Trainwreck or Trainspotting at W&M

The "Nichol Debacle" is a nationally broadcast media controversy that took place at the College of William and Mary in 2006/2007 after Gene Nichol (see photo right: Associated Press ©2008) ordered the removal of the Holy Cross from the Wren Chapel altar, the oldest ivy league chapel in the United States due to diversity and religious rights issues. He was then promptly forced to resign by the Board of Visitors of the College, after not standing up to his fundraising pledge. He was a popular President of the College amongst the student body at the time, as is evidenced in the videos below, but I was first introduced to this "debacle" from a person with an alternate view point.

Thomas Lipscomb, W&M '61, a LinkedIn.com Connection as explained below, referred me to his Minding the Campus Article: Trainwreck at William & Mary (Original), which took a very negative stance on Nichol's valuable attributes (or lack there of) as President of the College, citing his failures as Dean of University of Texas and University of North Carolina (Chapel Hill), whose schools both fell drastically (by 1/3) in ranking during his tenure at either school.

I'm troubled because I was hitherto until recently ignorant of the entire controversy, as I had left the College and its news behind when I left the school in 2002, when Timothy Sullivan (an excellent, stalwart President) was still in tenure. I feel that after viewing both the equally passionate Lipscomb article and the Student/Faculty videos, I would have to side with the student activists, but I still find Lipscomb argument compelling and support the B.O.V.'s choice to terminate Nichol's tenure as President of the College; although, admittedly, it wasn't handled very well at all, because the B.O.V. is so not integrated with the faculty and student body and holds itself on an ivory pedestal (ever so long as I can remember, it's been the same way).

Below, you will find my Facebook response email to the Lipscomb article, which requests feedback from my Facebook W&M Alumni Friends about the whole controversy. I also include comments from two of my friends and feedback from the YouTube video "Campus Voices: Forging an honest dialogue?". First, I recommend that you read the Lipscomb article. Then veiw the videos below for contrast and read my email text. This will give you a round about, decent overview of the entire ordeal, in hopes that you also will be able to provide some feedback on how I should perceive this entire "debacle."



I ask, "Which side should I take? Who's side am I on? Who's the hero in all of this, if there really is one in the first place? Should I join the students' passionate cries to be heard by the Board of Visitors and to have preserved Nichol's tenure?" All I know is that the B.O.V. needs much more transparency of its decision making and more communication with and involvement of the student body and faculty: those stakeholders in the College that truly matter to that for which the school truly represents.

FACEBOOK EMAIL TO W&M ALUMNI FRIENDS

Hey W&M Alumni Friends,

As a member of the LinkedIn.com professional networking & development community, I am connected to the "College of William & Mary Alumni Network" Group which has at least a thousand (or over 800) members and is a venue for divisive discussions on current events & issues related to the College and to alumni life.

Sometime late last year, I posted a discussion comment about an NBC News Today Show broadcast from last year entitled "Best Values in Colleges." According to the Princeton Review, in 2008, William & Mary ranked third in over all value of education for all public universities, just under the University of Virginia.

A link to the video was included with the discussion posting, so people could view it, if they were so inclined. I also wrote a personal blog about the posting and video; specifically, because it had received such negative feedback from the W&M Alumni LinkedIn.com community. Numerous people offered very derogatory commentary on the state of affairs and the evolution (or downward spiral) of the College now and in the recent past.

One particular comment to my LinkedIn.com Group Discussion posting mentioned the "Nichol debacle" as an example of how the reputation and state of affairs at W&M has deteriorated in recent years, just after our graduation from the College and after Timothy Sullivan's resignation as President of W&M. I was confused by this comment, particularly because I was ignorant of who Nichol was and what his association to W&M was. A kind-hearted commentator kindly replied to my pleas for information that could cure my ignorance on the subject of Nichol with an email which included a link to a web article published on a website entitled www.mindingthecampus.com that he had written (see attached).

I didn't read the June 5, 2008 article until just tonight, after an in-depth, in-home personal discussion with my good friend, W&M Alumna ('03) and now student at the UCBerkeley Graduate School of Journalism ('11): Linsay Rousseau Burnett (who is also receiving this Facebook email).

Linsay didn't remember the exact name of the controversial President of the College who followed Sullivan, so I looked for the email that Thomas Lipscomb ('61) had sent me late last year in response to my LinkedIn.com Group Discussion posting to find the name of the so-called "debacle", as I figured that this was the same controversy that Linsay was talking about.

Nichol was the man! And Linsay had a very positive progressive, liberal, anti-majority, activist opinion on Nichol's tenure as President of the College and the controversy that surrounded him. She however did not provided specifics.

So, after she left (instead of immediately answering her interview questions in an email to her), I used the link in Lipscomb's email to me to find and read his op-ed article on Nichol. Lipscomb's point of view, in exact binary contrast to Linsay's opinions, was expressed in what I found to be a very sarcastic, preachy, uber-conservative tone. He, opposite to Linsay, had a very negative perspective on the "debacle" and controversy, as I had gleaned from one of the few comments he had made in his email to me from last year.

I was personally well informed through my & Linsay's discussion and through reading the Lipscomb article, but I was left confounded by their two alternate, contrary points of view. I didn't know what to believe after learning of the complete story from both sides of the aisle, but I did give it a lot of thought, and I was ultimately motivated to post a comment to the article on its webpage.

My comment, which I finally posted just moments before writing this email to all of you (my W&M Alumni Facebook Friends), has yet to be approved by the webmaster or moderator of the Minding the Campus website. It was a rather lengthy response to the article, so we'll just have to see if it's actually, finally posted to the page, at the end of the text of the article. Maybe by the time you click the link attached below, my comment will have been posted. I don't know! But, meanwhile...

I just wanted to give you all access to this article so that you might read it and give me some feedback, in order to initiate a discussion with all of you about the "debacle" and to get a diverse array of opinions about the issue. With your responses (either through Facebook or to one of my personal email accounts), I should be able to derive my own definitive opinions on the whole story with which I had until today (or yesterday, since it's after 2am in the morning already) not been familiar—of which I have just learned quite a lot.

I would appreciate it if you were to read the article and respond to me (if you're so inclined) with your own commentary and opinions. Perhaps, unlike my sorry, ignorant self, you are already familiar with the Nichol story; perhaps, I am enlightening you of something new and unknown—I don't know! What matters essentially is that you might be kind & generous enough to devote and share some thoughts on the article with me, so that I might be able to clarify and cement my own opinions about the controversy.

If it's not important to you or just not a big deal, then I'll understand if I don't receive very much feedback from all of you, but I believe that if you were truly invested in the W&M Alumni Community, you would at least have an opinion about Nichol (to share or not to share?). That is the question! Hehehe! So please, indulge me! I beg of you your opinions. Please read the article and respond to me. Let's start a discussion of our own.

I want to know that W&M was and is important to you! Unless, of course, you couldn't give a rat's ass about your Alma Mater; then, ultimately, this entire exchange that I am attempting to initiate would be uselessly irrelevant, which I understand.

I look forward to hearing back from at least a couple of you. For all you others out there, I just hope that I have helped to broaden your perspective on the state of affairs recently at our alma mater. It'd be nice to know that there's a purpose and results to all of this needy banter and debate. Thanks for listening. Tootles! Be Safe, Be Sane, Be Sexy! Cheers. Peace Out! Namaste!

In pride of the Alma Mater,
Matt(e)o | QHereKidSF

This video might not be entirely provocative in its imagery, but the vocal recording is astounding and truly evokes the passions of W&M students and faculty, especially in favor of the Gene Nichol tenure as President of the College. I suppose then that this is a good way to close. What are you're thoughts and feedback? This is an old story, but it keeps me as current as I can be on happenings at William & Mary. It's good to know that Timothy Reveley III, the new President of the College, is doing well. Here is one comment from a friend on Facebook to close:

FACEBOOK COMMENT FROM BRAD CARLTON SISK

Nichol was a much better president than Sullivan, whose outright corruption in his presidency and administration was one of the reasons I left the school in protest. Nichol pushed hard for multiculturalism and diversity at W&M, through the Gateway program initiative and also through his efforts to remove the cross in Wren chapel which, since W&M is a public university, was deeply offensive to non-Christian students. These were long-overdue reforms for such a whitebread school. But since ultra-conservative Rethuglicans have their hooks deep inside W&M's bureaucracy (both in terms of fatcat donors and on the Board of Visitors, the body that appointed the likes of Thatcher and Kissinger, a war criminal for God's sake, as chancellors), Nichol's efforts to liberalize W&M's reactionary policies unfortunately didn't stand a chance (as the more Machiavellian "pragmatist" Sullivan told him, in an email). However, Nichol left many of Sullivan's bureaucrats in place, such as the exceedingly incompetent and corrupt Sam Sadler, who actually tried to bribe me into keeping quiet a scandal about asbestos in the dorm where I was RA shortly before I left the school, so that doesn't speak in Nichol's favor. Anyway, since I dropped out I suppose W&M isn't really my Alma Mater and I therefore don't have very much invested in this discussion. But my outlook for the school's future is very bleak.