The page on the carolina website you click through to get to the pdfs gives the counts. The average pages per document is between 2 and 3. A lot of them are one page emails, but then you get a 20 page powerpoint mixed in.
In response to two public records requests, the University has released 214,550 pages from 91,383 emails and electronic documents gathered during the independent investigation of academic irregularities led by Kenneth Wainstein.
Those records come from a database of nearly 1.7 million unique electronic records compiled by Wainstein’s firm, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, as part of the report released on Oct. 22, 2014. The database contained about 5 million total pages of documents.
I'm not convinced that the high fees follow from the difficulty of searching the large number of documents (although the fees might very well follow from the appearance of difficulty). The search for relevant documents was conducted by Cadwalader's "IT specialists." The only additional details I found in the report were that the search involved 48 keywords to identify relevant documents. Depending on the methodology, that might or might not be so onerous a task. If they did something like using Outlook to search through *.pst or *.msg files I'm sure it would take a frustratingly long time. If they converted emails to a simple text format, they might narrow down several million records to a few thousand in a day, and even rank them by prioritizing keywords or their combinations. Load a million emails as text onto a Linux machine, grep for the right regular expressions, and you'll get results fast. On the other hand, Cadwalader probably had access to specialized software for the task, making it even simpler to narrow the search. It's possible that the only documents they actually reviewed were the ones provided in the report's addendum, although I suspect the set was larger than that.
We really can't say for sure without more knowledge of the search methodology. What intrigues me is the possibility that the search parameters were only used for the initial selection of documents. Given the information we have now, what would a new search based on expanded parameters yield? My personal dream is for an email tying Crowder, Roy, and statements by Rashad McCants.
High fees might also follow from an hourly rate of $990.
Either these documents now being released were not supplied to the enforcement staff or the enforcement staff did not perform an optimal examination of them them. Otherwise the enforcement staff would have discovered the "newly discovered" infractions that UNC came up with during their redaction. Of course, we know that UNC would certainly not have ignored any arguable but less than unquestionable infractions turned up during their redaction process, and would not have failed to follow up on clues to potential infractions, but perhaps they would appreciate it if we double-checked their work.
Edit: of course, this assumes that documents containing arguable but less than unquestionable infractions have not been removed from the document dump. Perhaps it would be useful, after we receive all these documents, to find out through FOIA exactly how many documents Wainstein received, but they could circumvent that by supplying a fake document for each one removed.
Last edited by swood1000; 10-23-2015 at 04:12 PM.
Bump.
Sage Grouse
---------------------------------------
'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013
This morning while getting items checked at the door by an arrogant Heels fan. I was wearing a Duke shirt.
As I approach, in an attempt to be nice.
"How are you doing?"
"Good, now that we are 6-0," said with all the arrogance of a Wal-Mart Carolina fan which is where he should be employed.
"Helps when you don't have to go to class." As i am departing.
I heard what sounded like a huge throat constriction behind me. Rarely do I entertain these fools but this guy went to the well one time too many. I know a few good fans that follow the light blue but it is a tiny percentage. Most arrogant base of people I have ever encountered.
Boy do I hope they get everything they have coming to them by the NCAA.
& No the 6-0 is not a typo. Just repeating the conversation as it took place.
nothing like a PO'd BOG member to possibly reveal some stinky...
"One POSSIBLE future. From your point of view... I don't know tech stuff.".... Kyle Reese
So let me get this straight. UNC paid Cadwadaler upwards of 2.6 million dollars from Dec 2014 until June 2015 to:
So if Cadwadaler finished in June 2015, why did they wait until October to release the first set of documents and where is the rest?process for public release the records related to the independent investigation in light of the pending requests from The News & Observer and The Daily Tar Heel.
They've also paid 1.8 million for PR related to this mess.
http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/up...firm-expenses/
The article above is about John Fennebresque resigning as Chairman of the UNC board of governors.
Although I would be surprised if a lawyer in North Carolina would reveal anything detrimental to UNC, I was curious about the following quote from UNC system president Tom Ross.
“While John Fennebresque and I may have had our differences at times, he truly loves the University of North Carolina and has been a tireless, passionate advocate for it,” said UNC President Tom Ross."
I may be misreading here, and I may be confusing the UNC system with the University of North Carolina. Is Fennebresque supposed to be a representative of the entire system, or is he placed in his position as a representative of the University on the board? Because in the quote above, Ross describes him as a "tireless, passionate advocate" for the University. Is this the duty of the Chairman of the Board of Governors? I know that the other schools within the system already decry the (lack of) impartiality of the UNC system. But it is interesting that the President of the UNC system clearly finds being a tireless advocate of the University consistent (and laudable) with being Chairman of the Board of Governors. In a case such as this, with long-standing academic fraud by the University, I would not think the interests of the University were necessarily consistent with those of the System. But again, perhaps I do not properly understand the role of either the Chairman or the President.