UT Band Could Be There This Sat But Vote Not To Play

I feel I corrupted Sarkisan's staff thread unintentionally. Here is my issue with our president. I want a president to make a decision on important matters without hiding behind a committee. I have been told that I do not know what I am talking about and everyone is correct because I have not seen a clear message from our president in regards to the eyes of Texas. If you have seen his message, please post the link. I would like to know his position. Here is the last thing I heard. Texas President Jay Hartzell unveils 24-person committee to study ‘The Eyes of Texas’ | Hookem.com

 

Not just a committee but 24 person, good grief.

 

I would argue that we need a clear and rather quick stance on this issue. 2 things that are more or less guaranteed not to happen with a 24 man committee.

 

Good grief

 

Wait a minute. The 24 committee members are all men?

 

Committee means “I don’t have the guts to make a controversial decision.” Hartzell is not a leader.

 

If you have a big committee then you can later say all views were considered and here is the policy collectively arrived at.
Otherwise twenty opinions come at you with knives because you didn’t consider their opinion.
If he skillfully stacked the committee his opinion will be chosen.

not a big fan of committees but this is the sort of area where they are a useful deflection/calming force

 

Just poll the donors. If they say to kill the song then ok. If not, then don't. Simple. This is just such a stupid thing. The university used to be racist by definition from its founding and many decades afterwards. If the song must go, the whole dang university should too. You can't just ignore everything else but the song. Enough is enough.

That said, there is still nothing racist about the song.

 

Everything is racist, donchaknow?

except the band uniforms, which are gay.

 

Amazing Grace was written by a former slave trader. Canceled! Let's see what else?

 

President Hartzell, AD CDC and HC Sark all have different stakeholders to address on many issues and different responsibilities to the University. Here are their words on the subjects they chose and didn't choose to address:

Feb 7, 2021 Hartzell Tonight 7pm on LHN Longhorn Network | Videos | Watch ESPN

Jan 2, 2021 Texas Longhorns name Steve Sarkisian Head Football Coach - University of Texas Athletics

Jan 12, 2021

Feb 5,2021 Hartzell Sets Ambitious Course for UT Austin in State of the University Address - UT News

 

The BOR, University president, and AD are all addressing different audiences with different outreaches (they have been described in above posts). Unfortunately the common fan is at the bottom of their priority list. I thought this was fairly obvious but guess not.

 

MC,

This thread has made it clearly evident that we have posters, who have never reached near middle management level and/or been in the military. (I was never in the military)

The hated phrase, "above your paygrade" is not understood, neither is their ability to interpret "coach speak".

Perhaps a giant neon sign screaming, "YOU DON'T NEED TO ******* KNOW".

They don't trust people in the administration who have never lied to them, which considering Powers, Fenves, Cunningham, Berdahl, is somewhat understandable. Reminds me of my kids when they were about 3 and hit the "why stage". No matter what you say, they respond "why".

 

Did you just ASSUME their identities? Why, a few of them might identify as...oh hell, who are we kidding.

 

Nope. A poster referenced a 24 “man” committee.

All in jest.

 

That is proper in The Queen's English, which we used to speak rather than the PC crap. I was taught it in elementary school, junior high, high school, and The University of Texas, although my required English classes on The Forty Acres were on the fifth floor of the BEB, Taylor Hall, Wagner Hall, & The Tower.

Only class I ever had in the English Building was a black studies upper division elective - TT 730-9 AM

 

Okay I am trying to figure the logic of this. If the following is stupid, let it rip:

1. An employee accuses their employer of being racist. If the employer is actually racist, how do you think that is going to turn out?
2. The above (1) happens but the employer is not racist and the employee knows it. Then why do it?
3. The above (2) happens and the employer recognizes that “employee concerns” are worth listening for the benefit of the org. After listening to the employees and making changes (whether worthwhile or not), the employee still disrespects the employer by not participating in certain workplace activities that is intended to align work team members.
4. Now say the above (3) happens and you further learn that the employer is actually an investor of the organization and the employees work at that org.
5. Finally you learn that the investor can pull his money at any time for any reason and the investor invariably gets tired of being called a racist. What do you think is going to happen and why wasn’t this 100% predictable from the onset?