(08-23-2023, 04:57 PM)burger Wrote: (08-23-2023, 04:26 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: (08-23-2023, 04:14 PM)M T Wrote: While the questions are worth asking, consider the alternative, that MTL announced this. What would this board have made of that. Whatever the new provost's qualifications, there would be those that, if she doesn't control the AD as they want, would talk about her as appointed by a lame duck president.
I think it makes perfect sense for the incoming (interim) president to announce the selection, as a show of support.
As for "interim", I rather doubt Stanford has had time to do all the checking it might do on potential candidates and to make a selection. I rather doubt Stanford would tip its hand by simply dropping "interim" in a press release.
Saller's field of expertise, Ancient History, fits nicely with our Athletic Department. He's an expert on the Fall of Rome, as well. . . .
As for Martinez, I too am puzzled in light of the recent fiasco at the Law School. Sure, she penned a nice response after the fact, but the fiasco happened on her watch. Time will tell.
What should she have done? Personally muzzle the students?
The continuing complaints here about that incident are so transparently tendentious that it's sad.
There are actual threats to free speech being enacted in schools all over the country today, but you people are fixated on a single incident involving a few students with no power whatsoever.
Hypocritical whiners need to get over it already.
Hypocritical whiner. Wow. I've not been called that before.
The incident at the Law School brought a ton of negative press to University at a time when the University was waist deep in bad press.
"A few students with no power whatsoever" you claim. If my memory is correct, there was an Associate Dean of the Law School involved as well. Perhaps even as the main instigator. That IS the responsibility of the Dean, as is the culture that enabled the incident to occur.
I said time will tell, and I'll give the new Provost a shot.