Post your asides here

[sinenomine]

Unrelated to above.

I certainly hope that the Saturday option on the Doodle poll about a chairs' meeting was an error and not an indication of how the new dean works.

[FishProf]

Nice hypothetical, which doesn't address the story or what I said.   Nor does it relate to what little bongo said.

If you mean me, why is it surprising that I would think spitting on someone is a bigger deal than using a word the person finds offensive?

I don't think anyone here thinks the words would be worse than the spitting, IF the spitting actually happened; which we don't know.  The words aren't in dispute, so that is what is getting the attention.

... wouldn't you expect that any subsequent investigation would be much more focused on the physical abuse than the verbal insult? I sure would.

Which investigation do you mean?  There isn't just one incident with two facets, there are two separate incidents, both of which should be investigated.

Maybe I'm misreading you, but it sounds like you are saying the words aren't important in and of themselves, because there is this other allegation.  Please correct me if I have this wrong.

[marshwiggle]

Nice hypothetical, which doesn't address the story or what I said.   Nor does it relate to what little bongo said.

If you mean me, why is it surprising that I would think spitting on someone is a bigger deal than using a word the person finds offensive?

I don't think anyone here thinks the words would be worse than the spitting, IF the spitting actually happened; which we don't know.  The words aren't in dispute, so that is what is getting the attention.

... wouldn't you expect that any subsequent investigation would be much more focused on the physical abuse than the verbal insult? I sure would.

Which investigation do you mean? There isn't just one incident with two facets, there are two separate incidents, both of which should be investigated.

Maybe I'm misreading you, but it sounds like you are saying the words aren't important in and of themselves, because there is this other allegation.  Please correct me if I have this wrong.

My point is that it sounds as if the spitting incident isn't (and perhaps hasn't ever been) a priority for investigation, and it also appears to have little or no bearing on the suspension, whereas the words got an immediate reaction, and serious investigation.

In other words, if the words are just the tip of the iceberg, (which would include other things like spitting, if it turns out to be true), then suspension on the grounds of the entire "iceberg" makes much more sense  than it does on the basis of one quotation alone.

The article (and subsequent discussion) seems to take the latter view, as though that single comment on its own would warrant suspension, while at the same time suggesting that the spitting doesn't even warrant investigation.

[FishProf]

My point is that it sounds as if the spitting incident isn't (and perhaps hasn't ever been) a priority for investigation, and it also appears to have little or no bearing on the suspension, whereas the words got an immediate reaction, and serious investigation.

"Adams is also being investigated for an incident earlier in the season when he allegedly spat on a player. Adams told Stadium he had gone to the doctor, had a bad cough and slobbered on the player during the game."  - Sports Illustrated

[FishProf]

Sorry, posted too soon.

I would argue the words alone warrant a suspension and an investigation, and the spitting allegations, if true (with the alleged quotation also being true) would warrant a firing.

Are you suggesting he should NOT be suspended for his words pending the outcome(s) of the investigation(s)?

[marshwiggle]

Sorry, posted too soon.

I would argue the words alone warrant a suspension and an investigation, and the spitting allegations, if true (with the alleged quotation also being true) would warrant a firing.

Are you suggesting he should NOT be suspended for his words pending the outcome(s) of the investigation(s)?

Honestly, I don't think that suspension is warranted on the basis of the word alone.

• The word was part of a quotation.
• The word was not, (as far as we can tell), intended as some sort of insult to any particular student.
• Had the quotation been used in a different context, which did not contain any students whose ancestors experienced slavery, even if a student was concerned about the quotation it would not likely have led to any sort of disciplinary procedure; at most, an apology may have been required.

If a student had used the quotation in a class and the professor was upset by it, would automatically suspending the student be the "right" thing to do?

The idea that the severity of sanctions to be applied for any action ought to be based on how offensive they were perceived to be by someone else completely undermines any principles of fairness. Imagine if every instructor at a university was completely free to decide how (and even whether) to punish plagiarism (and even what counts as plagiarism). The whole institution would lose credibility.

[FishProf]

Suspended pending the outcome of an investigation is pretty standard.

[permanent imposter]

And the "applicant pools" thread is now the "international healthcare and cost of living" thread.

Also the "brag about how great my current situation is" thread. Maybe this belongs in the "Vent" thread or whatever but between the job market, inflation, and other mounting stresses even one does have a job, this stuff is not easy to read.

[bacardiandlime]

And the "applicant pools" thread is now the "international healthcare and cost of living" thread.

Also the "brag about how great my current situation is" thread. Maybe this belongs in the "Vent" thread or whatever but between the job market, inflation, and other mounting stresses even one does have a job, this stuff is not easy to read.

yeah, the humblebrags are tedious.

[lightning]

And the "applicant pools" thread is now the "international healthcare and cost of living" thread.

Also the "brag about how great my current situation is" thread. Maybe this belongs in the "Vent" thread or whatever but between the job market, inflation, and other mounting stresses even one does have a job, this stuff is not easy to read.

Humble-bragging comes in many forms, with some more obnoxious and more overt than others. Regardless, I wonder if we should start a "Victory Lap" thread for people to do their humble-bragging. And, I don't mean a "Share Your Good News" type of thread. I mean a real "Victory Lap" thread. That way, the humble-bragging can stay off of threads that are meant to discuss some real and very curious problems in current academic hiring such as shrinking applicant pools.

[kaysixteen]

Any possibility that the 'spitting' did not actually occur, is bogus, something made up afterwards to attempt to get more punishment for the coach?   Due process and innocence till guilt are proven are not, ahem, exactly hallmarks of modern American academe.

[jimbogumbo]

Any possibility that the 'spitting' did not actually occur, is bogus, something made up afterwards to attempt to get more punishment for the coach?   Due process and innocence till guilt are proven are not, ahem, exactly hallmarks of modern American academe.

I'm guessing (from experience) that the coach screamed in a player's face and spittle flew, rather than a straight up spit. I think that kind of behavior itself should be grounds for dismissal, but in fact it is relatively common and seldom punished.

I think the more offensive to many is the alleged statement that a coach he can spit with impunity as it were. He does deny this.

It is all somewhat moot in that he has resigned.

[FishProf]

I'm guessing (from experience) that the coach screamed in a player's face and spittle flew, rather than a straight up spit. I think that kind of behavior itself should be grounds for dismissal, but in fact it is relatively common and seldom punished.

Yes, the coach made some claim about a "slobbering issue".  So even this event is admitted into evidence, although the interpretation is in dispute.

[Antiphon1]

Referring to the coaching question, I can say from personal experience, this person is a product of his social environment and entirely capable of any and all the accusations.  However, he isn't too harmed.  https://www.kcbd.com/2023/03/10/texas-tech-pay-adams-more-than-39-million-forms-coach-search-committee/

[FishProf]

I have a visceral objection to economic arguments that I've never quite been able to put my finger on.  This might be it: "Sure, not all individuals will do as well as the median. That's a personal problem rather than a societal problem, for we have a safety net."

These discussions seem to lack compassion, as if the economist doesn't care about who gets run over by the train as long as the invisible hand is driving.