• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

The Ohio State University Marching Band (TBDBITL)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
kujirakira said:
I don't know about the Board, but Drake seems to be a textbook reactionary autocrat... those types don't back down unless it comes from above and then they back peddle real quick.
Personally I'd guess that the Board stands behind him for no other reason than to maintain a sense of competency and control; but will silently question his judgment in the future.
Click to expand...
Time for a civil trial.
 
Upvote 0
cincibuck said:
I would think that the university has a separate contract for faculty members and yes there is a union for professors - AAUP, don't know if Waters belonged, but they'd give him legal counsel if he did. The question of firing on a flawed report that followed two positive reviews would be a fertile field for a law suit I would think.

Where's ORD on this? Or maybe he's too close to the situation to comment. The stone walling of this issue by Drake and the BOT leads me to conclude: a) that they think they have the stronger case b) that they didn't anticipate Water's popularity c) that they thought the report would convince the public d) that I want to see Drake's evaluation report at the end of the year.
Click to expand...

Doubt Waters has tenure. I know he didn't have a doctorate, and I'm unsure of his status as faculty in the school of music. As for Drake, I've come to the conclusion that he acted too quickly and fucked up. I won't say that everything that comes out is in Waters' favor either. Just that the situation needed a little more thought, investigation and probably discipline short of dismissal. That being said, I doubt he's going anywhere. He's the handpicked choice of the current board, and they're going to ride this out, and if it doesn't effect fundraising, freshman class profiles, research dollars or faculty hiring, he'll survive.

The one thing that was brought up about UCI that I find troubling isn't that he's an autocrat (he didn't unilaterally hire that Dean for political reasons), it's that he seems to be subject to bending with the wind when it's coming from powerful outside influences (he probably did fire him for political reasons). The real analogy between the UCI situation and now is whether he acted prematurely from outside pressure (board?, Wexner?, a scared university lawyer?) as he did when the donor convinced him to yank the law Dean's employment offer.
 
Upvote 0
ORD_Buckeye said:
Doubt Waters has tenure. I know he didn't have a doctorate, and I'm unsure of his status as faculty in the school of music. As for Drake, I've come to the conclusion that he acted too quickly and fucked up. I won't say that everything that comes out is in Waters' favor either. Just that the situation needed a little more thought, investigation and probably discipline short of dismissal. That being said, I doubt he's going anywhere. He's the handpicked choice of the current board, and they're going to ride this out, and if it doesn't effect fundraising, freshman class profiles, research dollars or faculty hiring, he'll survive.

The one thing that was brought up about UCI that I find troubling isn't that he's an autocrat (he didn't unilaterally hire that Dean for political reasons), it's that he seems to be subject to bending with the wind when it's coming from powerful outside influences (he probably did fire him for political reasons). The real analogy between the UCI situation and now is whether he acted prematurely from outside pressure (board?, Wexner?, a scared university lawyer?) as he did when the donor convinced him to yank the law Dean's employment offer.
Click to expand...

By autocrat I mean that he makes snap decisions and refuses to rethink those decisions once they're made. He makes it and sticks to it no matter how poor that decision is proven to be. Having read the statements he released after rescinding the offer to the would-be Law School Dean, it's obvious that he refuses to reconsider and threw out a lot of bs. I see the same here with the statements he's made after the hasty unilateral decision (did he wait for the independent report? did he consult with anyone beyond the 1 report? did he even talk to Waters himself? did he even look over Water's performance reviews?)

The Duke lawyer's (sorry can't remember how to spell his name) own story reflects this as well. The guy flew to NC to inform him personally ... probably w/o anyone else in the University being aware of his actions... and told the guy at a hotel ... and the reasons he gave sounded very poorly thought out. More desperate and paranoid than rational. And yet once he made that decision - after telling the lawyer himself that it was for political reasons, he came out with all manner of diversions and denials that would've embarrassed even Richard Nixon.

The difference there was that the Dean decision brought great embarrassment to the University and threatened to nuke their own Law School before it got off the ground... and it was likely the Regents themselves who told him to unscrew himself. I can't see that happening here; the public image damage has already been done and rehiring Waters would require him to admit he made a mistake -- something autocrats are loathe to do.
 
Upvote 0
cincibuck said:
I would think that the university has a separate contract for faculty members and yes there is a union for professors - AAUP, don't know if Waters belonged, but they'd give him legal counsel if he did. The question of firing on a flawed report that followed two positive reviews would be a fertile field for a law suit I would think.

Where's ORD on this? Or maybe he's too close to the situation to comment. The stone walling of this issue by Drake and the BOT leads me to conclude: a) that they think they have the stronger case b) that they didn't anticipate Water's popularity c) that they thought the report would convince the public d) that I want to see Drake's evaluation report at the end of the year.
Click to expand...

Waters was defined as an unclassified professional staff member, without the protections of tenure or classified civil service.
 
Upvote 0
Here is a very laborious and tedious link that connects the dots between Michael V. Drake, Jeffrey Wadsworth, Joseph E. Steinmetz, Betty D. Montgomery, MOOC, Eclipse Foundation, Arent Fox LLP, Ernst & Young, David P. Vaughn, et al.

"OHIO STATE’S PRESIDENT MICHAEL V. DRAKE MIRED IN PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST"
http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2014/08/ohio-states-michael-v-drake-mired-in.html

Warning: Get a very big bag of popcorn . . . (yawns).
 
Upvote 0
TGC OSU'62 said:
Here is a very laborious and tedious link that connects the dots between Michael V. Drake, Jeffrey Wadsworth, Joseph E. Steinmetz, Betty D. Montgomery, MOOC, Eclipse Foundation, Arent Fox LLP, Ernst & Young, David P. Vaughn, et al.

"OHIO STATE’S PRESIDENT MICHAEL V. DRAKE MIRED IN PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST"
http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2014/08/ohio-states-michael-v-drake-mired-in.html

Warning: Get a very big bag of popcorn . . . (yawns).
Click to expand...
That's what they said about the Watergate hearings.:sneaky:
 
Upvote 0
TGC OSU'62 said:
Here is a very laborious and tedious link that connects the dots between Michael V. Drake, Jeffrey Wadsworth, Joseph E. Steinmetz, Betty D. Montgomery, MOOC, Eclipse Foundation, Arent Fox LLP, Ernst & Young, David P. Vaughn, et al.

"OHIO STATE’S PRESIDENT MICHAEL V. DRAKE MIRED IN PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST"
http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2014/08/ohio-states-michael-v-drake-mired-in.html

Warning: Get a very big bag of popcorn . . . (yawns).
Click to expand...

Their credibility would be enhanced by better sourcing and less drama. ...and by not self-sourcing with articles such as this: http://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/2014/08/eclipse-of-us-constitution.html

"ECLIPSE OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

IBM AND "THE ECLIPSE FOUNDATION" CONTROL OBAMA IN THE SHADOWS TO BLOCK OUT OUR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS"
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top