We have an anonymous someone calling her/himself "Bagolee" posting: ostensibly in defense of the two candidates for the CSU presidency, but in reality attacking faculty who are criticizing the choices. It seems unfortunate that someone would take the opportunity to spew unsubstantiated anti-faculty invective during a conversation over such an important issue.
I wonder if this person has anything substantive to contribute to the discussion or if: "I. see people living in glass houses throwing stones at the Board and the candidates."
"I've been watching the blasting of two amazing candidates for the job - one who runs a $5.5 billion annual budget and another who manages 7 colleges and 10 satellite campuses with 8,000 employees and a budget five times that of CSU. Many of the people who are doing the blasting have never been able to complete their PhD's or publish or administer research grants. Talk about hyprocrisy. I guess that amusing one's self like this during the idle time between classes generates a feeling of superiority."
Are the best you have to offer?