Margee Mulhall, '84
Karen Hall, '78 (Fourth Century Club)
Karla K. Bruno, ’81 and ‘92
Elizabeth Gibbons, '71
Eugene R. Thurston,Jr. '66 (Fourth Century Club)
Victor K. Biebighauser '75
Todd Skiles '92 (Bequeath Revoked)
Andrew R. McRoberts, A.B.‘87
Constance Bruce McRoberts, B.B.A.‘88
W. J. Clark Evans, B.B.A., '82
Ellen Williams Evans, B.A. '83
Robert G. Jones, A.B. Government, '72 (Fourth Century Club; William and Mary Athletic Education Fund; others)
Jean Zettler, '73 (Fourth Century Club)
Susan Prock. '80
Andy Yacos, '86
Stephanie (Kobezak) Selmer, '94
It's a great start, but it would help us if the list were much longer. Please let me know if you'd like your name added to the list. And spread the word. Also, be sure to let me know if you have sent your name in and it hasn't been posted.
Thanks!
8 comments:
As a current student at William and Mary (Class of '08), I am concerned over the "No Cross, No Cash" list. The decision to withhold funds from the College directly affects the the lifeblood of this fine institution. That is, the College's ability to provide each student with a top-notch education. President Nichol's decision to remove the Wren Cross was, unfortunately, made unilaterally. Your fight to restore the cross should be aimed directly at him, instead of the school as a whole.
Dean Pulley:
I am saddened by Mr. Nichols attempt to impose the tyranny of the minority on an historic part of the college, and the community as a whole. I wanted to make you aware that I will be unable to continue offering financial support to the business school (including the balance of my current pledge), or any future support, until such time as Mr. Nichols rescinds his position in regard to the Wren cross, or if he cannot do so in good conscience, he will choose the course of honor and resign from his position as President. Please make the development office aware that I am rescinding my current year’s future contributions effective immediately until such time that the cross is restored to its place of honor. I am sorry to do this, but as an individual, this is the only course of action available to me to hopefully open Mr. Nichols eyes that his arbitrary actions will have consequences. I am hopeful my next e-mail will be of a much more positive nature.
Sincerely,
Fred A. Bays
College of William & Mary MBA 1989
Aim directly at Nichols? How on earth do you do that? The only leverage we have is our money that William and Mary wants. We can't vote against Nichols, we can't fire Nichols. Perhaps we could write letters so his secretary could put them in the circular file?
Dear Anonymous,
It is virtually impossible to "attack' Mr. Nichol without creating animosity on both sides of the issue. And it seems that Mr. Nichol is surrounded by teflon. The Board of Visitors basically hired the man -- it is up to the Board to resolve the issue and incumbent on them to ensure there is appropriate leadership at the College (a quality Mr. Nichol seems to lack). The College needs a President who will encourage inclusiveness instead of controversy and who is respected enough to raise money for the College -- and it is up to the BOV to make sure W&M has a president/leader that will win people's trust enough to raise the money.
My post (February 1st) concerning the "No Cross, No Cash" list was in no way meant to demean anyone's decision to withhold funds from the College. I only ask potential withholders to reconsider this course of action. For those of you that have already added your name to the list, there is no doubt that you came to this decision in a thoughtful manner. My Feb. 1st post was written somewhat hurriedly and for that, I apologize. President Nichol can be pressured in other ways, which include, and are by no means limited to, keeping the issue in the national spotlight, public demonstrations, intelligent letter-writing campaigns, and maintaining a continuous debate over the issue. These constructive methods will eventually lead to a suitable conclusion on this issue. A patient, coordinated dialogue between each side of the issue is mandatory.
Calls for Nichol to resign, General Assembly bills calling for his salary to be cut in half, incendiary comments, and sarcasm (as the February 7th poster utilized in response to my initial post) are nonsensical and do not lead to anything productive. You will only inflame your opposition and harden their resolve. I have met President Nichol personally. He is an amiable man, who is truly committed to leading this institution to brighter pastures. I understand that in light of this controversy, many of you find this hard to believe.
P.S. I feel obliged to divulge/remind you that I am a current student at WM (Class of '08).
Dear Jean, class of 1973,
I appreciate your thoughtful response and agree that the BOV seems to have circled their wagons over this issue in order to deflect criticism. However, I never stated that Nichol should be "attacked" over this issue. Rather, you can exert pressure and, unfortunately, money does represent the highest form of pressure nowadays (maybe I am being too naive, if that is the correct term to use, to believe things can be accomplished without money). On the other hand, I must respectfully disagree with you when you claim Nichol is a man of controversy, who does not value inclusiveness. In his defense, there are many people on the other side of the debate that believe removing the Wren Cross from permanent display will lead to more inclusiveness because the chapel is meant for anyone's use. President Nichol did seem to be a genuine fellow when I met him. I refer you to my second post for clarification on my stance. But for now, I've been writing for the past two hours and I am all posted out. Good luck in your quest for a resolution on this issue.
NO NICKEL UNTIL NO MORE NICHOL!
I have a feeling many of you are forming an opinion of President Nichol solely on this dying issue... this is unfortunate and irresponsible. We here at the College are tired of much of the negativity and non-constructive stances many of you have taken. Let's focus on preserving the ideals of this public liberal arts institution, instead of trying to force a religious ideology down everyone's throat. The term "liberal" represents everything this school, nay country, should stand for. Removing a permanently displayed cross from a public place of worship (a place for all faiths) should be celebrated, not scorned. Monetary donations will increase because this school is finally living up to its liberal roots, while this "No Cash" list will fade into oblivion.
Post a Comment