[Plsfaculty] Time-sensitive: Addendum to Phase II document

Tue May 15 05:36:42 MST 2012

I agree with Bentley re counting votes and responses

Eliot

Eliot M Herman
Professor
University of Arizona
School of Plant Sciences
BIO5 Institute
1657 E. Helen St.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0240
520/626-1641

mail address
University of Arizona
School of Plant Sciences
PO Box 210036
Tucson, AZ 85721-0036
________________________________________
From: plsfaculty-bounces at CALS.arizona.edu [plsfaculty-bounces at CALS.arizona.edu] On Behalf Of Bentley Fane [bfane at email.arizona.edu]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 9:09 PM
To: Betsy Arnold
Cc: plsfaculty at ag.arizona.edu
Subject: Re: [Plsfaculty] Time-sensitive: Addendum to Phase II document

>
>
> RY1: I agree, a straw poll is needed to go with 'majority.' I have not heard any discordant views and have received positive responses from >30% of the SPLS faculty so far today. I made it clear in my note that no response is a yes vote.

Betsy, your email stated: "If I do not hear from you, I will assume that you are comfortable with this document being added to the public record." Being comfortable with a document does not mean one agrees with the document. Thus, in this case and really in all future cases, "no response" should never be a   "yes vote."  It is not even an  abstention - one must vote "abstention."  It is a "vote not casted."

> However, I am hoping that a majority (>50%) of our faculty will respond positively, and if so I plan to keep the phrasing in there. If not, I'll remove it where flagged at RY1 and RY2. I'm sensitive to getting that right.

Thus, I suggest 100% accuracy. "No response" should be reported as "no response"  without any interpretation of any kind.

On May 14, 2012, at 8:14 PM, Betsy Arnold wrote:

> Thanks, Ramin -- much appreciated.
>
> A few quick thoughts:
>
> RY1: I agree, a straw poll is needed to go with 'majority.' I have not heard any discordant views and have received positive responses from >30% of the SPLS faculty so far today. I made it clear in my note that no response is a yes vote. However, I am hoping that a majority (>50%) of our faculty will respond positively, and if so I plan to keep the phrasing in there. If not, I'll remove it where flagged at RY1 and RY2. I'm sensitive to getting that right.
>
> RY3: The document says that the retirement of VanEtten and McClure will negatively impact our ability to provide a graduate program in plant pathology, in that it leaves...[six faculty]. Plant pathology is a diverse field, as demonstrated by programs throughout the country, and work by all of us listed in the addendum corresponds to national directions of plant path research in the modern sense. Thus, I prefer to correct the statement as written in the addendum.
>
> RY4: Corrected; thanks! Clearly had my head somewhere else on that.
>
> RY5: I am sorry, but I am not clear on your meaning here. Let me try: The document says that we lack a critical mass of faculty that work on plant stress adaptation, and lists a few Extension folks and then says that we have only one research faculty member (Karen). Karen's role is correct. However, those faculty listed in the addendum self-identify as working on plant stress adaptation, and it's inappropriate to name some but not others when some are listed. This is the motivation to expand this list.
>
> Best,
> Betsy
> _______________________________________________
> Plsfaculty mailing list
> Plsfaculty at CALS.arizona.edu
> http://CALSmail.arizona.edu/mailman/listinfo/plsfaculty

_______________________________________________
Plsfaculty mailing list
Plsfaculty at CALS.arizona.edu
http://CALSmail.arizona.edu/mailman/listinfo/plsfaculty