Jared Evans Global Microbrand

Fernades has had repeated opportunities to respond to the letters sent in by NAD, FSSA, and numberous other organizations/groups with a vested interest.

So far, we have not seen anything positive come out of Jordan and Fernades.
From the top of my head over the summer the FSSA got:

The "proper protesting" guidelines sent by the administration office at Gallaudet. (Read the actual transcript)
Jordan saying "There is no crisis at Gallaudet" at the NAD Conference. (Jordan as the keynote speaker)
Manure.

With the media power Gallaudet has, THEY HAVE DONE NOTHING to appease our concerns.

That is all the evidence I need.

If Gallaudet administration and Board of Trustees can't answer to why the likes of Glenn Anderson and Roslyn Rosen were chosen to be eliminated over those two of the three finalists, we have every right to keep the protest going until the end.

Anderson and Rosen would make it hard for Fernandes to walk and be selected, given their criterias and qualifications. Then,
Fernandes was the last one and given many weeks to prepare her presentation while making Weiner and Stern give theirs on a Jewish Holiday on a short notice. It is not just about one thing going wrong!

Fernades's continued refusal to give up her position and re-apply goes to show the whole thing is flawed. She knows the chance may be slim of her winning the selection in the next search with everyone watching the process closely.

A new search process have to be done all over again period with no buts or ifs! I pray every night for something out of goodness to happen at Gallaudet and that FSSA is heard.

I have no doubt as to the integrity of the seven faculty members. I’ve met some of them before and the letter does carry some weight with me since they are putting their professional reputations at stake.

I don’t believe it would be realistic to expect transcripts or video to be recorded during these private meetings. Both parties must feel like they can be part of a private dialogue, which hopefully will help move the whole matter beyond this point where everyone has been stuck since the announcement back in May.

However, if a group of people decide to make public what happened in the meeting as these seven faculty members did, it’s only fair to hear what JKF has to say before being able to pass good judgment on what course of action to take. This brings me back to my original point that the Gallaudet administration is unable/unwilling to let us know so all we have to go on is with what FSSA has produced for us.

It’s saddening to see that the administration has decided to declare war on the protestors with their Earth Juice tactics and becoming a “Big Brother.” While it may have well been within their legal jurisdiction to do so, it’s far from the positive steps that they will need to take if they hope to bring this protest to a close.

Agreed Ridor. Has there been any positive progress in their dialogue with JF at all, they will mention it. It just isn't happening. I talked with some people yesterday at BA Tent City and some would say JFK is deliberate in her naiveness or others would firmly believe that she is THAT absent-minded and out of the loop. (BTW, I met Jon Savage at BA Tent City!)

As a new bloghole since May, I pretty much see how established Mike McCon's positions on various issues relating to the deaf so I don't know if anything NEW or TRANSCRIBED info from these Gally camps will actually help re-evaluate his stance on the protest. I just don't buy his intentions. I pretty much eye roll and skip his article headers in deafread (kiss fist). I guess certain bloggers invent catch phrases and invented issues to keep their readers amused and that is in itself, biased and misleading too. "Cherry picking," funny. It's out of season.

Mike, nobody wanted to read a long rambling, FYI. Just a word of advice, is all.

Jared, I neglect to mention that these seven faculty members are well-respected. They knew that if they fabricated the information, it'd reflect upon them all. I do not think they fabricate anything in their favor.

When I read their efforts to work with Fernandes, Fernandes kept on deflecting the serious issues repeatedly reminded me of the same individual that I had seen at Gallaudet. Her name? Jane K. Fernandes.

So I'm inclined to trust the faculty members' write-up on the meeting with Fernandes.

R-

Huh? Umm, good luck with that.

Oh, I see, Mike S. So, you're not for equal access on the distribution of information so that people can make an *informed* decision on what actually transpired between two parties on a magnitude as serious as this?

It's not about requesting a simple transcript beforehand per se but about assuring that factual reporting from both sides of the parties involved do take place so as not allow one or the other to "cherry pick" information. The transcript and video documentation forces both parties on not to subvert each other's tactics should there be any.

This is not an uncomplicated issue on what's going on here, folks. It's vast. It has many agendas. It's loopy. It's ugly. It is politically complicated. And people all want a part of the pie. And to the FSSA credits, they sometime sound like chickens running around saying the sky is falling. And seeing students run around saying they're purposely being poisoned by lawn fertilizers by the IJK's secret police is even more nuttier. Talk about hyper-sensitivy here where common sense is practically thrown out of the window here.

I and many others are not interested in wild eyed emotions, conspiracy theories, gossips, rumours, mud-slinging, petty 5th, no, make that 2nd grade name callings, character assassinations, and fantastical claims of utter oppresion that would rival even the Gulag prisons in Russia. What I and many, many others are interested in is pure, unmitigated facts that can easily be substantiated, corroborated and confirmed to everybody's satisfaction. If you let your emotions get the best of you in so many ways, ya'll not going to succeed. PERIOD!

Transcripts and video-taping documentations are exactly what both parties need. This is done to ensure that proper documentation takes place on who said what in light of the context being discussed in a meeting. This is exactly what courts do to prevent any misunderstandings on what was actually said or done by having court reporters do their shorthand thing and record what was said.

This is an historical event that has taken place and continues to do so. And what you guys are going to end up doing is explain forever to the outside world who have no concept or idea of what the deaf/hh/Deaf community is like and they will always ask why on earth are deaf and hard of hearing students upset over the fact that a first ever deaf woman was selected for president of Gallaudet University who was, not surpisingly, selected by a mostly deaf BoT.

If the FSSA want greater credibility and believability in their actions and reporting to the masses, they had better provide something a bit more substantial with their own reports on their meetings between their own FSSA and Gally Admins. The same for Gally Admins, too. Everybody will have their own reason for suspicions either against the FSSA or against the Admins. But the various, long standing issues do need to be addressed in the most cordial and productive way. That's a given. Everybody knows that.

Both parties will have to agree to this method if both are going to meet or else this will continue on spiraling downward... hurting everybody in the process.

Each and everyone of you, me, the Gallaudet University admins, alumni, students, staff, faculty members along with the ingrained politics and culture deeply rooted for years and years and years from all sides are the source of the blame for this galling and ugly event that took place this past May and it continues to this day. Nobody wanted to see this happen. But it did. This is not unity folks. This is emotion running amok like a banshee. Now, everybody will have to roll up their sleeves up, pitch in and help clean up this god-forsaken mess that everybody created in the first place!

Yes, everybody.

One thing it does not look right about Jane, why she laughs at staff workers when they bring concerns? Disdaining and daunting are not the way how a leader or ANYONE should do to handle crisis and changes. It reflects callousness and the level of trust we should ensue.

Anne Marie

I fail to see any points Mike McCon made. Did HE request a transcript beforehand? Of course not. Not all internal meetings within an institution are required to accommodate the general public with info.

BTW, what about the "purebloods" and "mudbloods" letter produced by certain faculty members a day earlier to Jane? I see no transcript produced on their part to describe FSSA's side of what happened at the Faculty Forum. I also see no request of transcript on his part.

Healthy discourse req. for both sides, I know.. but I only see double standards from this comic character.

I'm very happy where I am now. :-) This is something that Gallaudet will have to figure this out organically on their own. If their internal organizational culture allows them to try something new, especially at this critical junction, they will give it a try.

If not, all the best to them.

Jared,

Can Gallaudet contract with Taylor and you to run their PR Dept since you both are truly on the cutting edge of the changing political landscape?

Julie

I agreed but Mike McConnell asking for a transcript is nonsense. In fact, if you do that during the meeting with Jane K. Fernandes, she will make sure that it is not included at all.

Knowing her tactics, she will not permit it to happen at all.

R-