That would be me. The president-elect will be elected by the Senate at the June 3rd meeting, and serves one year as Senate VP, and then becomes Senate President the following year. Randy Sullivan (Chemistry) was elected last year, and will be president for 2015-16.
If I’m elected I’d have to make some significant changes to this blog. I’m considering alternatives ranging from handing it off to another person or group of people to cutting way back on my opinions and eliminating anonymous comments.
John Bonine (Law) has proposed a change to the Senate rules, to have a vote to reconfirm the VP as president at the end of their year as VP, or vote in a new president. I would support this change, to take effect this coming year, so it would apply to whoever is elected this year.
I’ll post at more length next week about my goals as VP and president, and all nominees will give a statement at the Senate meeting and answer questions. If anyone else is running, I’d be happy to post their statements here as well. Meanwhile here’s my c.v.
Hope you win this. Here is a question for anyone: UO and the City of Eugene have quietly formed some new “liason committee” that they refer to as “UO Partners” that meets quarterly at the UO Alumni center. These meetings are not being listed in the news or any City of Eugene calender as far as I can tell. The first meeting was last September or October. The next one is at 5;30pm on June 8 in the Guistina Ballroom. Does anyone know where to get the minutes from the last meeting ? Or have any idea why they are not being publicized in any way ? Or they were and I just missed it ?
So let me get this straight, one of your first acts as Pres is to reduce your opinions and eliminate anonymous comments. Sounds like you are perfect JH material.
You cut me to the quick, anonymous.
Kind of has a point, though, Bill, though I certainly understand that you need to make a gesture toward a less inflammatory stance while you bear the crown.
While I would *never* describe you as perfect JH material, my brain did go “huh?” when you mentioned reducing your opinions and eliminating anon comments. Hmm … put your opines on a diet? Reduce the number of them? Or, are you contemplating a more finessed exposure of potential abuses?
As I remember, you have tried a couple times to force people to use disqus with a dramatic loss of comments. Why would it be different now? People comment anonymously because they actually have felt the wrath of retribution by those “in power”. Putting a consistent screen name on posts is understandable, but putting a name on something doesn’t make it any more or less true or factual. If your audience has a hard time distinguishing fact from fiction, humor, or sarcasm unless the comment is non-anonymous, then we truly are in a sad state.
Thanks for these comments. Other suggestions on what to do or not to do are welcome.
Well, in my truly humble opinion, DON’T EVER turn this blog over to a committee. Just shoot it first. If you feel/think you can’t continue, leave it up as an archived blog or do what Bojack has done and leave it up as archived and *on hiatus*. If you decide to return 2 years from now, it will be there waiting. Then, you can help others with guidance in setting up a blog of their own choosing and they can run with it. (It will never happen.)
Change happens, and maybe this is one of those moments. I’m sure you’ll come up with the best solution.
I agree that banning anonymous comments would have a huge stifling effect. There is ample evidence of retribution against people who criticize the JH insiders.
Perhaps a more moderate solution would be to hand over moderation of comments to a trustworthy alternate.
Voices like UOmatters are needed. It would be a big loss if you felt obligated to moderate any dissenting opinions in the interest of politics and appearance.
Bill, I can’t help but think you’re better on the outside pissing in.
Wow.
I agree with Bill about his plans for this blog if he becomes president-elect. I’d like to see UO Matters run by a diverse group of people–I guess that would be the UO Matters Posse–that represents a cross-section of the (many) people who both love UO and want to be watchdogs for the administration.
For better or worse, UO Matters has become a platform for many in the UO and UO-related community. Maybe it’s time to change it to reflect that instead of its current status as a personal blog.
I hope the June 3 Senate meeting will be well attended and that there will be several good candidates. Remember, any member of the Statutory Faculty who is eligible for Senate membership can run for President (i.e., for VP/President elect) and candidates can be self-nominated or nominated by others.
Bill’s support for John Bonine’s proposed change of Senate ByLaws seems a bit presumptuous (or premature), since Bonine has posted no such motion (but only the Notice of one). As I understand it (perhaps incorrectly) from Bill’s post, the proposed change could lead to the election of a President who had never had the opportunity to learn the job as VP/President-elect and may never even have been a Senator. Is that wise?
“If I’m elected I’d have to make some significant changes to this blog. I’m considering alternatives ranging from handing it off to another person or group of people to cutting way back on my opinions and eliminating anonymous comments.”
Shameless pandering to the Johnson Hall vote.
I don’t see it as pandering or nice-making at all. A good leader (or leader-elect) doesn’t abuse his position with personal axe-grinding or by springboarding off his influence elsewhere. Bill didn’t say he wasn’t going to have opinions; he just said this might not be the right forum to air them. I agree, and I’m sure he will be just as irritating to the powers-that-be as a senate president as he is as a muckraker.
Hold up, pardner. Are you saying this blog is currently about personal axe-grinding or spring-boarding off his current tenured position?
He didn’t say this wasn’t the “right forum” to air them … he put it out for discussion. And, why, as a personal blog, would this NOT be an appropriate place to air his personal opinion? People are certainly allowed to disagree and put their name on it both in meetings and on blogs. Where’s the problem with expressing personal opinions as Senate Pres? Does becoming VP and Pres of an institution that most see as a distraction and nuisance require one to neuter themselves? If so, time to update … and time to suggest if that’s the case, maybe he’d better remain a darn effective Senator.
I suspect this is more about the growth of political correctness in the guise of “civility”. Whatever the hell THAT is!
If you are elected, the most painless way to keep up the site quality would be to bring in another writer, make him the “senior editor” on a contract that lasts as long as you hold elected office, and continue to function as a “contributor.”
As long as you are simply a contributor to an independent news organization, you are fine. You could also set up an email for UO Matters that is not tied to any one individual (access for the site editor and any trusted contributors), for the sake of anonymous comments.
There are many people who can helm the Senate, but I doubt there are any others with the determination and doggedness (which we very much need) to run this blog. Voting for you, Bill, would be voting to end this blog. Therefore I’d have to vote against you for Senate Prez. This sounds jocular but I’m serious.
Kill anonymous posting and you lose 99% of your posters who rely on anonymity to protect their opinions from employment related retaliation.
Have to agree with SaveUofO on this one. We have seen plenty of employment-related retaliation at this institution, from rigged P and T evaluations to unconscionable firings.
That said, everyone can adopt a screen name, as UOM always urges, both preserving anonymity and allowing readers to build up an impression over time of the rationality and position of the commenter behind that screen name–like Hen, Dog, Just Different, Old Man, Awesome0, Honest Uncle Bernie…
Adopting a screen name does not provide anonymity nor in any fashion indicate the origin of the person. For example, I am not Dog. Would you like to know who Dog is? He is easy to figure out.
Everyone knows who Dog is…
This is completely besides the point. Googling “Dog” won’t tell you who Dog is, where he lives, and what his children’s names are. People who don’t personally know Dog–and even many who do–don’t know who Dog is. I myself am not certain who Dog is, and I don’t care. (Sorry Dog, your ears must be burning.)
Pseudonyms aren’t absolute protection against retaliation, but they provide a significant measure of security against the less motivated. Sort of like using a cheap bike lock instead of no lock at all.
by moniker is derived solely from this 1993 New Yorker cartoon, which seems apropos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_you%27re_a_dog#/media/File:Internet_dog.jpg
by the way, nice ads for Liberty Univ., nothing like a sell-out to cheap education as a statement of the kind of Senate Pres we want… must be an economics thing
Actually, the google ads algorithm targets the ads to individual reader’s browsing and gmail history. So what other websites do you visit? The ads that I see are mostly from statistical software companies, and a worrying number of law firms. Some people tell me theirs are from Goducks.com, hawking football tickets.
I just get ads for dog food and chew toys
Comment of the week, I’ll leave your UO Matters dog bowl out by the back door.
Sounds like I’m the only one who doesn’t know who Dog is. I’m a little slow, so bear with me.