PDA

View Full Version : UNC Athletic Scandal: New Wainstein Document Details



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

BigWayne
10-21-2015, 09:57 PM
UNC has released a crap ton of files from the Wainstein inquiry (http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/records/)

Folks over at PP have a busy week ahead of them. Hopefully this means something is happening soon and they are trying to inundate us with data as a distraction.


The following records come from a database of nearly 1.7 million unique electronic records compiled by Kenneth 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.

Before public release, the University is legally mandated to review every page to protect privacy rights and, if necessary, to redact or withhold confidential information.

Future batches of Wainstein records will be posted regularly on this same webpage as they become available. The University continues to review and prepare additional records for public release. That process is being done with great care and takes time.

Note that these are large files, which may extend download times.

devildeac
10-21-2015, 10:28 PM
UNC has released a crap ton of files from the Wainstein inquiry (http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/records/)

Folks over at PP have a busy week ahead of them. Hopefully this means something is happening soon and they are trying to inundate us with data as a distraction.


The following records come from a database of nearly 1.7 million unique electronic records compiled by Kenneth 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.

Before public release, the University is legally mandated to review every page to protect privacy rights and, if necessary, to redact or withhold confidential information.

Future batches of Wainstein records will be posted regularly on this same webpage as they become available. The University continues to review and prepare additional records for public release. That process is being done with great care and takes time.

Note that these are large files, which may extend download times.


That's one helluva way to celebrate the one year anniversary...

Merlindevildog91
10-21-2015, 10:49 PM
That's one helluva way to celebrate the one year anniversary...

IIRC, the appropriate gift for the first anniversary is paper....

JasonEvans
10-21-2015, 11:44 PM
Going through all this stuff needs to be crowdsourced. Someone needs to set up a database or something where volunteers from the DBR, Pack Pride, and elsewhere can register which documents they have reviewed so we can collectively examine all of it.

When folks see a document that seems to have some juicy info, it should be noted so a more thorough examination can be given to it (such as folks who will study font sizes to try to figure out which player's name was redacted).

-Jason "I bet Wake, Maryland, Kentucky, South Carolina, Virginia, and many other fan bases would be happy to help out with the examination of the documents too -- each doc should have multiple eyes see it to ensure thorough vetting" Evans

Olympic Fan
10-22-2015, 01:48 AM
I just checked PackPride to see if any of the sleuths over there are digging into the data dump. They claim that the total amount dumped is over 20 GB of information.

One poster -- CptHindsight -- claims to have reviewed the first 1177 PDF pages from file 5a (why he decided to start with this one, I don't know). The most interesting stuff he found:


edit1: Some guy named "Sean" (redaction failure) taking a lot of Drama and AFAM classes. Also a lot of mentions about Exercise Science, but it is unclear if this Sean guy is taking any.

edit2: Does UNC needs to redact the info of recruits who did not eventually choose UNC? They are listing the phone number, GPA, SAT scores, address of several recruits. One of these recruits might eventually make it to the NFL.

edit3: Stopped at page 1177 of 5a for tonight. This document is mind numbing. Will read this tomorrow. So far this doc is a bunch of tutor feedback reports and emails, then filled with pages of pregnancy/fertility study ads.


I would say that listing confidential information about recruits that chose other schools is very much the Carolina Way -- remember Dean and his comments about Ferry and Laettner's SAT scores?

BigWayne
10-22-2015, 03:35 AM
It's going to be a tough sleuth job. They have attempted to redact everything in there they think is incriminating. They must have spent a ton of time and money on this.
Page 2411/28592 of file PDF1A is shown below. It concerns observation of various coaches, included a couple named Williams and Davis having been seen coming around to check on the players academic activities. They have redacted the date of the email so you can't tell when Roy was apparently interested in academics.
5601

Don't know why it won't load bigger so you can see it.

BigWayne
10-22-2015, 04:23 AM
Few last comments for today as it's getting late.....

PDF1A is mostly a bunch of emails of various people we have heard about. In the ~2400 page area are a lot of Beth Bridger emails.
The real emails where people are actually talking to each other about something that matters are interrupted by various emails sent to or from the concerned individuals that have unimportant (to us) attachments like agendas or powerpoints for conferences or training sessions.

Down at page 23120, emails from Jan Boxill start showing up. Looks like it's mostly Boxill related stuff from there to the end of this first file. There is a lot of back and forth between Boxill and Stroman, especially some catty discussions about Jay Smith. How Stroman has avoided being implicated up to this point is hard to fathom. Her fingerprints seem to be all over this stuff.

cspan37421
10-22-2015, 06:55 AM
They have redacted the date of the email so you can't tell when Roy was apparently interested in academics.



How is the date of that email related to privacy rights or confidential information ... unless any evidence itself is deemed confidential? Why should UNC get to decide what is redacted? [I'm sure there's a legal reason but really, fox and henhouse and all that, right?]

BD80
10-22-2015, 07:46 AM
How is the date of that email related to privacy rights or confidential information ... unless any evidence itself is deemed confidential? Why should UNC get to decide what is redacted? [I'm sure there's a legal reason but really, fox and henhouse and all that, right?]

It is probably more prejudicial than confidential.

If the date were revealed, unc would be in deep doo-doo (a legal term).

OldPhiKap
10-22-2015, 07:53 AM
Please be 2005 . . . .please be 2005 . . . .

Having said that, I cannot read the email. Does it say anything more than Coach Williams (is Roy the only one?) came by to check on academic progress of his kids? May have wait for BigWayne to wake up, he was sleuthing into the wee hours it seems.

cspan37421
10-22-2015, 08:11 AM
It is probably more prejudicial than confidential.



I suspect the truth is prejudicial to UNC's case.

Indoor66
10-22-2015, 08:35 AM
It is probably more prejudicial than confidential.

If the date were revealed, unc would be in deep doo-doo (a legal term).

Next you will go all Latin on us!:mad::cool:

OldPhiKap
10-22-2015, 08:47 AM
Next you will go all Latin on us!:mad::cool:

Altus excrementum.

Henderson
10-22-2015, 08:57 AM
Does UNC needs to redact the info of recruits who did not eventually choose UNC? They are listing the phone number, GPA, SAT scores, address of several recruits. One of these recruits might eventually make it to the NFL.

***

I would say that listing confidential information about recruits that chose other schools is very much the Carolina Way -- remember Dean and his comments about Ferry and Laettner's SAT scores?

This is how FERPA interacts with state Public Records Laws: FERPA protects the privacy rights of students who matriculate at your school, not that of applicants who never matriculate. And Public Records Laws say a public university must turn over requested documents unless those documents are exempted (e.g. by FERPA's privacy prohibitions). So if Serge Zwicker applied to UNC and enrolled, all of his records are protected by FERPA. But if Laettner applied to UNC and never enrolled there, his application materials are a public record unprotected by FERPA.



How is the date of that email related to privacy rights or confidential information ... unless any evidence itself is deemed confidential? Why should UNC get to decide what is redacted? [I'm sure there's a legal reason but really, fox and henhouse and all that, right?]

That's how public records laws work: It's up to the institution to turn over requested material and redact as appropriate, and it's mostly the honor system. So, yeah, fox and henhouse. But every public records law I've seen (and I'm not familiar with NC's specifically) has a process to challenge omissions/redactions, which are then resolved by an outside party, like an administrative law judge or the Attorney General's office, whose decisions are subject to judicial review. I'm guessing -- but do not know -- that North Carolina's public records law has such a process.

A date could be subject to redaction under FERPA if, for whatever reason, disclosing a date in context would allow a person to discern the identity of a student. So consider, for example, this statement: "On May 1, 2005, Coach Jones met with student-athlete Jim Smith to discuss his recent foot injury and failure to complete assignments in his two AFAM classes." Well, if you just take out the student's name, a person could suss out Jim Smith's identity because the date and "recent foot injury" tells you who it is. But if someone thinks the fox made the wrong call about the henhouse, he or she could challenge the redaction and force UNC-CH to justify it.

sammy3469
10-22-2015, 09:25 AM
You sometimes just have to shake your head and laugh. 1A starts with presentation slides from a 2007 conference on underprepared student-athletes. It then transitions to NCSU academic support program manual, record, educational support plans from 2004-8. One of those documents is a plan from the Fall of 2004 for a swimmer with a CUM GPA of 1.94.

Nice trolling UNC.

dudog84
10-22-2015, 09:44 AM
I truly appreciate those who will read this material and will pull out the tidbits for the rest of us.

For others like me, here's something more easily digestible. And entertaining.

Money quote from Sylvia Hatchell: "this will be our finest hour". Not only channeling Winston Churchill, but comparing UNC to Apollo 13.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/article40800936.html

Just...priceless.

BigWayne
10-22-2015, 10:42 AM
Please be 2005 . . . .please be 2005 . . . .

Having said that, I cannot read the email. Does it say anything more than Coach Williams (is Roy the only one?) came by to check on academic progress of his kids? May have wait for BigWayne to wake up, he was sleuthing into the wee hours it seems.

Actually, that email is almost certainly from Sunday Sep 12th 2010. It is in the middle of a bunch of emails pulled from Beth Bridger's inbox. They are displayed in the file chronologically. The one on page 2410 is from Sunday Sep 12th 2010 at 8:32PM. The one on 2411 is from Sunday at 8:38PM.

The dates are redacted off of a lot of the emails, many of which it makes no sense why they needed to do so. I was hoping this was a way to flag the ones to look at, but I am not so sure now.

On the content, it lists coach Davis, Kaufmann, Williams, Mo, Shoop, and Pittman. States that they "were all (academic) business."

5602

BigWayne
10-22-2015, 10:56 AM
Daily Tarheel has a number of things today.

Main article (http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2015/10/a-year-after-the-wainstein-report-the-ncaa-and-discipline-decisions-loom)

Interactive graphic that details involvement of a bunch of different actors at UNC (http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2015/10/interactive-graphic-one-year-after-the-wainstein-report)
Check out Eunice Sahle on the academic side:

Current position: Chairperson of the African, African-American and Diaspora Studies department
What Wainstein said about her: Sahle’s knowledge of the classes was less than that of fellow professors Tim McMillan and Alphonse Mutima, but she still was aware of them. She allowed Crowder to sign up several students in her lectures to mask the true nature of the class. "According to Crowder, Professor Sahle was aware that she was adding paper class students and 'agreed that a few students could get away with not showing up and doing a paper at the end [of the semester].'Crowder’s recollection is corroborated by an email in which she tells Wayne Walden that one of his players can take a Sahle lecture class without having to attend,” the report said.

sammy3469
10-22-2015, 11:06 AM
Actually, that email is almost certainly from Sunday Sep 12th 2010. It is in the middle of a bunch of emails pulled from Beth Bridger's inbox. They are displayed in the file chronologically. The one on page 2410 is from Sunday Sep 12th 2010 at 8:32PM. The one on 2411 is from Sunday at 8:38PM.

The dates are redacted off of a lot of the emails, many of which it makes no sense why they needed to do so. I was hoping this was a way to flag the ones to look at, but I am not so sure now.

On the content, it lists coach Davis, Kaufmann, Williams, Mo, Shoop, and Pittman. States that they "were all (academic) business."

5602

I'm pretty sure anything incriminating ends up getting it's date removed. Bridger was a one women eligibility machine. In any case, page 1692 from presumably July 9th 2010 has someone registering presumably a football player for classes. That's the most overt one, but it seems it was pretty standard practice to forward filled out Get Ready to Register forms to Andrea Caldwell or others in the Academic Advising Program to register athletes for classes which is one of the "extra benefits".

Williams is actually probably Charlie Williams a WR coach as opposed to Roy. Bridger dealt solely with football.

swood1000
10-22-2015, 11:24 AM
Daily Tarheel has a number of things today.

Main article (http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2015/10/a-year-after-the-wainstein-report-the-ncaa-and-discipline-decisions-loom)

Interactive graphic that details involvement of a bunch of different actors at UNC (http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2015/10/interactive-graphic-one-year-after-the-wainstein-report)
Check out Eunice Sahle on the academic side:

Current position: Chairperson of the African, African-American and Diaspora Studies department
What Wainstein said about her: Sahle’s knowledge of the classes was less than that of fellow professors Tim McMillan and Alphonse Mutima, but she still was aware of them. She allowed Crowder to sign up several students in her lectures to mask the true nature of the class. "According to Crowder, Professor Sahle was aware that she was adding paper class students and 'agreed that a few students could get away with not showing up and doing a paper at the end [of the semester].'Crowder’s recollection is corroborated by an email in which she tells Wayne Walden that one of his players can take a Sahle lecture class without having to attend,” the report said.
The referenced main article shows a user comment at the bottom:


Listen, just about every school in America cheats. We just happened to get caught. The NCAA ain't gonna do nothing. Roy already guaranteed that. As long as we keep winning titles I don't care what they do behind closed doors. ...
There are no doubt quite a few UNC fans who believe this exact thing. Their world is about to shatter right in front of their eyes. I can't even imagine the magnitude of the bellowing outrage that is going to be heard after the COI announces its decision.

Henderson
10-22-2015, 11:32 AM
The referenced main article shows a user comment at the bottom:

"Listen, just about every school in America cheats. We just happened to get caught. The NCAA ain't gonna do nothing. Roy already guaranteed that. As long as we keep winning titles I don't care what they do behind closed doors. ..."

There are no doubt quite a few UNC fans who believe this exact thing.



Somebody should ask Carol Folt, the Hat, Bubba, Sylvia, and Roy if they agree with the comment. Unless they distance themselves from such statements, the comment represents The Carolina Way. Because (as the poster makes clear) this is a pretty commonly expressed sentiment among UNC fans.

swood1000
10-22-2015, 11:36 AM
Crowder’s recollection is corroborated by an email in which she tells Wayne Walden that one of his players can take a Sahle lecture class without having to attend,” the report said.
Hold on a second there. Do we have that email? That looks pretty much like the smoking gun in the hand of Wayne Walden, and through him Roy Williams. I wonder why the enforcement staff didn't charge this. We'll find out when we get to look at Walden's interview transcript. Maybe Walden made it sound credible that he thought that this class was an independent study or that the instructor had the authority to convert it into an independent study.

BigWayne
10-22-2015, 11:37 AM
Meanwhile, after getting suspended for the incredibly tough games against Wake and UVA for beating up some ATO members, Stewart and Hughes are getting reactivated in time for the game against Pitt next week. (http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2015/10/stewart-and-hughes-to-be-reinstated)

BigWayne
10-22-2015, 11:41 AM
Hold on a second there. Do we have that email? That looks pretty much like the smoking gun in the hand of Wayne Walden, and through him Roy Williams. I wonder why the enforcement staff didn't charge this. We'll find out when we get to look at Walden's interview transcript. Maybe Walden made it sound credible that he thought that this class was an independent study or that the instructor had the authority to convert it into an independent study.

It might be in the big dump and the DTH has had it for a while already. The carolinacommitment site does state that yesterday's dump is in response to records requests by the N&O and the DTH. So now the race is on to figure out which of these big files has Walden's emails.

Henderson
10-22-2015, 11:45 AM
Anyone else notice the evolution of the UNC-CH faithful in the past few months?

Step 1: "We didn't do anything wrong. We don't cheat. It's not the Carolina Way."

Step 2: "We didn't do anything any other school doesn't do. It's not cheating; it's just the way things work. Corey Maggette, Lance Thomas."

Step 3: "There were bad apples at UNC. Those bad apples cheated. But it was academic cheating, so leave the athletics programs alone."

Step 4: "Some athletic programs cheated. But not men's basketball."

Step 5: "OK, men's basketball benefited from some cheating too, but Roy didn't know and the cheaters are gone, so there shouldn't be MBB sanctions."

Step 6: "OK, ok, we cheated. But what are you going to do about it? The NCAA ain't gonna do squat. And good, because I don't care about cheating; I only care about winning. F all of y'all."

Nosbleuatu
10-22-2015, 12:04 PM
Anyone else notice the evolution of the UNC-CH faithful in the past few months?

Step 1: "We didn't do anything wrong. We don't cheat. It's not the Carolina Way."

Step 2: "We didn't do anything any other school doesn't do. It's not cheating; it's just the way things work. Corey Maggette, Lance Thomas."

Step 3: "There were bad apples at UNC. Those bad apples cheated. But it was academic cheating, so leave the athletics programs alone."

Step 4: "Some athletic programs cheated. But not men's basketball."

Step 5: "OK, men's basketball benefited from some cheating too, but Roy didn't know and the cheaters are gone, so there shouldn't be MBB sanctions."

Step 6: "OK, ok, we cheated. But what are you going to do about it? The NCAA ain't gonna do squat. And good, because I don't care about cheating; I only care about winning. F all of y'all."


Reading through this, I was thinking of the seven stages of grief...

1. Shock or Disbelief
2. Denial
3. Anger
4. Bargaining
5. Guilt
6. Depression
7. Acceptance

Seems like UNC has made it to stage #3. I could see #4 leading up to meetings with the COI, but then I'm not sure what will come next. Skip #5 and go right to #6? Or jump back down to #1 and start over?

swood1000
10-22-2015, 12:10 PM
Reading through this, I was thinking of the seven stages of grief...

1. Shock or Disbelief
2. Denial
3. Anger
4. Bargaining
5. Guilt
6. Depression
7. Acceptance

Seems like UNC has made it to stage #3. I could see #4 leading up to meetings with the COI, but then I'm not sure what will come next. Skip #5 and go right to #6? Or jump back down to #1 and start over?
I think they're still at 2. The anger we see is related to being falsely accused, different from the anger that will come when denial is no longer possible.

TampaDuke
10-22-2015, 12:14 PM
Not sure where they get this, but the DTH article also mentions that UNC has to respond to the NCAA's Notice of Allegations in the spring.


In the spring, the University must reply to the NCAA’s Notice of Allegations, which cited the school for five level one violations — namely a lack of institutional control. A few months later, UNC’s yearlong probation implemented by its accrediting agency, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, will end, forcing the agency to make a ruling on the school’s status.

swood1000
10-22-2015, 12:25 PM
Not sure where they get this, but the DTH article also mentions that UNC has to respond to the NCAA's Notice of Allegations in the spring.

In the spring, the University must reply to the NCAA’s Notice of Allegations, which cited the school for five level one violations — namely a lack of institutional control. A few months later, UNC’s yearlong probation implemented by its accrediting agency, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, will end, forcing the agency to make a ruling on the school’s status.

They no doubt are figuring in the additional 90 days they will get after the enforcement staff amends the NOA. If they received the amended NOA on 11/1/2015 their response would be due 1/30/2016. Maybe they have reason to think that the amended NOA will not be arriving until 12/1/2015, which would make their response due 2/29/2016 (leap year). That would make for great discussions during the tournament.

BLPOG
10-22-2015, 12:30 PM
Page 12 of the Cadwalader report, in a section titled C. Collection and Review of Electronic Documents, states


We formulated a list of 48 keywords that related to the subject matter of our investigation – words such as “paper class” and “independent study” – and our IT specialists ran these terms against the 1.6 million electronic documents in the database. Our staff then reviewed emails and documents that hit on those terms to identify those that had some bearing on the issues we were investigating. We then used the information gleaned from those emails to craft our investigation and interview strategy.

Was there ever provided a full list of those 48 keywords? I think that would be a fruitful area for inquiry, now that some of the primary - albeit redacted - sources are available.

luburch
10-22-2015, 12:30 PM
Anyone else notice the evolution of the UNC-CH faithful in the past few months?

Step 1: "We didn't do anything wrong. We don't cheat. It's not the Carolina Way."

Step 2: "We didn't do anything any other school doesn't do. It's not cheating; it's just the way things work. Corey Maggette, Lance Thomas."

Step 3: "There were bad apples at UNC. Those bad apples cheated. But it was academic cheating, so leave the athletics programs alone."

Step 4: "Some athletic programs cheated. But not men's basketball."

Step 5: "OK, men's basketball benefited from some cheating too, but Roy didn't know and the cheaters are gone, so there shouldn't be MBB sanctions."

Step 6: "OK, ok, we cheated. But what are you going to do about it? The NCAA ain't gonna do squat. And good, because I don't care about cheating; I only care about winning. F all of y'all."

This is completely inaccurate. We know for a fact that the majority of UNC graduates cannot count past three :)

captmojo
10-22-2015, 12:50 PM
Reading through this, I was thinking of the seven stages of grief...

1. Shock or Disbelief
2. Denial
3. Anger
4. Bargaining
5. Guilt
6. Depression
7. Acceptance

Seems like UNC has made it to stage #3. I could see #4 leading up to meetings with the COI, but then I'm not sure what will come next. Skip #5 and go right to #6? Or jump back down to #1 and start over?

It's a good analogy, but I think they have jumped all out of order.
I think of the Don Knotts psychiatrist character in 'No Time for Sargeants'. "He did do it completely wrong."

Then again, luburch just may have the proper answer.;)

Skitzle
10-22-2015, 12:53 PM
The referenced main article shows a user comment at the bottom:

"Listen, just about every school in America cheats. We just happened to get caught. The NCAA ain't gonna do nothing. Roy already guaranteed that. As long as we keep winning titles I don't care what they do behind closed doors. ..."

There are no doubt quite a few UNC fans who believe this exact thing.

Roy Williams wrote this comment. You can tell because he referred to himself in the 3rd person.

devildeac
10-22-2015, 12:59 PM
Meanwhile, after getting suspended for the incredibly tough games against Wake and UVA for beating up some ATO members, Stewart and Hughes are getting reactivated in time for the game against Pitt next week. (http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2015/10/stewart-and-hughes-to-be-reinstated)

the c*rolina way...

:rolleyes::mad:

Henderson
10-22-2015, 01:06 PM
They no doubt are figuring in the additional 90 days they will get after the enforcement staff amends the NOA. If they received the amended NOA on 11/1/2015 their response would be due 1/30/2016. Maybe they have reason to think that the amended NOA will not be arriving until 12/1/2015, which would make their response due 2/29/2016 (leap year). That would make for great discussions during the tournament.

That would explain a stall-ball defense by UNC-CH. It goes like this: "If we're going to get hammered, let's get as much as possible before that happens. We might have a really good MBB team this year. And think about what wounds that would heal. So stall. If our response to the NOA is due 2/29, there's no way the COI imposes sanctions during the tourney."

BD80
10-22-2015, 01:20 PM
... Money quote from Sylvia Hatchell: "this will be our finest hour". Not only channeling Winston Churchill, but comparing UNC to Apollo 13. ...

Well, she does resemble Winston ...

Apologies to Winston, his ancestors and descendants


Not sure where they get this, but the DTH article also mentions that UNC has to respond to the NCAA's Notice of Allegations in the spring.

Which spring?

devildeac
10-22-2015, 01:25 PM
Well, she does resemble Winston ...

Apologies to Winston, his ancestors and descendants



Which spring?



'My dear, you are ugly, and what’s more, you are disgustingly ugly. But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be disgustingly ugly.'

Winston Churchill


Or something like that...

Merlindevildog91
10-22-2015, 01:41 PM
I am stuck waiting for the phone to ring and listening to recorded interviews. To occupy my time, I began with the first section of the report. Learning specialists and "A Comprehensive Learning Center: Not Your Mama's Study Hall."

Memo to the authors: The word for a study cubicle is not "carol." Even if that passes spell check, it is still the wrong word. (page 31)

BD80
10-22-2015, 01:45 PM
... Memo to the authors: The word for a study cubicle is not "carol." Even if that passes spell check, it is still the wrong word. (page 31)

Considering what was taking place inside of the cubicle, perhaps the chosen spelling is more apt

Indoor66
10-22-2015, 02:15 PM
'My dear, you are ugly, and what’s more, you are disgustingly ugly. But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be disgustingly ugly.'

Winston Churchill


Or something like that...

I believe it is, more properly (as is appropriate for Sir Winston):

“'You are drunk Sir Winston, you are disgustingly drunk. 'Yes, Mrs. Braddock, I am drunk. But you, Mrs. Braddock are ugly, and disgustingly fat. But, tomorrow morning, I, Winston Churchill will be sober.”

devildeac
10-22-2015, 02:28 PM
I believe it is, more properly (as is appropriate for Sir Winston):

“'You are drunk Sir Winston, you are disgustingly drunk. 'Yes, Mrs. Braddock, I am drunk. But you, Mrs. Braddock are ugly, and disgustingly fat. But, tomorrow morning, I, Winston Churchill will be sober.”

That's likely more accurate. I found several quotes and omitted the first part about his inebriated condition at the time. ;)

BigWayne
10-22-2015, 03:13 PM
Another interesting mention from the DTH articles on an actor that is still employed there so could be compelled to testify by the NCAA:

Travis Gore

Current position: Administrative Assistant in the African, African-American and Diaspora Studies department

What Wainstein said about him: Gore began working under Crowder in 2001 and took over for her after her retirement in 2009. After Crowder’s retirement, Gore would get schedules from Nyang’oro and put them into the computer. "Gore acknowledged that his understanding of a paper class was a course that did not meet and required the student to write a paper. Gore recalled that for the paper classes after Crowder left, Nyang’oro would give him a list of topics that the class could write on, and Gore would provide the topics to the students,” the report said.

What he said about the report: Gore intially lied about his identity when asked for comment. After following up with Gore, he disclosed his identity and declined to comment on the report.

hallcity
10-22-2015, 03:48 PM
From today's piece by Dan Kane (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article40937289.html):

Rick White, a UNC spokesman, said Wednesday: “We have not received a revised (notice of allegations) from the NCAA nor have we received a revised timeline.” He said that information would be made public as soon as UNC is notified.

It would please me greatly if the NOA ends up being amended so Ol' Roy is explicitly cited and the Men's Basketball and Football programs are so explicitly cited that even the most myopic Tar Heel can't miss it.

OldPhiKap
10-22-2015, 04:08 PM
From today's piece by Dan Kane (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article40937289.html):

Rick White, a UNC spokesman, said Wednesday: “We have not received a revised (notice of allegations) from the NCAA nor have we received a revised timeline.” He said that information would be made public as soon as UNC is notified.

It would please me greatly if the NOA ends up being amended so Ol' Roy is explicitly cited and the Men's Basketball and Football programs are so explicitly cited that even the most myopic Tar Heel can't miss it.

Thanks. Where does that leave the deadline?

BD80
10-22-2015, 04:46 PM
Thanks. Where does that leave the deadline?

The etymology of words can be interesting.

"Deadline" really does capture situation at the dump

swood1000
10-22-2015, 05:16 PM
Thanks. Where does that leave the deadline?
It means that at least we know that UNC has finished its investigation and submitted its findings to the enforcement staff. There seem to be three possibilities.

(a) Enforcement staff will decide to conduct its own extended investigation. Seems unlikely. If they were going to do this they probably would have done so starting in August when they received the basic facts surrounding the new infractions.

(b) Enforcement staff will amend the NOA but in a way that is not significant or concludes that the new infractions are not Level I or II. Also seems unlikely. Activities by Jan Boxill seem like Level I almost by definition, and this infractions seems to be different in kind from the existing "extra benefits" infractions that she is charged with, although maybe it is just one more of the same kind of email that they have plenty of already.

(c) Enforcement staff will amend the NOA to add significant new infraction(s). This will restart the 90 days that UNC has to provide their answer. If UNC submitted the results of their investigation in mid-October and the enforcement staff takes two weeks to come up with a revised NOA then 90 days from November 1 is January 30, 2016, so their response will be due then (and they likely will have finished redacting the new NOA about then as well). Then come 60 days for the enforcement staff to meet with UNC and reply, bringing us to March 30, 2016. They have to give three or four weeks after that for the COI panel to read everything, and then they can have the hearing. If the same amount of time elapses as elapsed in the Syracuse case (127 days after the hearing began) then the decision will be released August 4, 2016.

At any rate, if there is a significant amendment of the NOA, then UNC is not going to miss the tournament in 2016 unless they self-impose. Also, Roy knew what he was talking about when he said that this was not going to affect the tournament in 2016.

OldPhiKap
10-22-2015, 05:21 PM
It means that at least we know that UNC has finished its investigation and submitted its findings to the enforcement staff. There seem to be three possibilities.

(a) Enforcement staff will decide to conduct its own extended investigation. Seems unlikely. If they were going to do this they probably would have done so starting in August when they received the basic facts surrounding the new infractions.

(b) Enforcement staff will amend the NOA but in a way that is not significant or concludes that the new infractions are not Level I or II. Also seems unlikely. Activities by Jan Boxill seem like Level I almost by definition, and this infractions seems to be different in kind from the existing "extra benefits" infractions that she is charged with, although maybe it is just one more of the same kind of email that they have plenty of already.

(c) Enforcement staff will amend the NOA to add significant new infraction(s). This will restart the 90 days that UNC has to provide their answer. If UNC submitted the results of their investigation in mid-October and the enforcement staff takes two weeks to come up with a revised NOA then 90 days from November 1 is January 30, 2016, so their response will be due then (and they likely will have finished redacting the new NOA about then as well). Then come 60 days for the enforcement staff to meet with UNC and reply, bringing us to March 30, 2016. They have to give three or four weeks after that for the COI panel to read everything, and then they can have the hearing. If the same amount of time elapses as elapsed in the Syracuse case (127 days after the hearing began) then the decision will be released August 4, 2016.

At any rate, if there is a significant amendment of the NOA, then UNC is not going to miss the tournament in 2016 unless they self-impose. Also, Roy knew what he was talking about when he said that this was not going to affect the tournament in 2016.

Thanks, tried to Spork but must spread the love first.

I guess it's just up to us to beat the snot out of them. Ok.

BigWayne
10-22-2015, 06:22 PM
From today's piece by Dan Kane (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article40937289.html):

Rick White, a UNC spokesman, said Wednesday: “We have not received a revised (notice of allegations) from the NCAA nor have we received a revised timeline.” He said that information would be made public as soon as UNC is notified.

It would please me greatly if the NOA ends up being amended so Ol' Roy is explicitly cited and the Men's Basketball and Football programs are so explicitly cited that even the most myopic Tar Heel can't miss it.

To me, the most interesting item in that article is this section about yesterday's data dump:

White said a much more voluminous request has tied up UNC’s public records staff. Last year, The N&O requested all records provided to Wainstein for his investigation. (The Daily Tar Heel, UNC’s student newspaper, made a similar request.) UNC began releasing those Wednesday, making public roughly 200,000 pages of records. UNC officials say five million pages of records were originally provided to Wainstein.

UNC reviewed the records before releasing them, with some names and dates redacted. That review led to UNC identifying the further allegations of misconduct by Boxill. The N&O has requested those particular records be released immediately.


So somewhere in these 200K pages is the new stuff that created the delay. Given that UNC states there are more releases coming, i.e. they aren't done redacting yet, the redactors could find more smoking guns in there. This could take a long time.

This all makes me wonder/hope that some of the manalishi comments last week about things speeding up could be something along the following lines:


1) NCAA sees from the 5 million page situation that the likelihood more violations keep getting mined over the next few months or years is pretty high.
2) NCAA is sick of the delays and wants to act now so they have something they can point to when they are in the courtroom defending the various lawsuits over the next year.
3) NCAA declares initial sanctions with the right to come back and pile on more later when all the documents get processed.

aimo
10-22-2015, 08:34 PM
Well, she does resemble Winston ...

Al Czervik:
Last time I saw a mouth like that, it had a hook in it.

swood1000
10-22-2015, 09:03 PM
Thanks, tried to Spork but must spread the love first.

I guess it's just up to us to beat the snot out of them. Ok.
Thanks. So it seems to me that the longer the enforcement staff takes to amend the NOA the more infractions they are likely to be adding, or at least the greater the pains they are taking to frame the charges in just the right way to make them stick. Therefore, we at the northern end of Rt. 501 should not be unhappy if they do not complete this process quickly. The longer they take, the greater the probable final penalties, and it won't affect the 2016 Tournament in any event.

Henderson
10-22-2015, 10:53 PM
It means that at least we know that UNC has finished its investigation and submitted its findings to the enforcement staff. There seem to be three possibilities.

(a) Enforcement staff will decide to conduct its own extended investigation. Seems unlikely. If they were going to do this they probably would have done so starting in August when they received the basic facts surrounding the new infractions.

(b) Enforcement staff will amend the NOA but in a way that is not significant or concludes that the new infractions are not Level I or II. Also seems unlikely. Activities by Jan Boxill seem like Level I almost by definition, and this infractions seems to be different in kind from the existing "extra benefits" infractions that she is charged with, although maybe it is just one more of the same kind of email that they have plenty of already.

(c) Enforcement staff will amend the NOA to add significant new infraction(s). This will restart the 90 days that UNC has to provide their answer. If UNC submitted the results of their investigation in mid-October and the enforcement staff takes two weeks to come up with a revised NOA then 90 days from November 1 is January 30, 2016, so their response will be due then (and they likely will have finished redacting the new NOA about then as well). Then come 60 days for the enforcement staff to meet with UNC and reply, bringing us to March 30, 2016. They have to give three or four weeks after that for the COI panel to read everything, and then they can have the hearing. If the same amount of time elapses as elapsed in the Syracuse case (127 days after the hearing began) then the decision will be released August 4, 2016.

At any rate, if there is a significant amendment of the NOA, then UNC is not going to miss the tournament in 2016 unless they self-impose. Also, Roy knew what he was talking about when he said that this was not going to affect the tournament in 2016.

So by self-reporting "newly discovered" infractions immediately before its response to the NOA was due, UNC-CH bought itself an entire season of basketball, sanction free. Pretty clever. The strategy may be at the considerable expense of future teams because of the negative overhang of an ongoing NCAA investigation. But I see what they're doing.

OldPhiKap
10-22-2015, 10:55 PM
So by self-reporting "newly discovered" infractions immediately before its response to the NOA was due, UNC-CH bought itself an entire season of basketball, sanction free. Pretty clever.

Yup. But I am sure that the NCAA noted this too. Water finds its own level.

devildeac
10-22-2015, 11:03 PM
So by self-reporting "newly discovered" infractions immediately before its response to the NOA was due, UNC-CH bought itself an entire season of basketball, sanction free. Pretty clever. The strategy may be at the considerable expense of future teams because of the negative overhang of an ongoing NCAA investigation. But I see what they're doing.


Yup. But I am sure that the NCAA noted this too. Water finds its own level.

Aptly titled, perhaps in more ways than one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_holes

Merlindevildog91
10-23-2015, 09:22 AM
Aptly titled, perhaps in more ways than one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_holes

I haven't spread enough love to spork you, DD, but consider yourself praised.

Love the picture and the caption. I expect the caption is there for the sake of those with a sheep u education.

Pghdukie
10-23-2015, 10:28 AM
Citing Al Bundy - "It's only cheating if you get caught"

swood1000
10-23-2015, 10:45 AM
So by self-reporting "newly discovered" infractions immediately before its response to the NOA was due, UNC-CH bought itself an entire season of basketball, sanction free. Pretty clever. The strategy may be at the considerable expense of future teams because of the negative overhang of an ongoing NCAA investigation. But I see what they're doing.
On the bright side, assuming that these were infractions that UNC kept in reserve specifically for this purpose, it's likely that they were serious. That's the only way that UNC could have been sure that the enforcement staff would OK a 60 day pause to investigate, and then issue an amended NOA, together supplying the crucial 150 day additional delay UNC needed to salvage its season. Also on the bright side, the enforcement staff has had an additional 60 days to pore through the evidence and may have added additional infractions and/or cited additional evidence to bolster the original infractions. On the dark side, the "newly discovered" infractions could be infractions that are against individuals, like Jan Boxill, and not against the institution.

swood1000
10-23-2015, 10:53 AM
Aptly titled, perhaps in more ways than one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_holes
Love it. Perhaps the application of the Law of Holes here is this: "If you find that you are UNC, stop it."

swood1000
10-23-2015, 01:53 PM
UNC will likely be releasing a number of other documents shortly. They have received a number of Freedom of Information requests but UNC says that attending to those requests has been delayed because of the request by the News & Observer and The Daily Tar Heel last year for all records provided to Wainstein for his investigation. That was the huge release we saw recently, and that release involved only 200,000 of the 5 million pages that were provided to Wainstein. Don't know how long it will be until they get to the other requests. Maybe they are taking their time on this in order to avoid complying with requests for more sensitive info. The Daily Tar Heel said:


But a check of the website shows many unfulfilled requests, some of which do not involve voluminous records. The N&O, for example, has not received legal and public relations bills from some of the firms UNC has contracted with, nor has UNC responded to a request for any letters of disassociation issued to people involved in the scandal. Both requests are several weeks old.

White said a much more voluminous request has tied up UNC's public records staff. Last year, The N&O requested all records provided to Wainstein for his investigation. (The Daily Tar Heel, UNC's student newspaper, made a similar request.) UNC began releasing those Wednesday, making public roughly 200,000 pages of records. UNC officials say 5 million pages of records were originally provided to Wainstein.

UNC reviewed the records before releasing them, with some names and dates redacted. That review led to UNC identifying the further allegations of misconduct by Boxill. The N&O has requested those particular records be released immediately. http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2015/10/a-year-after-the-wainstein-report-the-ncaa-and-discipline-decisions-loom

BigWayne
10-23-2015, 02:22 PM
UNC will likely be releasing a number of other documents shortly. They have received a number of Freedom of Information requests but UNC says that attending to those requests has been delayed because of the request by the News & Observer and The Daily Tar Heel last year for all records provided to Wainstein for his investigation. That was the huge release we saw recently, and that release involved only 200,000 of the 5 million pages that were provided to Wainstein. Don't know how long it will be until they get to the other requests. Maybe they are taking their time on this in order to avoid complying with requests for more sensitive info. The Daily Tar Heel said:

This week's dump was stated to be of 91,383 out of 1.7 million documents. It will be a very long time before they are done with these requests.

swood1000
10-23-2015, 02:39 PM
This week's dump was stated to be of 91,383 out of 1.7 million documents. It will be a very long time before they are done with these requests.
So if The Daily Tar Heel is to be believed, 91,383 out of 1.7 million documents translates to 200,000 out of 5 million pages. (My Acrobat is still busy converting them to searchable text, which appears to be taking about 10 hours per download, so I can't open them up to count the number of total pages they contain.)

Edit: but with this number of documents it's not hard to understand the high fees that Wainstein charged.

BigWayne
10-23-2015, 02:55 PM
So if The Daily Tar Heel is to be believed, 91,383 out of 1.7 million documents translates to 200,000 out of 5 million pages. (My Acrobat is still busy converting them to searchable text, which appears to be taking about 10 hours per download, so I can't open them up to count the number of total pages they contain.)

Edit: but with this number of documents it's not hard to understand the high fees that Wainstein charged.

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.

Kfanarmy
10-23-2015, 03:05 PM
.....The dates are redacted off of a lot of the emails, many of which it makes no sense why they needed to do so. I was hoping this was a way to flag the ones to look at, but I am not so sure now.....
5602

perhaps one reason to remove the dates/times might be to frustrate attempts to follow the email as they are forwarded, replied to etc. making it more difficult to detail actors and their full roles. If I were investigating, it would make me a wee bit angry.

swood1000
10-23-2015, 03:11 PM
This week's dump was stated to be of 91,383 out of 1.7 million documents. It will be a very long time before they are done with these requests.
They said that the "recently discovered" infractions were discovered in the process of redacting these documents. Perhaps it's not impossible that additional infractions still remain to be found by sharp-eyed inquisitors.

BLPOG
10-23-2015, 03:19 PM
So if The Daily Tar Heel is to be believed, 91,383 out of 1.7 million documents translates to 200,000 out of 5 million pages. (My Acrobat is still busy converting them to searchable text, which appears to be taking about 10 hours per download, so I can't open them up to count the number of total pages they contain.)

Edit: but with this number of documents it's not hard to understand the high fees that Wainstein charged.

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.

swood1000
10-23-2015, 03:42 PM
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).High fees might also follow from an hourly rate of $990 (http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2014/12/wainstein-report-was-latest-to-chronicle-uncs-academic-fraud).

BLPOG
10-23-2015, 03:45 PM
High fees might also follow from an hourly rate of $990 (http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2014/12/wainstein-report-was-latest-to-chronicle-uncs-academic-fraud).

They really should have just hired PackPride, I hear their rate is much lower.

swood1000
10-23-2015, 03:58 PM
They said that the "recently discovered" infractions were discovered in the process of redacting these documents. Perhaps it's not impossible that additional infractions still remain to be found by sharp-eyed inquisitors.
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.

swood1000
10-23-2015, 03:59 PM
They really should have just hired PackPride, I hear their rate is much lower.
Their effectiveness is too high.

OldPhiKap
10-26-2015, 07:29 AM
Bump.

sagegrouse
10-26-2015, 08:53 AM
'My dear, you are ugly, and what’s more, you are disgustingly ugly. But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be disgustingly ugly.'

Winston Churchill


Or something like that...

It was Viscountess Nancy Astor, who gave as good as she got. in this case:

Nancy Astor: "Winston, you are drunk."

Churchill: "And you, madam, are ugly. But I shall be sober in the morning!"

wsb3
10-26-2015, 12:19 PM
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.

Sir Stealth
10-26-2015, 12:23 PM
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.

Sounds like he was probably talking about the Carolina Panthers....

wsb3
10-26-2015, 12:35 PM
Sounds like he was probably talking about the Carolina Panthers...

Uh, no he wasn't..

uh_no
10-26-2015, 12:41 PM
Uh, no he wasn't..

you rang?

wsb3
10-26-2015, 12:42 PM
you rang?

Well played..

Merlindevildog91
10-26-2015, 12:47 PM
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.

The HBC and his former team say hi.

moonpie23
10-26-2015, 01:57 PM
nothing like a PO'd BOG member (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article41447865.html) to possibly reveal some stinky...

sammy3469
10-26-2015, 02:23 PM
So let me get this straight. UNC paid Cadwadaler upwards of 2.6 million dollars from Dec 2014 until June 2015 to:


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.

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?

They've also paid 1.8 million for PR related to this mess.

http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/updates/university-responds-to-public-records-requests-for-legal-communications-firm-expenses/

Owen Meany
10-26-2015, 02:28 PM
nothing like a PO'd BOG member (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article41447865.html) to possibly reveal some stinky...

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.

cspan37421
10-26-2015, 02:48 PM
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.

Oh, Owen, it was just a Fraudian Slip.
:D

BigWayne
10-26-2015, 03:17 PM
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.


There are two entities that have technical definitions which are not consistent with what people generally think of when they hear the names.

The University of North Carolina (http://www.northcarolina.edu/) is the full system of 17 campuses, including NCSU, ECU, etc.
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (http://www.unc.edu/) is just the campus in Chapel Hill and is what most people think of when the hear "The University of North Carolina."

Tom Ross, being an employee of the former entity, is referring to that.

trinity92
10-26-2015, 03:26 PM
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.

As someone who has past lives both as a litigation attorney and as electronic discovery director hired by the Cadwaladers of the world (or their clients directly) to structure and execute large document reviews like this, I can tell you the document searching is done as part of the document collection process. Search terms are heavily negotiated between the parties to the action, then an outside company runs the search terms and then pulls all documents with a hit to a database, which is then indexed and integrated with coding forms. There is virtually no human interaction with the documents at this stage, and there are an incredible number of documents that get pulled to the database and that must be reviewed by human eyes that contain search term hits that are not truly responsive to the document request-- imagine every piece of spam or personal email you get, then imagine how many might have words like basketball, attendance, paper, class, roy, williams, ugly, shade, blue . . . you get the idea. The law firm then hires a team of 10 - 100+ outside attorneys to review the documents to see if they're truly responsive to the inquiry, with broad issue checkboxes to help further sort the issues of the case. All documents deemed unresponsive are put aside and in the vast majority of cases will never see the light of day again. All responsive documents are then subject to secondary review by law firm associates.

The initial collection and indexing of data is a separate and substantial cost-- must admit I never paid one of these bills, so I can't estimate cost per document, but could approach or even surpass the cost of the first pass review by contract attorneys. Cost for the first pass team of attorneys is somewhere between .45 and .55 per document, so 200,000 documents would cost around $100,000 for the first pass. The second pass will be between 5% and 20% of the original document count depending on how pointed the search terms were and how responsive the documents were, with the big firm's junior associates charging $300+/hr. and a couple senior associates overseeing at $500+/hr. and conferring with the $1K+/hr. partner on the case as needed. It gets expensive quickly.

madscavenger
10-26-2015, 03:28 PM
..........In a case such as this, with long-standing academic fraud by the University............




Oh, Owen, it was just a Fraudian Slip.


If he actually knew about the academic fraud ( :rolleyes: ) , then it was a Faustian slip.

swood1000
10-26-2015, 03:50 PM
As someone who has past lives both as a litigation attorney and as electronic discovery director hired by the Cadwaladers of the world (or their clients directly) to structure and execute large document reviews like this, I can tell you the document searching is done as part of the document collection process. Search terms are heavily negotiated between the parties to the action, then an outside company runs the search terms and then pulls all documents with a hit to a database, which is then indexed and integrated with coding forms. There is virtually no human interaction with the documents at this stage, and there are an incredible number of documents that get pulled to the database and that must be reviewed by human eyes that contain search term hits that are not truly responsive to the document request-- imagine every piece of spam or personal email you get, then imagine how many might have words like basketball, attendance, paper, class, roy, williams, ugly, shade, blue . . . you get the idea. The law firm then hires a team of 10 - 100+ outside attorneys to review the documents to see if they're truly responsive to the inquiry, with broad issue checkboxes to help further sort the issues of the case. All documents deemed unresponsive are put aside and in the vast majority of cases will never see the light of day again. All responsive documents are then subject to secondary review by law firm associates.

The initial collection and indexing of data is a separate and substantial cost-- must admit I never paid one of these bills, so I can't estimate cost per document, but could approach or even surpass the cost of the first pass review by contract attorneys. Cost for the first pass team of attorneys is somewhere between .45 and .55 per document, so 200,000 documents would cost around $100,000 for the first pass. The second pass will be between 5% and 20% of the original document count depending on how pointed the search terms were and how responsive the documents were, with the big firm's junior associates charging $300+/hr. and a couple senior associates overseeing at $500+/hr. and conferring with the $1K+/hr. partner on the case as needed. It gets expensive quickly.
Meanwhile, UNC says (http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/updates/university-responds-to-public-records-requests-for-legal-communications-firm-expenses/) that it is spending $600,000 per year just handling regular public records requests. Not clear if this includes the massive requests by the News & Observer and The Daily Tar Heel for all of the Wainstein documents.

sammy3469
10-26-2015, 03:54 PM
Meanwhile, UNC says (http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/updates/university-responds-to-public-records-requests-for-legal-communications-firm-expenses/) that it is spending $600,000 per year just handling regular public records requests. Not clear if this includes the massive requests by the News & Observer and The Daily Tar Heel for all of the Wainstein documents.

That's in addition to the 2.6 million they paid Cadwalader to process the N&O/DTH request. Of course that request was completed in June, so UNC's been sitting on the documents.

BLPOG
10-26-2015, 04:36 PM
As someone who has past lives both as a litigation attorney and as electronic discovery director hired by the Cadwaladers of the world (or their clients directly) to structure and execute large document reviews like this, I can tell you the document searching is done as part of the document collection process. Search terms are heavily negotiated between the parties to the action, then an outside company runs the search terms and then pulls all documents with a hit to a database, which is then indexed and integrated with coding forms. There is virtually no human interaction with the documents at this stage, and there are an incredible number of documents that get pulled to the database and that must be reviewed by human eyes that contain search term hits that are not truly responsive to the document request-- imagine every piece of spam or personal email you get, then imagine how many might have words like basketball, attendance, paper, class, roy, williams, ugly, shade, blue . . . you get the idea. The law firm then hires a team of 10 - 100+ outside attorneys to review the documents to see if they're truly responsive to the inquiry, with broad issue checkboxes to help further sort the issues of the case. All documents deemed unresponsive are put aside and in the vast majority of cases will never see the light of day again. All responsive documents are then subject to secondary review by law firm associates.

The initial collection and indexing of data is a separate and substantial cost-- must admit I never paid one of these bills, so I can't estimate cost per document, but could approach or even surpass the cost of the first pass review by contract attorneys. Cost for the first pass team of attorneys is somewhere between .45 and .55 per document, so 200,000 documents would cost around $100,000 for the first pass. The second pass will be between 5% and 20% of the original document count depending on how pointed the search terms were and how responsive the documents were, with the big firm's junior associates charging $300+/hr. and a couple senior associates overseeing at $500+/hr. and conferring with the $1K+/hr. partner on the case as needed. It gets expensive quickly.

Wow. Thanks for the insight!

OldPhiKap
10-26-2015, 04:39 PM
As someone who has past lives both as a litigation attorney and as electronic discovery director hired by the Cadwaladers of the world (or their clients directly) to structure and execute large document reviews like this, I can tell you the document searching is done as part of the document collection process. Search terms are heavily negotiated between the parties to the action, then an outside company runs the search terms and then pulls all documents with a hit to a database, which is then indexed and integrated with coding forms. There is virtually no human interaction with the documents at this stage, and there are an incredible number of documents that get pulled to the database and that must be reviewed by human eyes that contain search term hits that are not truly responsive to the document request-- imagine every piece of spam or personal email you get, then imagine how many might have words like basketball, attendance, paper, class, roy, williams, ugly, shade, blue . . . you get the idea. The law firm then hires a team of 10 - 100+ outside attorneys to review the documents to see if they're truly responsive to the inquiry, with broad issue checkboxes to help further sort the issues of the case. All documents deemed unresponsive are put aside and in the vast majority of cases will never see the light of day again. All responsive documents are then subject to secondary review by law firm associates.

The initial collection and indexing of data is a separate and substantial cost-- must admit I never paid one of these bills, so I can't estimate cost per document, but could approach or even surpass the cost of the first pass review by contract attorneys. Cost for the first pass team of attorneys is somewhere between .45 and .55 per document, so 200,000 documents would cost around $100,000 for the first pass. The second pass will be between 5% and 20% of the original document count depending on how pointed the search terms were and how responsive the documents were, with the big firm's junior associates charging $300+/hr. and a couple senior associates overseeing at $500+/hr. and conferring with the $1K+/hr. partner on the case as needed. It gets expensive quickly.

To echo this, they are considering changes to the federal rules of civil procedure to deal with the outrageous cost of electronic discovery.

trinity92
10-26-2015, 05:05 PM
To echo this, they are considering changes to the federal rules of civil procedure to deal with the outrageous cost of electronic discovery.

The thing is, discovery has gotten much cheaper in the last 10 years or so. Used to be, the big firm would hire a team of temporary attorneys themselves, then bill the client multiples of their cost-- it was a real profit center for the big firms. Only more recently have clients started hiring the ediscovery teams themselves, rather than through their lawyers, knocking costs way down. So too, the more sophisticated searches and indexing have reduced the number of documents that even get seen by human eyes enormously, knocking down the number of attorney hours spent on review.

OldPhiKap
10-26-2015, 05:12 PM
The thing is, discovery has gotten much cheaper in the last 10 years or so. Used to be, the big firm would hire a team of temporary attorneys themselves, then bill the client multiples of their cost-- it was a real profit center for the big firms. Only more recently have clients started hiring the ediscovery teams themselves, rather than through their lawyers, knocking costs way down. So too, the more sophisticated searches and indexing have reduced the number of documents that even get seen by human eyes enormously, knocking down the number of attorney hours spent on review.

True, although they still need to be reviewed by counsel before going out. You need to review for privileged material, and then you also need to know what is going out the door so you know the relevant facts. And the other side has to have their lawyers review whatever is produced too. It is a pretty burdensome process that can really spin out of hand relative to the amount at issue, which is the basic balance the new rule is seeking to strike.

oldnavy
10-26-2015, 05:31 PM
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.

Funny, I just had a UNC customer tell me that they haven't done anything that everyone else hasn't done for years.... and that the NCAA was just trying to make an example out of them. I didn't even bother to correct her, it wouldn't make a bit of difference, they live in a different world....

BD80
10-26-2015, 05:38 PM
nothing like a PO'd BOG member (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article41447865.html) to possibly reveal some stinky...

They didn't get a "harumpf" out of that guy.

wilson
10-26-2015, 06:04 PM
The thing is, discovery has gotten much cheaper in the last 10 years or so. Used to be, the big firm would hire a team of temporary attorneys themselves, then bill the client multiples of their cost-- it was a real profit center for the big firms. Only more recently have clients started hiring the ediscovery teams themselves, rather than through their lawyers, knocking costs way down. So too, the more sophisticated searches and indexing have reduced the number of documents that even get seen by human eyes enormously, knocking down the number of attorney hours spent on review.It also seems like vastly improved search technology would drive these costs down, no?

wsb3
10-26-2015, 06:16 PM
Funny, I just had a UNC customer tell me that they haven't done anything that everyone else hasn't done for years... and that the NCAA was just trying to make an example out of them. I didn't even bother to correct her, it wouldn't make a bit of difference, they live in a different world...

They really do live in another world. I love it when they don't land a recruit & blame it on the NCAA while at the same time say they did not want this guy anyway. My favorite is when some genius at IC says they should sue..yes please sue..Let's start bringing everyone into court & let them face perjury charges if they don't tell the truth.

Consider all the information that has come out & then imagine court where all the parties are brought in like say Crowder..& they testify..

Personally as bad as the academic scandal is at UNC I can't imagine how deep & how bad it really is. There is no way everything has come out. Even the good folks at Pack Pride I don't think have gotten all of out, though I love their passion & what they have been able to accomplish.

MarkD83
10-26-2015, 07:24 PM
So...the front page of DBR has an article about Sean May being hired as an assistant BBall coach at UNC.

Now things get very interesting as mentioned in the article. How many coaches do we recall were fired because they falsified their resumes? Does this whole scandal mean that if Sean May lists he is a graduate of UNC that he is falsifying his resume?

trinity92
10-26-2015, 07:57 PM
It also seems like vastly improved search technology would drive these costs down, no?

Absolutely. OPK is quite right about the need to have your lawyers' eyes on the second pass and beyond and to dive deep enough into the docs to use them and defend against their use. However, great progress has been made to refine searches and use the terms themselves to "predictively code" documents via machine, which has vastly reduced the volume of documents that require a human first pass review. Eventually, that need will
Probably be eliminated.

wsb3
10-26-2015, 07:59 PM
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article41475339.html



Millions spent for defense of something their fan base believes did not occur.

sammy3469
10-26-2015, 08:21 PM
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article41475339.html



Millions spent for defense of something their fan base believes did not occur.

Interestingly, Kane changed his wording from last week from UNC hasn't received an amended NOA or timeline from the NCAA to UNC hasn't gone before the infractions committee.

-jk
10-26-2015, 08:52 PM
It also seems like vastly improved search technology would drive these costs down, no?

Alas, English is still remarkably ambiguous and inscrutable. I suspect algorithms won't be anywhere close to enough for a really long while.

-jk

Henderson
10-26-2015, 09:01 PM
Absolutely. OPK is quite right about the need to have your lawyers' eyes on the second pass and beyond and to dive deep enough into the docs to use them and defend against their use. However, great progress has been made to refine searches and use the terms themselves to "predictively code" documents via machine, which has vastly reduced the volume of documents that require a human first pass review. Eventually, that need will
Probably be eliminated.

Maybe. But it would be malpractice to let search software make the discretionary decisions necessary to comply with FERPA, state privacy laws, attorney-client privilege, medical privileges, and public records laws all at the same time. We may get there one day, but we aren't close today. Like, really not close.

It's a pain in the atlas, but somebody with some training has to look at each page.

And now you know why tuition is high. UNC's base line budget for public records requests may seem astronomical, but it's pretty normal. And it doesn't shock me at all that they are paying this much to comply with requests for these docs. It could be a lot more if they were turning over paper and charging the requesters for the time and documents.

Edit: In fact, as much as I hate to say this, I'm pleasantly surprised that UNC-CH is absorbing the costs of public records production. Maybe that's required in NC, but in every other state with which I'm familiar, the public body producing records gets to charge the requester for the reasonable costs of making the production. That keeps a lot of frivolous or casual requesters from tying up the university with broad requests. Such as this. Another way of putting that is it discourages folks from requesting documents, so there's that.

Duke95
10-26-2015, 09:08 PM
nothing like a PO'd BOG member (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article41447865.html) to possibly reveal some stinky...

When I read that, my first thought was, man, how did the Boggers get dragged into this?

-jk
10-26-2015, 09:10 PM
When I read that, my first thought was, man, how did the Boggers get dragged into this?

Shouldn't it be: "Man, how did the Boggers get dragged into this, too?"

-jk

Jim3k
10-26-2015, 09:40 PM
At some point, probably soon, someone in power at UNC will realize that the cost-benefit ratio is so unfavorable that continuing to fight cannot be justified. Aḹl those documents in the doc-dump will be rendered unnecessary as the University caves to the NCAA sanctions.

I've certainly been the recipient of doc dumps (not this big, of course) but eventually the bean counters spoke. Voila! The case disappeared in an acceptable settlement and the dump turned out to be a big waste of time. These dumps do not usually faze the dumpee. Its lawyers almost always regard the tactic as a sign of the dumper's weakness. So they proceed and in doing so, they call the bluff.

Heck, just categorizing it all is terribly expensive for the dumper. Under court rules (perhaps not the NCAA's rules) those categorizations must be transparent. Judges do not like obfuscation and will step in to correct it. The NCAA won't like it either.

And the bean counters will have forced a practical, less expensive route.

OldPhiKap
10-26-2015, 09:56 PM
BOGgers get blamed for everything.

But they sure as hell did not need cheer sheets.

BD80
10-26-2015, 10:16 PM
BOGgers get blamed for everything.

But they sure as hell did not need cheer sheets.

nor any stinking badges

fidel
10-26-2015, 10:35 PM
nor any stinking badges

They are our big toe.

swood1000
10-27-2015, 11:32 AM
At some point, probably soon, someone in power at UNC will realize that the cost-benefit ratio is so unfavorable that continuing to fight cannot be justified. Aḹl those documents in the doc-dump will be rendered unnecessary as the University caves to the NCAA sanctions.

I've certainly been the recipient of doc dumps (not this big, of course) but eventually the bean counters spoke. Voila! The case disappeared in an acceptable settlement and the dump turned out to be a big waste of time. These dumps do not usually faze the dumpee. Its lawyers almost always regard the tactic as a sign of the dumper's weakness. So they proceed and in doing so, they call the bluff.

Heck, just categorizing it all is terribly expensive for the dumper. Under court rules (perhaps not the NCAA's rules) those categorizations must be transparent. Judges do not like obfuscation and will step in to correct it. The NCAA won't like it either.

And the bean counters will have forced a practical, less expensive route.
But if the request is made for all the docs that were delivered to Wainstein, then UNC can't be blamed for delivering all those docs in response to the FOIA requests. I haven't seen the criteria that Wainstein specified when he requested the docs. If he used overly-broad criteria then that would be part of the problem.

hallcity
10-27-2015, 01:26 PM
At some point, probably soon, someone in power at UNC will realize that the cost-benefit ratio is so unfavorable that continuing to fight cannot be justified. Aḹl those documents in the doc-dump will be rendered unnecessary as the University caves to the NCAA sanctions.

I've certainly been the recipient of doc dumps (not this big, of course) but eventually the bean counters spoke. Voila! The case disappeared in an acceptable settlement and the dump turned out to be a big waste of time. These dumps do not usually faze the dumpee. Its lawyers almost always regard the tactic as a sign of the dumper's weakness. So they proceed and in doing so, they call the bluff.

Heck, just categorizing it all is terribly expensive for the dumper. Under court rules (perhaps not the NCAA's rules) those categorizations must be transparent. Judges do not like obfuscation and will step in to correct it. The NCAA won't like it either.

And the bean counters will have forced a practical, less expensive route.

It's too late for UNC. It's not like it's litigation where you can turn off your document requests by settling the case. They're going to have to deal with the FOIA requests from the public even if they settle with the NCAA.

MChambers
10-27-2015, 02:10 PM
Absolutely. OPK is quite right about the need to have your lawyers' eyes on the second pass and beyond and to dive deep enough into the docs to use them and defend against their use. However, great progress has been made to refine searches and use the terms themselves to "predictively code" documents via machine, which has vastly reduced the volume of documents that require a human first pass review. Eventually, that need will
Probably be eliminated.
Yes, improved technology is definitely driving these costs down. On the other hand, the growth of the use of electronic communications is creating more and more documents that need to be produced in litigation or in response to requests from regulatory agencies (this is not just a cost of litigation, but of being in a regulated industry). Thirty years ago, you would not have had anywhere near the volume of documents that you have today.

BigWayne
10-27-2015, 03:50 PM
It's too late for UNC. It's not like it's litigation where you can turn off your document requests by settling the case. They're going to have to deal with the FOIA requests from the public even if they settle with the NCAA.

If they finally admit they cheated and self impose a big whopping sledgehammer on Roy, et. al., then the FOIA requests will slow to an insignificant trickle. In other words, they will still be sinking time and money into FOIA requests for years.

BD80
10-27-2015, 04:16 PM
It is somewhat amusing that unc's tactics could REALLY come back and bite them in the tarheel.

By inundating Wainstein with documents, they hoped to bury any indiscretions in a pile of virtual paper. FOI requests could be drawn out until things (carolina) blew over.

Now, by unc slow playing the NOI, the FOI requests are catching up and the Pack is on the hunt.

Because unc refused to admit there was fraud in keeping athletes eligible, any new evidence could really bite them. I wonder if anyone will have looked through the documents as closely as PackPride will.

sammy3469
10-27-2015, 04:51 PM
It is somewhat amusing that unc's tactics could REALLY come back and bite them in the tarheel.

By inundating Wainstein with documents, they hoped to bury any indiscretions in a pile of virtual paper. FOI requests could be drawn out until things (carolina) blew over.Now, by unc slow playing the NOI, the FOI requests are catching up and the Pack is on the hunt.

Because unc refused to admit there was fraud in keeping athletes eligible, any new evidence could really bite them. I wonder if anyone will have looked through the documents as closely as PackPride will.

Well at least on the FOIA Wainstein e-mail requests they should be about done paying outside firms since they paid his firm 2.6 million to process them.

I'm also guessing UNC is re-examining every page to make sure nothing really damaging is in them. Wainstein's firm was presumably done in June, so it took them 3.5 months to release what the did (which is a low percentage of the total).

Henderson
10-27-2015, 07:19 PM
But if the request is made for all the docs that were delivered to Wainstein, then UNC can't be blamed for delivering all those docs in response to the FOIA requests.

You'd think so, but the two are different. Delivery to Wainstein was protected by attorney-client privilege, which is permitted by FERPA without redaction; delivery to the public is what requires the screening.

devildeac
10-27-2015, 10:42 PM
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article41475339.html



Millions spent for defense of something their fan base believes did not occur.

QFE. This one bears repeating/bumping. $10M+ spent on this circus/disaster/whatever one wishes to call it. Astounding.

moonpie23
10-28-2015, 07:49 AM
QFE. This one bears repeating/bumping. $10M+ spent on this circus/disaster/whatever one wishes to call it. Astounding.

i have poor impulse control, so i'll call em as i see em...

camion
10-28-2015, 08:39 AM
i have poor impulse control, so i'll call em as i see em...

I see it more as:

5623

swood1000
10-28-2015, 10:14 AM
http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by swood1000 http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?p=833458#post833458)
But if the request is made for all the docs that were delivered to Wainstein, then UNC can't be blamed for delivering all those docs in response to the FOIA requests.
You'd think so, but the two are different. Delivery to Wainstein was protected by attorney-client privilege, which is permitted by FERPA without redaction; delivery to the public is what requires the screening.
But they are the same docs that must be delivered, except that they must be redacted when delivered in response to FOIA.

Listen to Quants
10-28-2015, 10:57 AM
Alas, English is still remarkably ambiguous and inscrutable. I suspect algorithms won't be anywhere close to enough for a really long while.

-jk

Maybe. But there are some algorithms operating in your (probably left) cerebral cortical hemisphere that do a fair job. :)

BD80
10-28-2015, 11:00 AM
I see it more as:

5623

How about a landfill fire spreading toward a nuclear waste dump?

http://www.triplepundit.com/2015/10/st-louis-landfill-fire-near-nuclear-waste-dump-poses-concerns/

PackMan97
10-28-2015, 11:36 AM
I know there are new Weinstein stuff....but a few oldies have been making the rounds on PackPride and I think they are worth repeating here for anyone who might be questioning whether or not Carolina should get the Death Penalty.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9B8ONIIQAQQlA-.png

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9B8O1iIIAAHCAC.png

http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/10/23/sports/UNCrip/UNCrip-articleLarge.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CO6qE6TUkAAUte2.png

OldPhiKap
10-28-2015, 11:44 AM
Appreciate the reposts of these. Always good to keep the facts up front.

devildeac
10-28-2015, 11:59 AM
I know there are new Weinstein stuff...but a few oldies have been making the rounds on PackPride and I think they are worth repeating here for anyone who might be questioning whether or not Carolina should get the Death Penalty.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9B8ONIIQAQQlA-.png

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9B8O1iIIAAHCAC.png

http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/10/23/sports/UNCrip/UNCrip-articleLarge.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CO6qE6TUkAAUte2.png

I'm ASSuming all those are regarding WBB, soccer, swimming and diving and fencing SA so I really don't see any problems there. Run along...

5624

Seriously, nice finds. Thanks for sharing!

PackMan97
10-28-2015, 12:06 PM
I'm ASSuming all those are regarding WBB, soccer, swimming and diving and fencing SA so I really don't see any problems there. Run along...

Seriously, nice finds. Thanks for sharing!

It's worth noting the second email is to Wayne Walden and AFAIK, he only did MBB.

These were "found" back when the original Weinstein report was released, but I think it's worth bringing them back up because many seem to be forgetting just how rotten the core is over at UNC.

Note that Stroman in EXSS is cited as a source of paper courses and she is now featured prominently in UNC's half-time "Advertising" spot for football games. The sheer audacity that UNC has tells us that they are not repentant about ANYTHING that has happened. The cancer has metastasized at gone to their heart and their brain and they have no desire to get better. Unless we continue to shine the light on them and demand action nothing is going to change.

sammy3469
10-28-2015, 12:20 PM
It's worth noting the second email is to Wayne Walden and AFAIK, he only did MBB.

These were "found" back when the original Weinstein report was released, but I think it's worth bringing them back up because many seem to be forgetting just how rotten the core is over at UNC.

Note that Stroman in EXSS is cited as a source of paper courses and she is now featured prominently in UNC's half-time "Advertising" spot for football games. The sheer audacity that UNC has tells us that they are not repentant about ANYTHING that has happened. The cancer has metastasized at gone to their heart and their brain and they have no desire to get better. Unless we continue to shine the light on them and demand action nothing is going to change.

I mean I guess it's not that surprising that you'd filter athletes to EXSS classes, but if you wade through the e-mail dump at all, it's sort of striking how much that program is relied on to keep athletes eligible. There's a reason Wainstein was just tasked with looking at AFAM.

PackMan97
10-28-2015, 12:23 PM
I mean I guess it's not that surprising that you'd filter athletes to EXSS classes, but if you wade through the e-mail dump at all, it's sort of striking how much that program is relied on to keep athletes eligible. There's a reason Wainstein was just tasked with looking at AFAM.

One has to wonder how far this wormed it's way into PHIL, with Boxil being a lecturer there and her husband being a full professor in the department.

It boggles the mind that UNC has avoided an independent investigation that looked at the entire institution. Remember, everyone hired so far has been hired and paid for by people at UNC. /smh

swood1000
10-28-2015, 01:02 PM
The sheer audacity that UNC has tells us that they are not repentant about ANYTHING that has happened. The cancer has metastasized at gone to their heart and their brain and they have no desire to get better. Unless we continue to shine the light on them and demand action nothing is going to change.
Demands and shining lights will not change anything either. Only vacating championships speaks in a language that will be comprehended.

jimsumner
10-28-2015, 01:14 PM
These emails shred the narrative that this isn't an athletic scandal because non-athletes took these classes when clearly the non-athletes were a cynical screen designed to protect the athletes.

For years and years and years I believed Carolina was one of the good guys, a program that did it the right way. Reading this kind of stuff just makes my skin crawl.

Indoor66
10-28-2015, 01:19 PM
These emails shred the narrative that this isn't an athletic scandal because non-athletes took these classes when clearly the non-athletes were a cynical screen designed to protect the athletes.

For years and years and years I believed Carolina was one of the good guys, a program that did it the right way. Reading this kind of stuff just makes my skin crawl.

I believe that the facts reveal that they were not the good guys - at least since the very early 90's. Maybe our back-to-back had something to do with that.

DukieInKansas
10-28-2015, 02:58 PM
I know there are new Weinstein stuff...but a few oldies have been making the rounds on PackPride and I think they are worth repeating here for anyone who might be questioning whether or not Carolina should get the Death Penalty.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9B8ONIIQAQQlA-.png

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9B8O1iIIAAHCAC.png

http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/10/23/sports/UNCrip/UNCrip-articleLarge.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CO6qE6TUkAAUte2.png

Best phrase in the first email: "and we have a little bit of academic credibility to try uphold." Little is apparently the operative word.

bedeviled
10-28-2015, 02:58 PM
I mean I guess it's not that surprising that you'd filter athletes to EXSS classes, but if you wade through the e-mail dump at all, it's sort of striking how much that program is relied on to keep athletes eligible. There's a reason Wainstein was just tasked with looking at AFAM.
IIRC, the focus on AFAM was actually set up by Gov. Martin. That "investigation" was to explain the anomaly of grades being given and classes being taught by an unknown source (which turned out to be Crowder). That investigation dismissed other departments because someone, like Boxill, affirmed that the class was taught and that they assigned the grades. It was not of interest that the grades were bogus, only that a designated professor was giving them (regardless of known oddities like athlete clustering, grade inflation, no meeting times, abnormal number of classes taught by instructor, frequent grade changes, frequent drop/add, etc).

The Wainstein "investigation" was a follow-up to the Martin one and, thus, continued to isolate AFAM from the onset. In effect, Wainstein highlighted the athletics involvement within the AFAM fraud...not the Crowder/Nyangoro element within an athletics-academic fraud. That investigation still hasn't happened and likely won't as there is no policing body. But, that's okay because PHIL, DRAM, EXSS, NAVS, etc have already moved forward.

SilkyJ
10-28-2015, 05:25 PM
So by self-reporting "newly discovered" infractions immediately before its response to the NOA was due, UNC-CH bought itself an entire season of basketball, sanction free. Pretty clever. The strategy may be at the considerable expense of future teams because of the negative overhang of an ongoing NCAA investigation. But I see what they're doing.

Surely you're not just coming to this conclusion now? The second they self-reported I thought we all assumed it was to kick the can down the road in the hopes of sneaking in a good bball season this year.


Yup. But I am sure that the NCAA noted this too. Water finds its own level.

Optimistic thinking, but there's nothing out there to indicate the NCAA is going to sanction before the bball season is over. Every time someone guesses on a timeline, it just gets pushed back. Some, but not most, even thought we could see something before this season even started. Ha.

Hell they've had a scandal brewing there for 4-5 years--why do so many people seem to think the other shoe drop is just around the corner?? Wake up guys and gals, you've got a spineless enforcement agency, an institution hell-bent on deflection and stall-ball, and years of watching the can be kicked down the road.


Al Czervik:
Last time I saw a mouth like that, it had a hook in it.

Hopefully UNC's season looks a little like the dance of the living dead.

75Crazie
10-28-2015, 10:35 PM
I believe that the facts reveal that they were not the good guys - at least since the very early 90's. Maybe our back-to-back had something to do with that.
No "maybe" to it. It very probably would have happened anyway ... but I think the Duke success of the time was a very high motivating factor in getting it going.

94duke
10-29-2015, 12:03 PM
No "maybe" to it. It very probably would have happened anyway ... but I think the Duke success of the time was a very high motivating factor in getting it going.
I knew the Holes would find a way to blame Duke for this mess.

"If Duke hadn't won back-to-back, the Carolina Way would be intact." ;) :p :rolleyes:

BD80
10-29-2015, 01:27 PM
I knew the Holes would find a way to blame Duke for this mess.

"If Duke hadn't won back-to-back, the Carolina Way would be intact." ;) :p :rolleyes:

The carolina way is intact.

It has simply been revealed.

wilson
10-29-2015, 01:53 PM
The carolina way is intact.

It has simply been revealed.

5630

bob blue devil
10-29-2015, 10:09 PM
most of the discussion of timing here has focused on the BB season, but with duke now close to the only thing standing between unc and an acc championship game appearance, the issue is not a small point for football. that game is 12/5 and they'd be one win away from a New Year's 6 bowl. if the ncaa surprises us by resolving this in 2015 and does it at an awkward moment, things could get a bit complicated... i guess this is farfetched - resolution not happening in 2015 and not beating duke.

jimsumner
10-29-2015, 10:27 PM
most of the discussion of timing here has focused on the BB season, but with duke now close to the only thing standing between unc and an acc championship game appearance, the issue is not a small point for football. that game is 12/5 and they'd be one win away from a New Year's 6 bowl. if the ncaa surprises us by resolving this in 2015 and does it at an awkward moment, things could get a bit complicated... i guess this is farfetched - resolution not happening in 2015 and not beating duke.

Keep in mind that Carolina has a road game against a VT team that should be fighting for a bowl bid and an NC State team that has talent and seems to show up for Carolina. So, they do have some other potential roadblocks.

bob blue devil
10-30-2015, 06:55 AM
Keep in mind that Carolina has a road game against a VT team that should be fighting for a bowl bid and an NC State team that has talent and seems to show up for Carolina. So, they do have some other potential roadblocks.

agreed that they don't have gimme's on their remaining schedule. they would need to drop 2 of their last 3 (VT, NCSU, Miami) and Duke or Pitt would need to go undefeated for UNC to not win the coastal if they beat duke. running the numbers, I'd say that's around a 20% probability - maybe too liberal use of the word "close" on my part. :confused:

PackMan97
10-30-2015, 08:45 AM
agreed that they don't have gimme's on their remaining schedule. they would need to drop 2 of their last 3 (VT, NCSU, Miami) and Duke or Pitt would need to go undefeated for UNC to not win the coastal if they beat duke. running the numbers, I'd say that's around a 20% probability - maybe too liberal use of the word "close" on my part. :confused:

The fact they still field a football team makes it "too close" for me. Their entire athletic department should have been nuked years ago.

Sadly, cheating wins.

jimsumner
10-31-2015, 04:04 PM
In true scandal news... The N&O has a new editorial up calling out UNC for the big $10M coverup. (http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/editorials/article41995485.html)

The best and cheapest response would have been not to circle the wagons and to try to defend the indefensible, but to conduct a straightforward, intense investigation, release all the findings and offer in detail a response not designed to spin the story in the best light but to expose the situation to the brightest light.

Instead, the university first – through neglect, a lack of attention, a desire for athletics success and the lackadaisical attitude of administrators – allowed the scandal to happen and, second, wasted years and millions of dollars trying to pretend it didn’t really happen the way the facts show that it did.


Pretty good summary.

porcophile
11-01-2015, 10:31 PM
How did this thread get off the front page?

moonpie23
11-01-2015, 10:46 PM
how has the NCAA not sent Dwayne Johnson down to the dump to "retrieve" the banners?

captmojo
11-02-2015, 09:59 AM
5630

And at the main entrance, the sign read,

"KNOCKER BROKEN - USE BELL"

:D

Neals384
11-03-2015, 10:52 AM
Today's AP story about the Tar Heels preseason #1 ranking included this bit on the scandal:

"They enter this season under the shadow of an ongoing NCAA investigation into the school’s long-running academic fraud scandal focused on courses with significant athlete enrollments.

Neither Williams nor his program are specifically cited for a violation among five NCAA charges, and it’s unclear whether the program or school will face penalties in a case likely to linger into the spring."

Nice to know UNC has someone writing for the AP.

Of note: Eight previous #1 preseason rankings for UNC and only two of those led to a championship.

Indoor66
11-03-2015, 11:46 AM
A bit of a fun fact from PackPride:



BDevilU (http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=178&up=BDevilU)
Waterboy
1423 posts this site
Ignore this Member (http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=178&f=2515&t=14183646&p=49&iu=BDevilU&stm=0&sto=MS_176626998)
Send Private Message (http://mbd.scout.com/themes/scout2/pm.aspx?s=178&to=BDevilU)

Posted: Today 10:47 AM
Re: Cheater Continuing Saga (strongly recommend page 2)Tuesday morning FUN WITH STATS: Cheaters Edition


The Tar Heels accumulated 521 men's basketball "wins" during the PROVEN (and UNC acknowledged) cheating era

FIVE HUNDRED TWENTY ONE... out of the program total 2140.

That leaves 1619 (supposedly legit) wins...

placing them #27 on the revised all-time wins list, just ahead of the Bradley Braves, and trailing now #25 NC State and #26 Villanova.

diablesseblu
11-03-2015, 12:55 PM
The "N&O" now has help in reviewing the information that UNC has released.

http://www.wral.com/unc-academic-fraud-records-now-searchable-on-wral-app/15055309/

Indoor66
11-03-2015, 01:27 PM
The "N&O" now has help in reviewing the information that UNC has released.

http://www.wral.com/unc-academic-fraud-records-now-searchable-on-wral-app/15055309/

That ought to be a fun toy! uncheat deserves death. The dean smith cheating scheme deserves full disclosure.

PackMan97
11-03-2015, 02:44 PM
A "goodie" from the recent document dump. This is about as "easy" as it gets.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2483790/pages/pdf1a-final-web007-p300-large.gif

Dr. Rosenrosen
11-03-2015, 02:53 PM
^^^^^^ The sinister part seems to me to be the redaction of information that clearly has no relationship to a student's name. Why redact the email author's name? Why redact the date of the email? Why redact the course numbers? If redaction is allowable to protect the identity of students, why are all the other redactions necessary and allowable?

Dr. Rosenrosen
11-03-2015, 02:56 PM
The "N&O" now has help in reviewing the information that UNC has released.

http://www.wral.com/unc-academic-fraud-records-now-searchable-on-wral-app/15055309/
Gotta give WRAL some credit here. I thought they were total UNC homers.

swood1000
11-03-2015, 03:54 PM
^^^^^^ The sinister part seems to me to be the redaction of information that clearly has no relationship to a student's name. Why redact the email author's name? Why redact the date of the email? Why redact the course numbers? If redaction is allowable to protect the identity of students, why are all the other redactions necessary and allowable?
But presumably the redactions weren't made in the versions given to Wainstgein and to the NCAA, so there was nothing hidden from those whose job it was to examine them. On the one hand UNC gets a benefit from redacting the version given to the public in that it is more difficult to make connections. On the other hand, we live in such a litigious society that one "privacy" mistake could be somebody's big payday.

JasonEvans
11-03-2015, 04:08 PM
While that email about the Drama class is hysterical, there is nothing in it that speaks to grade rigging or fraudulent classes. It merely shows the Carolina athletes were eager to find classes that required almost no attendance. While we may find that conduct wrong and flying in the face of the educational mission of a university, it does not strike me as something all that different from what goes on at many, many universities and it certainly does not rise to the level of any kind of NCAA illegal benefit or other violation.

-Jason "the redactions appear to be really gratuitous... what are they hiding here?" Evans

Olympic Fan
11-03-2015, 04:27 PM
While that email about the Drama class is hysterical, there is nothing in it that speaks to grade rigging or fraudulent classes. It merely shows the Carolina athletes were eager to find classes that required almost no attendance. While we may find that conduct wrong and flying in the face of the educational mission of a university, it does not strike me as something all that different from what goes on at many, many universities and it certainly does not rise to the level of any kind of NCAA illegal benefit or other violation.

-Jason "the redactions appear to be really gratuitous... what are they hiding here?" Evans

Jason, I agree that what is cited in the e-mail is the kind of thing that UNC fans have tried to use to dismiss the scandal -- "Every school has easy classes". If this was all there was, UNC's defenders would have a point. Obviously, there is a difference between an easy class like the drama one cited above the phony paper classes that Wainstein detailed.

Your point about the redactions raises something I've pointed out before. UNC keeps saying that men's basketball -- and nobody associated with the program -- was cited by the NCAA. But how do we know that's true when so many names are redacted? E-mails that detail athletes stashed in fraudulent classes could easily involve men's basketball players -- especially the ones coming to and from Wayne Walden (the academic advisor to the men's basketball program ... once described as the "most important man in my program" by Roy Williams).

I mentioned before, that a poster on PackPride built a compelling case that at least one of the redacted e-mails cited by the NCAA was about shenanigans involving Quentin Thomas ... who, of course, played on their 2005 national title team (and in the championship game).

Skitzle
11-03-2015, 04:30 PM
So I did a search for RAW20@uncaa.unc.edu (Roy Williams email address)

Some interesting stuff:
1. Of the 289 Emails that come up, no email documented was received before 2011.

I find that hard to believe...

2. Roy Williams emails, or a selection of them at least, were definitely handed over for the Wainstein Report. You can tell because some emails, like the one linked below come to Roy from places outside of UNC servers. This makes #1 seem even more strange

http://www.wral.com/search-thousands-of-unc-scandal-records/15030171/#41854

3. Roy Williams had an auto response that told people he didnt use email and to contact his Assistant. Nadia Lynch. WHICH IS INSANE

http://www.wral.com/search-thousands-of-unc-scandal-records/15030171/#41463

4. Nadia Lynch sent Roy Williams an EMAIL!!! WTH?? See point 3...http://www.wral.com/search-thousands-of-unc-scandal-records/15030171/#77763

5. The Keyword "Mike Krzyzewski" shows up in 0 searches. :)


EDIT: I DID THE BELOW, NOTHING IS THERE IGNORE
For those wanting to do more digging, here would be some intersting keywords to search for.

1) jholbrook@uncaa.unc.edu -> Roy Williams Assistant 2 Results
2) nlynch@uncaa.unc.edu -> Another Roy Williams Assitant 0 Results... ???

Neals384
11-03-2015, 04:35 PM
While that email about the Drama class is hysterical, there is nothing in it that speaks to grade rigging or fraudulent classes. It merely shows the Carolina athletes were eager to find classes that required almost no attendance. While we may find that conduct wrong and flying in the face of the educational mission of a university, it does not strike me as something all that different from what goes on at many, many universities and it certainly does not rise to the level of any kind of NCAA illegal benefit or other violation.

-Jason "the redactions appear to be really gratuitous... what are they hiding here?" Evans

Oh, Jason, what flavor of heel weed you been smokin'? Repeat after me: "Everybody does it". :p

BLPOG
11-03-2015, 04:49 PM
For anyone searching through the document release, you might want to take a look at some of the emails and other documents that mention learning disability testing and the accommodations provided to students. Some of these documents include guidelines for selecting athletes for testing as well as a special fund set up to finance their testing. My limited analysis leads me to believe that it might provide another impermissible benefit angle. For example, UNC's guidelines state that any scholarship or revenue sport athlete should be granted testing unconditionally, but other athletes had to be specially granted permission, and the fund was specifically for athletes. Learning disability status granted athletes huge academic accommodations, including extra time on tests, special note-taking assistants and the like, and non-standard course substitutions (used heavily for math and foreign language requirements).

Additionally, the testing occurred for many years through someone named Lyn Johnson. Apparently she left the company that UNC hired for testing to start her own business around the 2009-2010 to 2010-2011 time frame, and UNC decided to stick with her rather than the original company. Remember also that according to former UNC football player Tydreke Powell, players were sent to do testing with the explicit purpose of failing these tests, an allegation that was corroborated at the time by other UNC football players on Twitter who foolishly attacked Powell by insisting on his complicity. Moreover, according to a News & Observer article from several months ago, UNC finally terminated their relationship with Lyn Johnson in an abrupt fashion - it appears that either people discovered something suspicious or she might have furnished Mary Willingham with some data.

I've got notes on page numbers for these things somewhere but since there's searchable text online now y'all can probably find it anyway.

BigWayne
11-03-2015, 05:08 PM
I've got notes on page numbers for these things somewhere but since there's searchable text online now y'all can probably find it anyway.

From the WRAL search tool, can you tell which page and which doc something comes from? For example, I was doing searches on "guest coach" and I found a page that bears followup to see who was sending it, which is presumably on the page before or after.
5665

MChambers
11-03-2015, 05:24 PM
I used the search term "Coach K" and was gratified to see that Sylvia Hatchell had an email from Coaching Toolbox that featured great coaching tips from Coach K.

devildeac
11-03-2015, 05:28 PM
I used the search term "Coach K" and was gratified to see that Sylvia Hatchell had an email from Coaching Toolbox that featured great coaching tips from Coach K.

Sadly, I'd wager it didn't contain any sartorial suggestions:rolleyes:.

sagegrouse
11-03-2015, 05:38 PM
Not directing this at any particular poster, but aren't you folks worried that reading hundreds or thousands of UNC emails might result in mental impairment?

devildeac
11-03-2015, 05:54 PM
Not directing this at any particular poster, but aren't you folks worried that reading hundreds or thousands of UNC emails might result in mental impairment?

Good point. Look what has happened to all the regular readers and posters at IC over the years.:p

PackMan97
11-03-2015, 06:08 PM
While that email about the Drama class is hysterical, there is nothing in it that speaks to grade rigging or fraudulent classes. It merely shows the Carolina athletes were eager to find classes that required almost no attendance. While we may find that conduct wrong and flying in the face of the educational mission of a university, it does not strike me as something all that different from what goes on at many, many universities and it certainly does not rise to the level of any kind of NCAA illegal benefit or other violation.

-Jason "the redactions appear to be really gratuitous... what are they hiding here?" Evans

The main issue I see is that these ridiculously easy courses devoid of any academic content exited...and weren't enough to keep UNC athletes eligible!

BTW - Ask Harrick at UGa whether a class could be too easy for the NCAA.

MarkD83
11-03-2015, 06:59 PM
So I did a search for RAW20@uncaa.unc.edu (Roy Williams email address)

3. Roy Williams had an auto response that told people he didnt use email and to contact his Assistant. Nadia Lynch. WHICH IS INSANE




So that just proves that Roy is out of touch with the current generation of players. No wonder he can't get any recruits. He did not get stupid over the past several years just out of touch.

BLPOG
11-03-2015, 07:05 PM
From the WRAL search tool, can you tell which page and which doc something comes from? For example, I was doing searches on "guest coach" and I found a page that bears followup to see who was sending it, which is presumably on the page before or after.
5665

I've only glanced at the tool so far, not used it, so I can't say whether it's possible to get page numbers from it. A couple guys on Pack Pride put together a full set of converted documents that you could use for searching, but their OCR software failed on some of the emails so you might miss something here and there.

I've been working on a separate text-searchable conversion but only have doc 1A complete. In that document, there are mentions of Stroman (EXSS prof) and "guest coaches" on pages 2089, 13860, and 22423. Stroman was almost certainly involved in much the same manner as Boxill but doesn't have as obviously damning evidence against her.

Ima Facultiwyfe
11-03-2015, 08:54 PM
So that just proves that Roy is out of touch with the current generation of players. No wonder he can't get any recruits. He did not get stupid over the past several years just out of touch.

That just means he doesn't use THAT particular email address. You can't tell me he doesn't use email. What a maroon, that one.
Love, Ima

madscavenger
11-04-2015, 02:51 AM
..........................aren't you folks worried that reading hundreds or thousands of UNC emails might result in mental impairment?

We'll get by. Some of us, however, are a little concerned about imminent challenges to your well being, viz http://tinyurl.com/on85znk

:eek:

madscavenger
11-04-2015, 04:50 AM
Shouldn't Roy be wearing an orange jumpsuit or something.

BD80
11-04-2015, 07:13 AM
That just means he doesn't use THAT particular email address. You can't tell me he doesn't use email. What a maroon, that one.
Love, Ima

No "bless his heart?"

PackMan97
11-04-2015, 08:11 AM
Lots of great stuff being found by Pack Pride...

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2487546/pages/pdf3a-final-web060-p91-large.gif

sagegrouse
11-04-2015, 08:16 AM
We'll get by. Some of us, however, are a little concerned about imminent challenges to your well being, viz http://tinyurl.com/on85znk

:eek:

Thank you for your concern. There is also a hunting season on (ahem) moi in both Colorado and Wyoming. Biologists have told me with a straight face that hunting pressure is not harmful to the Sage Grouse population. Well, Dr. Biologist, give me a gun, and we'll see what "hunting pressure" does to the population of biologists.

whereinthehellami
11-04-2015, 08:18 AM
PackMan97 that is awesome. It is like UNC was pantsed and is just standing there for the amusement of everyone else. I love it. Thanks UNC!

rocketeli
11-04-2015, 08:45 AM
Lots of great stuff being found by Pack Pride...

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2487546/pages/pdf3a-final-web060-p91-large.gif

I'm sure UNC has dealt with this pressing problem, and educated all staff NOT to use email. It's amazing really that in the 21st century so many people remain clueless about how accessible and permanent electronic media are. Roy (in reference to some other posts) is neither stupid nor a Luddite. He knows better than to leave a trail.

OldPhiKap
11-04-2015, 08:54 AM
Lots of great stuff being found by Pack Pride...

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2487546/pages/pdf3a-final-web060-p91-large.gif

I love it -- the sender first talks about passing two players who should have failed, then suggests that others discuss "academic integrity."

You can't make this stuff up.

RepoMan
11-04-2015, 09:09 AM
This stuff is incredible. And, just think, the only things that are coming out are the things that were published and saved by the least savvy cheaters. Your skilled cheaters would have deleted or, better yet, avoided writing this stuff down at all. It truly is the tip of the iceberg. I wonder if there has been any ability to challenge the quality of UNC's search for electronic records. At a minimum, I would be shocked if there were not clear gaps that suggested the deliberate destruction of records by at least some people.

BD80
11-04-2015, 09:26 AM
... Well, Dr. Biologist, give me a gun, and we'll see what "hunting pressure" does to the population of biologists.

That would be harvesting, not hunting.

Not that I would object ...

CameronBlue
11-04-2015, 09:36 AM
Shouldn't Roy be wearing an orange jumpsuit or something.

Wait a second... you're not suggesting that the Crazies should dress in Orange jumpsuits with R. Williams stenciled on the front right pocket right beside the Nike swoosh for this year's game in Cameron are you? You're not suggesting they should shuffle in, single file in handcuffs and yell "Yes'm Boss" every time UNC misses a shot are you? Just trying to read between the lines a bit....

Tom B.
11-04-2015, 10:01 AM
I love it -- the sender first talks about passing two players who should have failed, then suggests that others discuss "academic integrity."

You can't make this stuff up.

You left out the part where the sender talks about two other players who likely were cheating and therefore should've been (a) flunked, and (b) kicked out of school (or at least suspended), but lets them slide without even so much as a follow-up inquiry. And then, yeah, talks about "academic integrity."

I brought this out a couple of days ago in a different context, but it seems appropriate again here:

5666

UrinalCake
11-04-2015, 10:08 AM
5667

UrinalCake
11-04-2015, 10:09 AM
5668

sammy3469
11-04-2015, 10:24 AM
This stuff is incredible. And, just think, the only things that are coming out are the things that were published and saved by the least savvy cheaters. Your skilled cheaters would have deleted or, better yet, avoided writing this stuff down at all. It truly is the tip of the iceberg. I wonder if there has been any ability to challenge the quality of UNC's search for electronic records. At a minimum, I would be shocked if there were not clear gaps that suggested the deliberate destruction of records by at least some people.

What gets me is just how widespread the entire scandal is. You have:

1. Professors giving undeserved grades
2. Professors denying admittance because they don't want to get used again
3. Professors giving people like Bridger detailed updates
4. Counselors signing freshmen up early for classes through the registers office (ie UNC administration)
5. The whole learning disability angle

I've always assumed some of this stuff went on, but to see the audacity of some of it and depth/breadth of it is still pretty amazing.

swood1000
11-04-2015, 10:55 AM
5667
Let's not overlook the part starting on the first line that "I wanted to proofread and edit it tonight to make sure the grammar and syntax were correct. While I looked over that..."

5669

Since when have mentors been permitted to edit student papers?

DCHoo
11-04-2015, 10:56 AM
I've only glanced at the tool so far, not used it, so I can't say whether it's possible to get page numbers from it. A couple guys on Pack Pride put together a full set of converted documents that you could use for searching, but their OCR software failed on some of the emails so you might miss something here and there.

I've been working on a separate text-searchable conversion but only have doc 1A complete. In that document, there are mentions of Stroman (EXSS prof) and "guest coaches" on pages 2089, 13860, and 22423. Stroman was almost certainly involved in much the same manner as Boxill but doesn't have as obviously damning evidence against her.



I stumbled on a way to see the whole document - not just the page that the search pulls up.
from firefox (probably works in any browser) - right click the search result page - it is an image - and select 'view image'. then hit the 'back' button. you will then be on the same page in the document/search viewer - except you'll be on a sequential page of the 200,000 thousand total - and you can navigate forward and back with the arrows to see the beginning and end of the document in questiion.

dudog84
11-04-2015, 11:08 AM
Hold it...Bayless is in the Mathematics department. I thought the cheating was confined to AFAM. And Drama. And Philosophy...

What's next? Astrophysics?

Kedsy
11-04-2015, 11:10 AM
What gets me is just how widespread the entire scandal is. You have:

1. Professors giving undeserved grades
2. Professors denying admittance because they don't want to get used again
3. Professors giving people like Bridger detailed updates
4. Counselors signing freshmen up early for classes through the registers office (ie UNC administration)
5. The whole learning disability angle

I've always assumed some of this stuff went on, but to see the audacity of some of it and depth/breadth of it is still pretty amazing.

The thing is, stuff like the above probably happens at a lot of places. What makes the UNC mess distinctive is the fake classes -- no attendance necessary, no professor, one short plagiarized paper graded by a secretary who didn't read the "work" and then makes up a grade based on what the "student" needed to stay eligible -- the further you get away from that, the closer you get to a pseudo-legitimate "everybody does it" defense.

swood1000
11-04-2015, 11:18 AM
I stumbled on a way to see the whole document - not just the page that the search pulls up.
from firefox (probably works in any browser) - right click the search result page - it is an image - and select 'view image'. then hit the 'back' button. you will then be on the same page in the document/search viewer - except you'll be on a sequential page of the 200,000 thousand total - and you can navigate forward and back with the arrows to see the beginning and end of the document in questiion.
It's also possible to do by simply reloading the page. For example if you search for "very good mood" you get five results. Go to the second result which is http://www.wral.com/search-thousands-of-unc-scandal-records/15030171/#4112. Then click reload and instead of looking at 2 of 5 you will be looking at 4,112 of 214,550.

Duke95
11-04-2015, 11:32 AM
Hold it...Bayless is in the Mathematics department. I thought the cheating was confined to AFAM. And Drama. And Philosophy...

What's next? Astrophysics?

Makes sense math would be involved. UNC probably figured out how important it was to teach their "student"-athletes basic math after watching Chris Webber fail it in 1993. ;)

Henderson
11-04-2015, 12:12 PM
The thing is, stuff like the above probably happens at a lot of places. What makes the UNC mess distinctive is the fake classes -- no attendance necessary, no professor, one short plagiarized paper graded by a secretary who didn't read the "work" and then makes up a grade based on what the "student" needed to stay eligible -- the further you get away from that, the closer you get to a pseudo-legitimate "everybody does it" defense.

Yes. Well said. And I suspect that's a subject of conversation at the NCAA. Everything I've seen so far on this matter suggests they really really don't want to go there (academic integrity and easy classes). In fairness, it really is too murky. OTOH in extreme cases, one has to be willing to discern this from that. I think we can agree that UNC's case is an outlier.

PackMan97
11-04-2015, 12:28 PM
Yes. Well said. And I suspect that's a subject of conversation at the NCAA. Everything I've seen so far on this matter suggests they really really don't want to go there (academic integrity and easy classes). In fairness, it really is too murky. OTOH in extreme cases, one has to be willing to discern this from that. I think we can agree that UNC's case is an outlier.

What UNC did was graduate their players. Laughably easy courses are a dime a dozen at every college...I even had a few at State like Differential Equations or Embeded Systems...however you can't make progress toward a degree taking that Drama class there, this math class here, a Naval Systems class o'er yonder. You need what UNC set up, a Potemkin degree made up of nothing but fake courses.

This is where the "everyone does it" defense falls apart. Every other school doesn't graduate athletes at a 97% clip. Every other school doesn't go decades between losing kids to academics. I'd like to think every other school doesn't ignore blatant cheating and plagarism.

Indoor66
11-04-2015, 12:34 PM
For those interested, below is a list of relevant email addresses for folks at the NCAA:

Email addresses for UNC scandal (fro PackPride):



ksulentic@ncaa.org She is the lead investigator in this case.

Here's a list of people to CC on any emails involving this uncovered fraud:

ajwalker@ncaa.org

Chris Strobel cstrobel@ncaa.org

Shepard Cooper scooper@ncaa.org
dave.roberts@usc.edu

EC_bylaw@ncaa.org,

eleanor.myers@temple.edu,

larry.parkinson@ferc.gov

Mark Emmert memmert@ncaa.org


mzonder@ncaa.org

jduncan@ncaa.org

shannah@ncaa.org

tomhill@iastate.edu

swood1000
11-04-2015, 12:42 PM
UNC was able to defer the COI hearing until after March by "finding" some additional infractions. Unfortunately they also gave the enforcement staff a second chance to add charges to the NOA, which they are working on now. Perhaps we'll see some academic fraud added to the extra benefits.

English
11-04-2015, 01:54 PM
UNC was able to defer the COI hearing until after March by "finding" some additional infractions. Unfortunately they also gave the enforcement staff a second chance to add charges to the NOA, which they are working on now. Perhaps we'll see some academic fraud added to the extra benefits.

I'm certainly encouraged by that possibility, but there has been absolutely NOTHING to suggest that the NCAA is considering this beyond a period of silence following the UNC "discovery" of additional violations. If anything, the original NOA appears to go to great lengths to omit any allusion to "academic fraud," "fraudulent curricula," "academic integrity," or the like. I'd be (pleasantly) shocked if the NCAA chose to expand the NOA at all, and especially to include any charge of academic fraud.

BD80
11-04-2015, 02:36 PM
Hold it...Bayless is in the Mathematics department. I thought the cheating was confined to AFAM. And Drama. And Philosophy...

What's next? Astrophysics?

I can more easily imagine the Jetson's dog succeeding in Physics than a tar heel basketball player passing rudimentary math

swood1000
11-04-2015, 02:42 PM
I'm certainly encouraged by that possibility, but there has been absolutely NOTHING to suggest that the NCAA is considering this beyond a period of silence following the UNC "discovery" of additional violations. If anything, the original NOA appears to go to great lengths to omit any allusion to "academic fraud," "fraudulent curricula," "academic integrity," or the like. I'd be (pleasantly) shocked if the NCAA chose to expand the NOA at all, and especially to include any charge of academic fraud.
If they can get the extra benefits allegations to stick it's not clear how much extra would be accomplished by adding allegations of academic fraud, at least with respect to academic fraud participated in by the academic counselors, since those activities are already being charged as extra benefits. But, for example, the Mentor Feedback form shown above that talks about editing a student's paper is not found in the original NOA exhibits, and so perhaps it and others like it were overlooked by the enforcement staff on the first go-through and could be added now.

rasputin
11-04-2015, 02:49 PM
I can more easily imagine the Jetson's dog succeeding in Physics than a tar heel basketball player passing rudimentary math

ruh-roh reorge

MarkD83
11-04-2015, 03:59 PM
If they can get the extra benefits allegations to stick it's not clear how much extra would be accomplished by adding allegations of academic fraud, at least with respect to academic fraud participated in by the academic counselors, since those activities are already being charged as extra benefits. But, for example, the Mentor Feedback form shown above that talks about editing a student's paper is not found in the original NOA exhibits, and so perhaps it and others like it were overlooked by the enforcement staff on the first go-through and could be added now.

If the NCAA is mad at UNC and wants to add other allegations my guess is they extend the time frame back to the time Prof. N and Boxhill arrived on campus (late 80s) and then explicitedly add items listing just MBB and FB.

Son of Jarhead
11-04-2015, 04:04 PM
What UNC did was graduate their players. Laughably easy courses are a dime a dozen at every college...I even had a few at State like Differential Equations or Embeded Systems...however you can't make progress toward a degree taking that Drama class there, this math class here, a Naval Systems class o'er yonder. You need what UNC set up, a Potemkin degree made up of nothing but fake courses.

This is where the "everyone does it" defense falls apart. Every other school doesn't graduate athletes at a 97% clip. Every other school doesn't go decades between losing kids to academics. I'd like to think every other school doesn't ignore blatant cheating and plagarism.

The NCAA released their stats on Graduation Success Rates (GSR) today and it looks like unc wasn't cheating well enough. The stats released today cover freshmen who entered between 2005-2008. unc's overall student athlete grad rate was 85% (Duke's was 98%). For men's basketball it was 80% and for football it was an ACC-low 62%. The first two numbers are middle of the road, but that football number, when they have a system in place to cheat, is laughable. I agree, the "everyone does it" defense doesn't work for unc. Not even close.

BigWayne
11-04-2015, 06:54 PM
Some of the stuff showing up at PP related to the latest doc dump concerns the foreign language requirement at UNC and how they deal with that for athletes. I am guessing before the fecal matter started hitting the fan after Debby left, they were doing about whatever they wanted.

Then in 2010, they came up with this gem of a mechanism (http://cssac.unc.edu/student-resources/substitution_process) to deal with it.

The basic way it works is:

1) Try to take a FL or math course and fail it.
2) Write up your failing experience and submit to the committee.

Then:
6. The committee reviews the student’s request and documentation to determine whether there is sufficient information to indicate that the student will not be able to meet the Math or Foreign Language Course requirements.

Then, if approved by Dean Woodard, they just come up with 3 courses that don't require foreign language and you are good to go.


Is this something all universities do these days? It's been a long time since I sat in a classroom and I know a lot has changed. I really hope we don't have a policy like this at Duke.

kmspeaks
11-04-2015, 07:44 PM
Some of the stuff showing up at PP related to the latest doc dump concerns the foreign language requirement at UNC and how they deal with that for athletes. I am guessing before the fecal matter started hitting the fan after Debby left, they were doing about whatever they wanted.

Then in 2010, they came up with this gem of a mechanism (http://cssac.unc.edu/student-resources/substitution_process) to deal with it.

The basic way it works is:

1) Try to take a FL or math course and fail it.
2) Write up your failing experience and submit to the committee.

Then:
6. The committee reviews the student’s request and documentation to determine whether there is sufficient information to indicate that the student will not be able to meet the Math or Foreign Language Course requirements.

Then, if approved by Dean Woodard, they just come up with 3 courses that don't require foreign language and you are good to go.


Is this something all universities do these days? It's been a long time since I sat in a classroom and I know a lot has changed. I really hope we don't have a policy like this at Duke.

Isn't it more likely the process goes:

1)Try to take a FL or math course and fail it.
2) Have a tutor write up your failing experience and submit it to Crowder.
3) Without reading it Crowder certifies to the committee that you will not be able to meet the requirements.

BD80
11-04-2015, 08:06 PM
Some of the stuff showing up at PP related to the latest doc dump concerns the foreign language requirement at UNC and how they deal with that for athletes. I am guessing before the fecal matter started hitting the fan after Debby left, they were doing about whatever they wanted.

Then in 2010, they came up with this gem of a mechanism (http://cssac.unc.edu/student-resources/substitution_process) to deal with it.

The basic way it works is:

1) Try to take a FL or math course and fail it.
2) Write up your failing experience and submit to the committee.

Then:
6. The committee reviews the student’s request and documentation to determine whether there is sufficient information to indicate that the student will not be able to meet the Math or Foreign Language Course requirements.

Then, if approved by Dean Woodard, they just come up with 3 courses that don't require foreign language and you are good to go.


Is this something all universities do these days? It's been a long time since I sat in a classroom and I know a lot has changed. I really hope we don't have a policy like this at Duke.

Swahili wasn't cutting it?

Or were they cutting Swahili? (If a tree falls in the woods ...)

CDu
11-04-2015, 08:15 PM
The thing is, stuff like the above probably happens at a lot of places. What makes the UNC mess distinctive is the fake classes -- no attendance necessary, no professor, one short plagiarized paper graded by a secretary who didn't read the "work" and then makes up a grade based on what the "student" needed to stay eligible -- the further you get away from that, the closer you get to a pseudo-legitimate "everybody does it" defense.

Yup. For example, when I was in school, students registered for classes based on a number system:fresshmen were 1s, sophs 2, juniors 3, seniors 4. But scholarship-sport athletes were given a 5, so they went first. The reasoning was simple: the athletic/travel requirements were such that it was critical they get the clases/sections that worked with their schedules.

PackMan97
11-04-2015, 08:46 PM
The NCAA released their stats on Graduation Success Rates (GSR) today and it looks like unc wasn't cheating well enough. The stats released today cover freshmen who entered between 2005-2008. unc's overall student athlete grad rate was 85% (Duke's was 98%). For men's basketball it was 80% and for football it was an ACC-low 62%. The first two numbers are middle of the road, but that football number, when they have a system in place to cheat, is laughable. I agree, the "everyone does it" defense doesn't work for unc. Not even close.

In other words, these are the first kids whom did have access to Crowder and Co for their entire academic career?

BigWayne
11-04-2015, 08:50 PM
Isn't it more likely the process goes:

1)Try to take a FL or math course and fail it.
2) Have a tutor write up your failing experience and submit it to Crowder.
3) Without reading it Crowder certifies to the committee that you will not be able to meet the requirements.

2009 and before, I would guess it was something at that level. The UNC party line has been that all is cleaned up since 2009 or 2011 depending on who you listen to.

The document I linked is the CURRENT policy. This document may even count as one of the 70 reforms.

To reiterate, it appears the current policy at UNC is that you can fail at foreign language and math and get those requirements waived by showing that you are incapable of succeeding in those subject areas due to a learning disability or for just being unable to master the material.

MarkD83
11-04-2015, 09:06 PM
2009 and before, I would guess it was something at that level. The UNC party line has been that all is cleaned up since 2009 or 2011 depending on who you listen to.

The document I linked is the CURRENT policy. This document may even count as one of the 70 reforms.

To reiterate, it appears the current policy at UNC is that you can fail at foreign language and math and get those requirements waived by showing that you are incapable of succeeding in those subject areas due to a learning disability or for just being unable to master the material.

So I am really bad at a lot of things so can I get all my requirements waived at UNC and get a degree.

sagegrouse
11-04-2015, 09:17 PM
So I am really bad at a lot of things so can I get all my requirements waived at UNC and get a degree.

Uhhh, ... what's your sport?

MarkD83
11-04-2015, 10:11 PM
Uhhh, ... what's your sport?

At my age... curling...the pint variety. (Did I just make this thread about beer.....)

OldPhiKap
11-04-2015, 10:14 PM
At my age... curling...the pint variety. (Did I just make this thread about beer....)

No, that's weightlifting. Twelve-ounce diminishing curls.

(Or for pints, something like sixteen-ounce diminishing curls)

devildeac
11-04-2015, 10:50 PM
At my age... curling...the pint variety. (Did I just make this thread about beer....)


No, that's weightlifting. Twelve-ounce diminishing curls.

(Or for pints, something like sixteen-ounce diminishing curls)

You're tempting me gentlemen (he said as he watches his Enjoy By 10-31-15 Stone Brewing Company IIPA disappear before his very eyes:o).

nocilla
11-05-2015, 07:53 AM
Wasn't there supposed to be something happening on Halloween? A wink from Manalish about spooky Oct 31st or something? Did I miss it or did it just not materialize?

moonpie23
11-05-2015, 08:23 AM
looks like it just didn't happen..

Neals384
11-05-2015, 09:16 AM
I'm sure UNC has dealt with this pressing problem, and educated all staff NOT to use email. It's amazing really that in the 21st century so many people remain clueless about how accessible and permanent electronic media are. Roy (in reference to some other posts) is neither stupid nor a Luddite. He knows better than to leave a trail.

In fact, it's starting to look like Roy may well be the smartest employee on the entire campus. Think about that for a moment...:cool:

sammy3469
11-05-2015, 10:12 AM
If you delve into the Federal Graduation Rate reports there's some really bad numbers in therefor UNC. Black football players in the 2008-9 4 year class has a GSR of 48% (this basically means 23 out of 48 black scholarship football players that were in school during the 2008-9 academic year graduated from some school). The grad rate from UNC was 37% (so 17 out of 48 graduated from UNC).

Contrast that with either the black student population in general (GSR of 74%) or the white football SA population (GSR of 94%).

If you want a really pathetic number, 31% of ALL 2008-9 freshman football recruits graduated from UNC and this is while they were rigging the entire system.

It's also not like this is a one-off as they've been producing similar numbers since 2002 and in the 1998 and 1999 report.

Indoor66
11-05-2015, 10:41 AM
If you delve into the Federal Graduation Rate reports there's some really bad numbers in therefor UNC. Black football players in the 2008-9 4 year class has a GSR of 48% (this basically means 23 out of 48 black scholarship football players that were in school during the 2008-9 academic year graduated from some school). The grad rate from UNC was 37% (so 17 out of 48 graduated from UNC).

Contrast that with either the black student population in general (GSR of 74%) or the white football SA population (GSR of 94%).

If you want a really pathetic number, 31% of ALL 2008-9 freshman football recruits graduated from UNC and this is while they were rigging the entire system.

It's also not like this is a one-off as they've been producing similar numbers since 2002 and in the 1998 and 1999 report.

As I said upthread, all that and they still could not win at a high level (championships or divisions). What a price for failure. :confused::cool:

BD80
11-05-2015, 02:05 PM
No, that's weightlifting. Twelve-ounce diminishing curls.

(Or for pints, something like sixteen-ounce diminishing curls)

The key in doing diminishing sets (or drop sets) ... LOTS OF SETS! Go to failure!

porcophile
11-07-2015, 07:58 PM
Rick White, Associate Vice Chancellor of Communications and Public Affairs at UNC, has put his finger on a question that needs to be answered before UNC can "move forward." Dan Kane's latest in the N&O quotes him as saying, "Carolina has acknowledged and accepted responsibility for the past and has committed to meaningful, long-term reforms that strike the right balance between academics and athletics.”
Yes! Who, exactly, decided what the "right balance" is?
Anyone? Anyone?

Duke95
11-07-2015, 09:31 PM
looks like it just didn't happen..

You mean, nothing happened other than the huge document dump from UNC that clearly shows that a) UNC basketball coaches received daily updates about their players' academic standing, and b) this scandal stretched well beyond AFAM classes?

Indoor66
11-08-2015, 07:31 AM
I wonder what Wheat thinks about the crap over at the dump. We haven't heard from him for quite a while.

Atlanta Duke
11-08-2015, 08:03 AM
In his latest N&O article Dan Kane takes a shot at those who claimed his reporting was much ado about nothing:)

Among the skeptics was Kevin Guskiewicz, an exercise and sports science professor recently named dean of UNC’s College of Arts and Sciences.

“I think he’s running on empty and this article most certainly won’t help him win a Pulitzer,” Guskiewicz wrote of the N&O reporter in an email on May 19, 2013.

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article43622670.html#storylink=cpy

Duke95
11-08-2015, 10:11 AM
The latest data dump clearly shows that this fraud was not limited to AFAM. It was prevalent in other departments as well. The cheating culture is absolutely ingrained in that place. Tutors could change athlete grades, athletes couldn't pass basic math, plagiarism was rampant...and I'd laugh at anyone who thinks that has changed today.

If UNC were a stock, I'd short it.

sagegrouse
11-08-2015, 11:03 AM
If UNC were a stock, I'd short it.Top basketball recruits have clearly done so.

-jk
11-08-2015, 08:28 PM
I wonder what Wheat thinks about the crap over at the dump. We haven't heard from him for quite a while.

I think he has his head in the sand just now... Or at least isn't reading this thread.

-jk

sagegrouse
11-08-2015, 09:54 PM
I think he has his head in the sand just now... Or at least isn't reading this thread.

-jk

I hope not -- he's a professional fisherman and that would signify bi-i-i-g-g trouble!!!

Jarhead
11-08-2015, 11:04 PM
In our local Sunday issue of the Southern Pines Pilot (http://www.thepilot.com/news/pinecrest-football-stripped-of-wins-fined-after-rules-violation/article_388eec30-84c4-11e5-918c-e39575e43663.html) there is story about a pretty stiff punishment levied on the Pinecrest High School football team.

Pinecrest High School's football team will forfeit its first eight wins of the season and miss the playoffs after the North Carolina High School Athletic Association determined Friday the school violated association rules.

The school was also fined $5,000, according to school officials.

The NCHSAA found that Pinecrest violated the protocol around what's known as the "eight-quarter rule" allowed for football players under certain conditions who play in the junior varsity game on Thursday and then dress for the varsity game on Friday night.

Prior to the ruling, the Patriots were 8-2 overall and 2-2 in the Southeastern Conference and playoff eligible.

The NCHSAA Board on Friday denied the school's appeal of the violation. The appeal was made based on the severity of the penalty and because the school self-reported the violation, school officials said.

The full Board heard the appeal by conference call, with NCHSAA president Mo Green, superintendent of the Guilford County schools, presiding. After lengthy discussion, the Board voted to uphold the decision for the forfeitures, based on using ineligible players by failure to follow the eight-quarter rule.

Since the full Board heard the appeal, there is no further NCHSAA appellate step in the due process.

“We certainly regret any time that a school has to forfeit victories in situations like this, but we do try to apply the rules as consistently and fairly as possible. We appreciate the professional way that Pinecrest High School has been dealing with this situation," said Interim NCHSAA commissioner Que Tucker.

The infractions came to light late in the week as the Patriots, one of the best teams in the state much of this season, prepared for their final regular season game at Hoke County Friday night.

Seems to me that the NCAA could learn something from the NCHSAA. It doesn't take long to read the riot act to a violator.

oldnavy
11-09-2015, 06:39 AM
In our local Sunday issue of the Southern Pines Pilot (http://www.thepilot.com/news/pinecrest-football-stripped-of-wins-fined-after-rules-violation/article_388eec30-84c4-11e5-918c-e39575e43663.html) there is story about a pretty stiff punishment levied on the Pinecrest High School football team.


Seems to me that the NCAA could learn something from the NCHSAA. It doesn't take long to read the riot act to a violator.

And the NCAA hasn't even judged Pinecrest HS for UNC's infractions, I bet Cleveland State is breathing a sigh of relief today!.

Wheat/"/"/"
11-09-2015, 04:09 PM
I think he has his head in the sand just now... Or at least isn't reading this thread.

-jk

I've been lurking on the board since last spring...because I like to keep up with Duke basketball.

I read this thread, along with the recruiting ones, when I stop by to see if anything new pops up. I'll comment on the academic stuff after the NCAA weighs in...and I have a better understanding of the entire issue.

I miss posting here, as I did for 15 plus years, but the simple truth is it became just too toxic for me to post...anything...and I just wasn't enjoying it.
The board rules against personal attacks got to where they didn't seem to apply to comments directed at me, a UNC basketball fan. I got sick of being accused as a "troll" over and over again when I would take the time to thoughtfully and respectfully try to express an alternate opinion. I'm over it.

I'm a basketball junkie, I like to talk basketball...and hope to join in on a disscussion here again in the future if it could be civil.

I would love to see something like a UNC team thread here where everyone can discuss the strengths and weaknesses of UNC players...and the team. I'd like to see others opinions of UNC's team and the players skill level.

But, while I think it's good to know your rival, I know many here just want to talk Duke basketball, so I'm not about to start a thread about UNC's team...and I'm not comfortable discussing Duke's team and players...and becoming a target again.

So I'll probably just lurk and fade away....

Good luck this season!

dudog84
11-09-2015, 04:20 PM
I've been lurking on the board since last spring...because I like to keep up with Duke basketball.

I read this thread, along with the recruiting ones, when I stop by to see if anything new pops up. I'll comment on the academic stuff after the NCAA weighs in...and I have a better understanding of the entire issue.

I miss posting here, as I did for 15 plus years, but the simple truth is it became just too toxic for me to post...anything...and I just wasn't enjoying it.
The board rules against personal attacks got to where they didn't seem to apply to comments directed at me, a UNC basketball fan. I got sick of being accused as a "troll" over and over again when I would take the time to thoughtfully and respectfully try to express an alternate opinion. I'm over it.

I'm a basketball junkie, I like to talk basketball...and hope to join in on a disscussion here again in the future if it could be civil.

I would love to see something like a UNC team thread here where everyone can discuss the strengths and weaknesses of UNC players...and the team. I'd like to see others opinions of UNC's team and the players skill level.

But, while I think it's good to know your rival, I know many here just want to talk Duke basketball, so I'm not about to start a thread about UNC's team...and I'm not comfortable discussing Duke's team and players...and becoming a target again.

So I'll probably just lurk and fade away...

Good luck this season!

Wheat, the way I deal with internet boards is to realize that anyone who annoys me is just an anonymous person out there in the universe. Hopefully not indicative of an entire fan base. Statistically insignificant (even if there are more than one). But don't get me started on statistical analysis...took it in grad school, didn't understand it and still got an A, and to this day don't believe what I read in the polls.

Be a duck. Let it slide off your back.

BLPOG
11-09-2015, 04:23 PM
I've been lurking on the board since last spring...because I like to keep up with Duke basketball.

I read this thread, along with the recruiting ones, when I stop by to see if anything new pops up. I'll comment on the academic stuff after the NCAA weighs in...and I have a better understanding of the entire issue.

I miss posting here, as I did for 15 plus years, but the simple truth is it became just too toxic for me to post...anything...and I just wasn't enjoying it.
The board rules against personal attacks got to where they didn't seem to apply to comments directed at me, a UNC basketball fan. I got sick of being accused as a "troll" over and over again when I would take the time to thoughtfully and respectfully try to express an alternate opinion. I'm over it.

I'm a basketball junkie, I like to talk basketball...and hope to join in on a disscussion here again in the future if it could be civil.

I would love to see something like a UNC team thread here where everyone can discuss the strengths and weaknesses of UNC players...and the team. I'd like to see others opinions of UNC's team and the players skill level.

But, while I think it's good to know your rival, I know many here just want to talk Duke basketball, so I'm not about to start a thread about UNC's team...and I'm not comfortable discussing Duke's team and players...and becoming a target again.

So I'll probably just lurk and fade away...

Good luck this season!

I'm not exactly a high-volume poster on this board - my profile currently lists 15 posts, all recent, and I don't recall if I had a previous username at some point - but I've been reading DBR since the 20th century. For what it's worth, I value your contribution here.

jimsumner
11-09-2015, 04:24 PM
Wheat, the way I deal with internet boards is to realize that anyone who annoys me is just an anonymous person out there in the universe. Hopefully not indicative of an entire fan base. Statistically insignificant (even if there are more than one). But don't get me started on statistical analysis...took it in grad school, didn't understand it and still got an A, and to this day don't believe what I read in the polls.

Be a duck. Let it slide off your back.

Hmm. I took lots of classes that I didn't understand.

But I never got A's in any of them.

duke09hms
11-09-2015, 04:31 PM
I've been lurking on the board since last spring...because I like to keep up with Duke basketball.

I read this thread, along with the recruiting ones, when I stop by to see if anything new pops up. I'll comment on the academic stuff after the NCAA weighs in...and I have a better understanding of the entire issue.

I miss posting here, as I did for 15 plus years, but the simple truth is it became just too toxic for me to post...anything...and I just wasn't enjoying it.
The board rules against personal attacks got to where they didn't seem to apply to comments directed at me, a UNC basketball fan. I got sick of being accused as a "troll" over and over again when I would take the time to thoughtfully and respectfully try to express an alternate opinion. I'm over it.

I'm a basketball junkie, I like to talk basketball...and hope to join in on a disscussion here again in the future if it could be civil.

I would love to see something like a UNC team thread here where everyone can discuss the strengths and weaknesses of UNC players...and the team. I'd like to see others opinions of UNC's team and the players skill level.

But, while I think it's good to know your rival, I know many here just want to talk Duke basketball, so I'm not about to start a thread about UNC's team...and I'm not comfortable discussing Duke's team and players...and becoming a target again.

So I'll probably just lurk and fade away...

Good luck this season!

I'd rather you not lurk and continue actively posting. DBR can get very guilty of optimistic groupthink, and I always value viewpoints from the opposing sides. Your posts have always been respectful at the core, and it's only the oversensitive minority here that declare you a troll. Don't go!

dudog84
11-09-2015, 04:43 PM
Hmm. I took lots of classes that I didn't understand.

But I never got A's in any of them.

They were very kind to grad students (it was all about the thesis). Also was forced to take physical chemistry, and the professor had to curve it 3 times to get me (and many of my colleagues) a C. I don't think I got over a 20 on any test. Hated that class.

El_Diablo
11-09-2015, 04:50 PM
I would love to see something like a UNC team thread here where everyone can discuss the strengths and weaknesses of UNC players...and the team. I'd like to see others opinions of UNC's team and the players skill level.

We have that--it's every thread (if it stays open long enough).

Olympic Fan
11-09-2015, 04:55 PM
I've been lurking on the PackPride board and it's amazing to see some of the stuff they've gleaned from UNC's recent document dump.

My favorite is an e-mail dated July 14, 2011 (AFTER the NCAA uncovered evidence of academic fraud ... and AFTER the point where UNC claims to have instituted reforms) from math instructor Rachel Bayless to Beth Bridger, the academic advisor for the football team (who has since been fired). Bayless reports that she passed all the football players in her Math 118 class, then remarks quite casually that "most of them actually passed on their own." She admits that she gave D's to two players who scored under 60 percent ... and also reports that several of the players turned in identical papers, plus several football players passed around the same calculator, which was not allowed, but she assures Beth that she will not take this evidence of cheating "beyond this e-mail."

Interesting because this is evidence that the academic fraud went beyond the AFAM program. The Path Pride sleuths have also unearthed e-mails showing that the academic fraud also extended to the geology department and to the drama department.

However, the most explosive evidence they've come up with (and I've heard this hinted before) is evidence that athletes were coached to fake learning disabilities. Students diagnosed with learning disabilities get all kinds of academic advantages, such as unlimited time to take tests. They've linked to documents that show that 32.5 percent of the football team was diagnosed with learning disabilities. It's actually worse than that since UNC's numbers show that 35 of 105 football players had learning disabilities. But there are only 85 scholarship athletes on a football team -- I wonder how many of the 35 learning disabled are scholarship players and how many were walk-ons? Is it 35 of 105 ... or 35 of 85?

Reading that makes me much more sympathetic to JD King's bitter post after Saturday's game. I don't have a problem with losing to the learning disabled -- but it burns me up to lose to those who pretend to be learning disabled to lighten their academic load.

dudog84
11-09-2015, 05:04 PM
Interesting because this is evidence that the academic fraud went beyond the AFAM program. The Path Pride sleuths have also unearthed e-mails showing that the academic fraud also extended to the geology department and to the drama department.

The geology department?!?!? Say it isn't so!

wilson
11-09-2015, 05:18 PM
The geology department?!?!? Say it isn't so!Just when you thought the whole thing had already reached rock bottom.

OldPhiKap
11-09-2015, 05:18 PM
Just when you thought the whole thing had already reached rock bottom.

Bad joke. Stone wilson!

BLPOG
11-09-2015, 05:21 PM
I've been lurking on the PackPride board and it's amazing to see some of the stuff they've gleaned from UNC's recent document dump.

My favorite is an e-mail dated July 14, 2011 (AFTER the NCAA uncovered evidence of academic fraud ... and AFTER the point where UNC claims to have instituted reforms) from math instructor Rachel Bayless to Beth Bridger, the academic advisor for the football team (who has since been fired). Bayless reports that she passed all the football players in her Math 118 class, then remarks quite casually that "most of them actually passed on their own." She admits that she gave D's to two players who scored under 60 percent ... and also reports that several of the players turned in identical papers, plus several football players passed around the same calculator, which was not allowed, but she assures Beth that she will not take this evidence of cheating "beyond this e-mail."

Interesting because this is evidence that the academic fraud went beyond the AFAM program. The Path Pride sleuths have also unearthed e-mails showing that the academic fraud also extended to the geology department and to the drama department.

However, the most explosive evidence they've come up with (and I've heard this hinted before) is evidence that athletes were coached to fake learning disabilities. Students diagnosed with learning disabilities get all kinds of academic advantages, such as unlimited time to take tests. They've linked to documents that show that 32.5 percent of the football team was diagnosed with learning disabilities. It's actually worse than that since UNC's numbers show that 35 of 105 football players had learning disabilities. But there are only 85 scholarship athletes on a football team -- I wonder how many of the 35 learning disabled are scholarship players and how many were walk-ons? Is it 35 of 105 ... or 35 of 85?

Reading that makes me much more sympathetic to JD King's bitter post after Saturday's game. I don't have a problem with losing to the learning disabled -- but it burns me up to lose to those who pretend to be learning disabled to lighten their academic load.

One point to consider about the learning disabilities is that it is quite likely that the percentage of athletes at many schools taking advantage (as in using, not necessarily abusing) of learning disabilities accommodations is higher than the normal student population, although I don't have any data handy. Some of that might be misuse at the margin, but learning disability diagnosis is not perfect and some people go undiagnosed - there a plausible explanations for a discrepancy.

On the other hand, most diagnoses happen well before college - in elementary, middle, or high school. Moreover, the huge difference in relative prevalence of LD diagnoses among the populations (nationwide and NC averages are around 5%) as well as the number of diagnoses happening after the students were enrolled in UNC, as well as the attempt to stick with a single tester (Lyn Johnson), as well as the special fund set up for scholarship athletes, etc. convincingly suggest that the LD diagnoses were being systematically abused to maintain athletic eligibility at UNC. One email in the documents contains a discussion from a professor who noted the astonishingly high rate of previously "undiagnosed" athletes. He thought it was worthy of having a paper published in a sports journal! What's more is that he appears to have been involved in the screening - which means he was either being dishonest, or was so naive/incompetent that he over-diagnosed due to the athletes' lower ability or intentional failures.

Indoor66
11-09-2015, 05:28 PM
The geology department?!?!? Say it isn't so!

You can't make this stuff up! Check it out:

Did someone mention geology in conjunction with the "Dean Smith Deal"? (http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=178&f=2515&t=14251572&p=21)

devildeac
11-09-2015, 05:43 PM
The geology department?!?!? Say it isn't so!


Just when you thought the whole thing had already reached rock bottom.

And here for the longest time I thought neither of you two posters had any faults...

wilson
11-09-2015, 05:54 PM
And here for the longest time I thought neither of you two posters had any faults...This one is just fracking terrible.

hudlow
11-09-2015, 06:00 PM
This one is just fracking terrible.

It can be taken for granite that puns are always lurking.

wilson
11-09-2015, 06:01 PM
It can be taken for granite that puns are always lurking.Are we just gonna go ahead and work our way through the whole slate of rock humor?

devildeac
11-09-2015, 06:03 PM
You bet! I'm going to mine this for all it's worth, hoping of course that no one gives me/us the shaft.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
11-09-2015, 06:23 PM
It can be taken for granite that puns are always lurking.

This scandal has become something for rivals to marble at. UNC should have to gravel for mercy.

Go to shale Carolina, go to shale!

hudlow
11-09-2015, 06:23 PM
Are we just gonna go ahead and work our way through the whole slate of rock humor?


Of quartz...

Tripping William
11-09-2015, 06:47 PM
Of quartz...

That's one of the most igneous statements I have ever read. You should be forced to stand in formation (get it? "Formation"??). :o

Pghdukie
11-09-2015, 06:48 PM
2 more credit hrs of AFAM will get you a degree in Officiating / Review Booth.

sagegrouse
11-09-2015, 06:48 PM
The geology department?!?!? Say it isn't so!


Just when you thought the whole thing had already reached rock bottom.

I mean, Rocks for Jocks is a universal course offering. What did you expect?

DukieInKansas
11-09-2015, 07:13 PM
That's one of the most igneous statements I have ever read. You should be forced to stand in formation (get it? "Formation"??). :o

All these puns are a basalt to the integrity of the thread. Mica them stop, please.

sagegrouse
11-09-2015, 07:29 PM
I've been lurking on the board since last spring...because I like to keep up with Duke basketball.

I read this thread, along with the recruiting ones, when I stop by to see if anything new pops up. I'll comment on the academic stuff after the NCAA weighs in...and I have a better understanding of the entire issue.

I miss posting here, as I did for 15 plus years, but the simple truth is it became just too toxic for me to post...anything...and I just wasn't enjoying it.
The board rules against personal attacks got to where they didn't seem to apply to comments directed at me, a UNC basketball fan. I got sick of being accused as a "troll" over and over again when I would take the time to thoughtfully and respectfully try to express an alternate opinion. I'm over it.

I'm a basketball junkie, I like to talk basketball...and hope to join in on a disscussion here again in the future if it could be civil.

I would love to see something like a UNC team thread here where everyone can discuss the strengths and weaknesses of UNC players...and the team. I'd like to see others opinions of UNC's team and the players skill level.

But, while I think it's good to know your rival, I know many here just want to talk Duke basketball, so I'm not about to start a thread about UNC's team...and I'm not comfortable discussing Duke's team and players...and becoming a target again.

So I'll probably just lurk and fade away...

Good luck this season!

Wheat, Say it isn't so! I value your contribution on this Board and believe we have had good discussions. Unhappily, the tone of a thread or the Board itself is a "lowest common denominator" problem, in that there is no reasonable lower bound on the impolite opinions of a few posters. I encourage you to give it another try -- especially since this could be UNC's year for a really strong team, and you don't want to lose the opportunity to gloat.

Kindly,
Sage

Tripping William
11-09-2015, 07:36 PM
All these puns are a basalt to the integrity of the thread. Mica them stop, please.

This makes me get all sedimentary for pun-free days gone by....

MChambers
11-09-2015, 08:05 PM
These new revelations could mark a tectonic shift in the NCAA's investigation.

BD80
11-09-2015, 08:45 PM
The geology department?!?!? Say it isn't so!

Silly athletes, they thought they were going to study stoned