tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post1137315612335675326..comments2024-02-16T09:00:32.845-06:00Comments on FromDC2Iowa: UI Held Hostage Day 502 - Show Me the Web SitesUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-90225137329774893982007-06-08T08:54:00.000-05:002007-06-08T08:54:00.000-05:00Thank you, anonymous 6/8 8:26....BUT...is there no...Thank you, anonymous 6/8 8:26....BUT...is there no way to avert this?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-793775359865634192007-06-08T08:26:00.000-05:002007-06-08T08:26:00.000-05:00Anonymous, 6/17, 13:00:Yes -- this is what I'm say...Anonymous, 6/17, 13:00:<BR/><BR/>Yes -- this is what I'm saying...<BR/><BR/>Gartner has a pick; it might not gain enough support and he is aware of that; so, he has been working since the airport interviews to stir up controversy and set the stage for an exit strategy-- a failed search. I think it's a long-shot, but then, he's surprised us before.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-47040170734581413112007-06-07T20:13:00.000-05:002007-06-07T20:13:00.000-05:00I don't get it, anonymous 7:19...You begin by sugg...I don't get it, anonymous 7:19...You begin by suggesting that Gartner knows who the finalists (and perhaps the final candidate) are, which implies that he's had the whole thing rigged (that's how it now appears to me) but then you go on to suggest things were fine until "Gartner started flailing around." As I see it, he's been "flailing around" from the start of this process, and it doesn't matter what anyone's responses are to any of the candidates that are coming in, and it doesn't matter if anyone screams about Hogan being omitted from the finalists, because he's already picked his candidate. Gartner already has a choice. (Or are you suggesting that choice may not materialize and so the search will once again be nullified?) If that's what you're saying I guess I agree. Regardless, this is insanity and I would think that it is precisely the new Regents and the Governor who might not want to intervene, but for whose intervention we should be grateful!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-26429654474031643412007-06-07T19:19:00.000-05:002007-06-07T19:19:00.000-05:00The fight between the search committee and regents...The fight between the search committee and regents (reported in the press citizen) over the disclosure of names seems crazy at this point. It is only making this university look more like a circus every minute. Of course Gartner already knows who's on the list (and who's on first -- ok, bad pun).<BR/><BR/>This is just another attempt at an "exit strategy" for Gartner. Have you noticed how he didn't do or say a thing until we are heading down the home stretch? Now, days out and he is doing everything he can to stir up controversy.<BR/><BR/>Just watch -- we are headed for an attempt to declare the search a failure. I hope the other regents resist this blatant attempt to disrupt what was a very good process up until Gartner started flailing around.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-80180256460185890492007-06-07T14:59:00.000-05:002007-06-07T14:59:00.000-05:00Why are you entitled to the links they have? Based...Why are you entitled to the links they have? Based on what? Your personal need to know?<BR/><BR/>I dont recall that the ICCSD runs the approval of every school administrator by the parents or students.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-47970881843290337092007-06-07T08:39:00.000-05:002007-06-07T08:39:00.000-05:00Various statements taken from today's Press-Citize...Various statements taken from today's Press-Citizen:<BR/>The leader of the initial University of Iowa presidential search, Teresa Wahlert, said the second search committee has not been public for critical parts of the search, and faculty are showing bias by not criticizing it.<BR/>Wahlert said the faculty just wants to support its own, showing a lack of credibility."I think this is about who is running the search and not who they are going to get (for a president)," Wahlert said in a telephone interview Wednesday. "Their point of view at the time was to take down the regents, not to get the most qualified person."<BR/><BR/>Wahlert may be correct in suggesting that the campus is more subdued than before in its response to Search Committee II's actions, but what's bitterly humorous is that the same person who was in charge of Search I is in charge of Search II: Regent President Gartner. But her question is good. One could rephrase it: where is the outrage? Is this tepid campus response a consequence of faculty "protecting their own"? Are they blind to the fact that this search is a ruse of major proportion, and that most of the faculty on that committee are no more to blame than they were in Search I?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com