King Dixon appointed to BOT? Are we serious?

[Kitchenlabs]

I've known King since the 50s and think highly of him. He is a person of good character and was a good football player for us. He is certainly a loyal Gamecock and is sharper in his 80s than most posters on here.

Well it's not that hard to be sharper than most of the posters here.

 

[winloseortie]

He's late 80s. Guess there's no age limit. You could be on a breathing tube and still be an active board member apparently.

He barely raises the average age

 

[EgotisticalGamecock]

This is my first time taking a look at the BOT website. For us to be a school that celebrates diversity in the student ranks, we sure don't value it in the decision-making ranks. Speaking from an ethnic, gender, and age standpoint. Is it 2020 or 1920?

 

[GeoCocky]

This is my first time taking a look at the BOT website. For us to be a school that celebrates diversity in the student ranks, we sure don't value it in the decision-making ranks. Speaking from an ethnic and age standpoint. Is it 2020 or 1920?

Agreed. That's because the school (the faculty, administration, staff, and students) can value diversity and inclusion all it wants, but the BOT is almost entirely appointed by politicians, many of whom have little use for it. That's one of the reasons why I've been so openly skeptical in other threads that the proposed revisions to the size of the BOT will change anything.

 

[GeoCocky]

I know that I've posted this before, but it's worth repeating. Contrast our BOT with Georgia's Board of Regents. The difference isn't just race, sex, and age, although those are all striking and, in SC's case, disappointing. It's also the backgrounds and professions of the board members, which takes some hunting in our case since the webpage doesn't even list the bios or qualifications of our trustees. Wonder why....

https://www.usg.edu/regents/members
https://sc.edu/about/offices_and_divisions/board_of_trustees/members/index.php

 

[ConKreteCock]

It's temporary... This is a huge overreaction fellas. smh

We understand it's temporary. That's not the point and not what we're pointing out........what we're pointing out is that while his hire is temporary, the "dumbassery" of USC is just astounding and never ending. Never. As another poster pointed out, any old dipstick off the streets could fill in.........

Only at USC will they make it a gold star certified dipstick. Verified and confirmed? Yep? Hire him......... that's USC. And the sunshine pumper cancer continues.

 

[Expro19]

We understand it's temporary. That's not the point and not what we're pointing out........what we're pointing out is that while his hire is temporary, the "dumbassery" of USC is just astounding and never ending. Never. As another poster pointed out, any old dipstick off the streets could fill in.........

Only at USC will they make it a gold star certified dipstick. Verified and confirmed? Yep? Hire him......... that's USC. And the sunshine pumper cancer continues.

Like I said... Overreaction!

 

[ConKreteCock]

Like I said... Overreaction!

Like I said.......continuous, nonstop, stupidity. It's the garnet way. From founding to this very second.

 

[JeffTweedyFan]

Agreed. That's because the school (the faculty, administration, staff, and students) can value diversity and inclusion all it wants, but the BOT is almost entirely appointed by politicians, many of whom have little use for it. That's one of the reasons why I've been so openly skeptical in other threads that the proposed revisions to the size of the BOT will change anything.

Yeah, this is SC. Just look at the 'diversity' of our state legislature.

 

[polo-loco]

Agreed. That's because the school (the faculty, administration, staff, and students) can value diversity and inclusion all it wants, but the BOT is almost entirely appointed by politicians, many of whom have little use for it. That's one of the reasons why I've been so openly skeptical in other threads that the proposed revisions to the size of the BOT will change anything.

The legislature has divested from higher education but hasn't given up any power. It's a damn good deal if you can get it.

 

[GeoCocky]

The legislature has divested from higher education but hasn't given up any power. It's a damn good deal if you can get it.

You've got that right. And the sad thing to me is that USC actually provides a good undergraduate education in spite of our administration and BOT and its low level of state funding; it's just not sustainable with how things are currently going on campus. The faculty are more dedicated to teaching than many peer research universities of our size and budget, and there are a lot of good undergrad 'enrichment' programs (Honors College, study abroad, internships, etc.), but morale and turnover continue to be horrible as we constantly lose good people. On top of that, we have a president who is sadly out of his depth, and a state legislature and BOT who have no interest in making USC better or enhancing our value to the state.