, I confess to being KitchKitten, now with tenure and thankfully able to use my real name.
You know, to be fair to EMU Listener (and other anonymous posters), I don’t think it’s necessarily cool to be digging too closely at who was posting from where, trying to figure out who they are, etc. After all, there have been some people who have posted anonymously in the past and who have also posted under their real names, too. And as many have pointed out, there are good reasons to remain anonymous for some.
Just fwiw.
Agreed and agreed again that anonymity is important, Steve, but this is something quite different than that. If this poster has been passing him or herself off as a student, a person with the least power on campus, and is in fact an administrator, as would be very likely given a Welch IP address, then s/he is doing something quite different than claiming anonymity for the sake of free discourse–something more along the lines of the wolf in little red riding hood who takes on an innocent persona to better commit great harm (like libel). I am not saying that that is the case here necessarily, but if it is, it is mighty uncool and needs to be prevented somehow. If this person is an administrator, I would welcome his or her posts in the proper persona (like Alum does, tho even he is more administrator than alumni). We need more of that point of view to be sure, but not if it comes in a false persona and in an only seemingly innocent guise.
I don’t disagree in general. There are MANY good reasons to maintain anonymity on campus. But I think that there might be a bit of misrepresentation here from EMU Listener. A full-time EMU employee who is also taking classes could say “I’m a student” with complete honesty.
Once upon a time, my older brother had hemorrhoid surgery and was sent home sooner than my father felt was appropriate. He RAGED at the hospital. During his diatribe, he informed the person “I haven’t practiced law since I retired, BUT…”
They ended up making Dad happy and, I suppose, my brother a perfect a**hole. Dad was 100% factual when he made his statement. He hadn’t practiced law since he had retired. He also hadn’t practiced law BEFORE he retired.
Did Dad *lie*?
If EMU Listener is actually a student employee, fine. But it *does* make a difference if EMU Listener is a student/employee and is just giving out more hooey.
Maybe we can adopt the weasel for a Welch hall mascot, eh?
It is my understanding that the cameras in Halle are among those providing best results on campus, given the likelihood of thefts of expensive textbooks/electronics left alone during a brief foray into the stacks, good lighting, opportunities for useful placement, etc.
It would be fun to map IP addresses to video footage for a given time period. Just as a technological exercise of course. Proof of utility of the installed system, that kind of thing, of course.
I graduated from EMU in 1995 and am proud to call Jim and Helen Vick friends. Jim and his wife have been friends of my family for several years. They helped me while I was on campus. I lived in Triangle West for a few years following graduation and I was broken into. The Vicks opened up their home to me. I support Jim.
Colleen,
I agree Jim Vick is a nice guy and has helped lots and lots of people. However, it is also clear that he was involved in breaking the law and violating common sense.
EMU needs to move beyond discussing how much an individual like Mr Vick is liked by many people, and instead focus on job performance.