Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Lambert '90 to replace Merkel

Jim Merkel's replacement has been found. Kathy Fallon Lambert '90 will be the College's new sustainability manager. Among her bright ideas: indoctrinating the students as soon as they step foot on campus. Why not, it has worked for the NADs.

College press release here.


Anonymous said...

ASE: The Dartmouth Undying comment thread is broken. Please move this comment there when it is fixed.

So who is paying for the phone survey being conducted by Dartmouth Undying, why will they not reveal what the questions are, and who among alumni are they surveying? Their supporters include many people who criticised an Association attempt to do a simple survey on parity last summer.

Why a question regarding alumni opinion about Carol Folt?

Ostrow is their spokesperson, but why are their leaders all not identified, and what does it mean that some of them (e.g. Keare) are themselves on the ballot?

Anonymous said...

Dartmouth Undying is not a group purporting to represent the whole of the alumni body as part of their official duties. Dartmouth Undying, unlike the AoA, is not an umbrella group that, at least according to Frank Gado and co., represents all alumni, living and dead. Asking Dartmouth Undying who funded the poll and to release the questions/results would be akin to demanding the Hanover Institute ir tge Dartmouth Review release their polls/databases and financials, which no reasonable person is requesting.

Also, for Frank Gado to feign surprise/disbelief that all-alumni address databases exist outside of the grasp of the College is ridiculous. Undergrads, alumni activists, and interest groups alike from both sides have access to databases like this through back channels.

Anonymous said...

The Alumni Association did disclose that the legal bills have been paid by the Hanover Institute. Yet the clamor from "reasonable people" is exactly that the Association learn and reveal who are the donors to the HI.

If one believes this argument, then candiates for AoA election, in particular ones who are also principles in the UnDying group, should reveal the details on their sponsorship.

Both groups merit privacy and should tone down their criticism of each other.

Regarding mailing lists, the UnDying spokesperson says the mail lists come from classes and clubs. Those lists are maintained on college list servers just like the overall alumni list, yet are only made available for College-approved use. If they are the source, then there is implicit College support.

Anonymous said...

I feel like knowing the money is from the Hanover Institute is enough to guess the profile of who is funding this lawsuit.

People who are demanding the HI release their records are being unreasonable.

Do you think the HI and groups on the other side of the aisle from Dartmouth Undying have gotten their lists from any sources other than classes, affinity groups, and Dartmouth fund raisers? As far as I know I am not on the HI or Dartmouth Review's mailing lists and yet I still receive campaign materials from the petition trustees.

Anonymous said...

Correction: the Association has disclosed that some of the legal bills have been paid by the Hanover Institute. Some have been paid by anonymous donors funneling cash through Donor's Trust. Some have been paid by still-secret donors.

Both parties in the law suit should reveal their funding. The bills of the defendant board are being paid by Dartmouth College. The plaintiff is still not being honest.

Anonymous said...

The Review asking them for further information is more than a little rich.

Compare the Dartmouth Undying website with SaveDartmouth.org, which spent $300k on ads, including banner ads on the NYTimes website and a full page ad in the WSJ, and directs inquiries to "our unofficial leader, Mr. Andres Morton Zimmerman."

Anonymous d-bags on both sides, it seems.

Anonymous said...

Actually, the donors behind Dartmouth Undying are among the listed supporters.

Anonymous said...

Anon. 1:25, who said there is a phone survey? Did you make that up?

Why the concern over a DU member being on the ballot? At least he straightforwardly disclosed it in his candidate bio. Unlike, say, Frank Gado, who still won't be honest and tell you who owns his loyalty.

Anonymous said...

Anon. 1:52

Sometimes it pays to read the article linked to before you ask stupid questions.

Anonymous said...

Actually, the donors behind Dartmouth Undying are among the listed supporters.

As far as I can tell, the "listed supporters" is the equivalent of signing a petition. To say that some of those people also may have donated some amount of money isn't the same thing as disclosure of funding.

Presumably, some of SaveDartmouth's supporters also donated money. http://savedartmouth.org/contact.cfm?tab=petition

Anonymous said...

Anon. 1:59, where in the article does it say DU is conducting a phone or telephone survey? Nowhere. Ostrow said the survey would take 20 minutes to complete. That does not mean it is a telephone survey. If it really is a "push poll" like the Association survey, then it could be in a mailing, like the Association survey.

Can you answer the second "stupid" question? Why question the meaning of Keare's candidacy when officers of the other party are running undisclosed?

Why do you think it's your business, and why do you care who's funding the survey and running the group? It's not a corporation yet, it's not a party in the law suit, and it's not funding the law suit. The AoA and HI fit those categories. That's why they have to answer questions like that.

Anonymous said...

Phil Aubart's blabbing about "Dartmouth Undying" is mostly made-up or plagiarized.