Cecil, Welcome to Night Vale: "The problem wasn’t solved, but most problems don’t get solved. I mean, generally we just do our best to mitigate the problem, and if it can’t be mitigated, then it can be relegated to a background noise by pleasant distractions and a prioritization of interests."
Sarah Silverman: "Nothing’s more attractive than an unending monologue about your shortcomings."
Carolyn Hax: "Sometimes surrendering to the awful is more useful than fighting it."
Graham Joyce: "why can’t our job here on earth be simply to inspire each other?"
Dan Harmon: "I believe in magic. I believe in mythology. I believe in shamanism. I believe that spells can be cast and I believe that random things coalesce and reveal themselves to be part of a plan we don’t control, you know."
Nora Ephron: "Never turn down a front-row seat for human folly."
McAlvie "The ultimate downfall of modern civilization won't be war; it'll be Twitter and Facebook."
Jenny Zhang: "A lot of writers swear by routine, but I swear by chaos. There’s enough fucking routine in my life. Every day I have to brush my teeth. Every day I have to smile at strangers. Every day I have to worry about money. Every day I want something I can’t have. Every day I find some way to go on! I know that writing every day for an hour would help me tremendously with writer’s block, but I also know that I need an element of wildness in my writing. I need to know that writing is something I do because it sets me free. It makes me feel golden with confidence. It gives me the gift of gab. I feel like a god. I feel like an entertainer. So write when you damn well please."
Joe Queenan: "If you have read 6,000 books in your lifetime, or even 600, it's probably because at some level you find "reality" a bit of a disappointment. People in the 19th century fell in love with "Ivanhoe" and "The Count of Monte Cristo" because they loathed the age they were living through. Women in our own era read "Pride and Prejudice" and "Jane Eyre" and even "The Bridges of Madison County"—a dimwit, hayseed reworking of "Madame Bovary"—because they imagine how much happier they would be if their husbands did not spend quite so much time with their drunken, illiterate golf buddies down at Myrtle Beach. A blind bigamist nobleman with a ruined castle and an insane, incinerated first wife beats those losers any day of the week. Blind, two-timing noblemen never wear belted shorts."
LogicalDash: "Nobody of any age should have to fend off sexual partners. That such defense is assumed as a part of the cost of adult courtship is suggestive of some more fundamental problem than age difference and its effect on consensuality."
Keith Richards: "I had to invent the job, you know," he said, earlier. "There wasn't a sign in the shop window, saying, "Wanted: Keith Richards."
Caitlin Moran: "As I started to reassess my writing style, I thought about what I liked doing--what gave me satisfaction--and realized the primary one was just... pointing at things. Pointing out things I liked, and showing them to other people--like a mum shouting, "Look! Moo-cows!" as a train rushes past a farm. I liked pointing at things, and I liked being reasonable and polite about stuff. Or silly. Silly was very, very good. No one ever got hurt by silly.
Best of all was being pointedly silly about serious things: politics, repression, bigotry. Too many commentators are quick to accuse their enemies of being evil. It's far, far more effective to point out that they're acting like idiots, instead. I was up for idiot-revealing.
"I am just going to be polite and silly, and point at cool things," I decided. "When I started writing, I would have killed to have one thing to write about. Now, I have three. Politeness and silliness, and pointing. That's enough."
Carolyn Hax: "Unless 15 years’ worth of mail has misled me, no one has ever found love through complaining about the lack of it, and no lonely person has ever felt better for hearing, “You just haven’t found the right person yet.”
David Simon: "Change is a motherfucker when you run from it."
Joe Queenan: "People who read an enormous number of books are basically dissatisfied with the way things are going on this planet. And I think, in a way, people read for the same reason that kids play video games ... they like that world better. It works better, it's more exciting, and it usually has a more satisfactory ending."
Dan Savage: "There isn't someone for everyone. Some of us do wind up alone, and that just fucking sucks and sometimes that stings, and you don't know if you're one of those people who's going to wind up alone until you die alone....So you kind of have to live in hope and build a life for yourself that's rewarding and fun, has friends and pleasure in it, whether you're alone or not."
the painkiller: "I will not be tagged, pinned, circled, liked, tweeted, retweeted or numbered."
Steve Jobs: "Of course it was impossible to connect the dots looking forward when I was in college. But it was very, very clear looking backwards ten years later.
Again, you can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something — your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life.”
Apple: "Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do."
Miss Manners: "Please do not -- repeat, not -- make a hostile approach to knitters. Have you not noticed that they are armed with long, pointy sticks?"
Stephen Tobolowsky: "And of course, nothing is what I figured on in my life. That seems to be a recurring theme."
James Bulls: "When you find yourself walking a true path, you will know it because you will want to walk it no matter the burning Sun, freezing sleet, torrential rain, and treacherous ground. The risks become no less and the journey as always exhausts you, but your desire to brave the challenges never diminishes."
Amy Argetsinger: "Twitter is a disease, plain and simple. It makes people insane. A decade from now I expect the CDC and FDA will be issuing warnings."
Cary Tennis: "You don't have to "move on" either. Not until you're ready. People say, Oh, you should be grateful. They say, Oh, it's time for you to move on. I'm like, What are you, a cop with a nightstick? I'll move on when I'm done playing the blues on my harmonica, thank you very much."
Mark Morford: "It is 2011 and here is what we know: Reality is fluid, fact is malleable, cause and effect completely uncertain. We know what we don't know, but we also know the opposite."
Charlie Jane Anders: "Just remember, if you flinch from your destiny, you'll never achieve your true greatness — you didn't choose to be chosen, but being chosen means you have to choose."
Roger Ebert: "To put it bluntly, I believe the world is patriarchal because men are bigger and stronger than women, and can beat them up."
Myca: "Jesus is not the reason for the season, and there's no way I need to act like he is. Christmas is a stolen tradition. There's no reason we can't steal it back."
Lady Gaga: "I hate the holidays! I'm alone and miserable, you fucking dumb bit of toy!"
Dianna Agron: "I am trying to live my life with a sharpie marker approach. You can’t erase the strokes you’ve made, but each step is much bolder and more deliberate."
John Mayer: "It occurred to me that since the invocation of Twitter, nobody who has participated in it has created any lasting art. And yes! Yours truly is included in that roundup as well. Let me make sure that statement is as absolute and irrevocable as possible by buzzing your tower one more time: no artwork created by someone with a healthy grasp of social media thus far has proven to be anything other than disposable."
Vanessa, Something Positive: "I like 'em crazy. You hear insane rants, I hear a reminder that the sex is interesting. Oooh! Hear that? Tonight's gonna tingle."
Anonymous: “Your problem is that you want to be an artist. What you need to be is an artisan.”
Sugar: "Ask better questions, sweet pea. The fuck is your life. Answer it."
Wide Lawns: "Often very odd things happen to me. Usually they are not my fault and mostly beyond my control."
Anonymous reporter: “When weird shit happens around here, weird shit really happens around here.”
Anne Johnson: "Today some stranger sent me an email that said, "You are a nut case." Well, I must admit this never would have occurred to me. Everyone else is a nut case. I'm the sane one. I think."
Carl Mayer: "Whenever I start to feel like my life isn’t where I want it to be, “Cops” is there to put everything into perspective. Yeah, I haven’t made all the right moves over the last 34 years, but I’m not hiding from the police under a kiddie pool, either."
Citing “serious lapses of truthfulness,” a disregard for “the impact of her actions on the campus and the university as a whole” and a manner “unbefitting of a leader of one of the nation’s top public research universities,” Napolitano unleashed some harsh criticism on her once-favored chancellor.
Indeed, in the Aug. 5 letter — which was released Wednesday by the UC Office of the President in response to a public records request by The Enterprise — Napolitano pointed to her initial defense of the chancellor as critical stories hit the media about Katehi’s paid board service, social media contracts and employment of her family members."
She also described to the regents how Katehi had failed to follow UC policy and “fostered a culture where even the campus leaders closest to her do not feel comfortable letting her know when she is engaging in questionable activity.”
“The investigation has demonstrated that chancellor Katehi repeatedly misled UC leadership, the UC Davis community, and the public about matters that would cast her in a negative light,” Napolitano wrote."
"A new report by SelfScore, which offers credit to international students, found that in-state students could be paying 34 percent higher tuition in fees if not for international students enrolled in select California institutions.
"This is more than double the rate of tuition increases at public four-year colleges and universities over the past five years," according to the report. "At the University of California San Diego, in-state undergraduates would have seen their tuition rise by nearly 65 percent last year. In-state undergraduates at the University of California Los Angeles, Irvine and Davis would experience tuition increases of more than 34 percent, if they had to cover the revenue loss from international students."
"We have a lot more men knitting—not as many as women, but they get more attention if they’re knitting. A guy knitter! But a lot of them are knitting to make something for a girlfriend or to make something you need that not everyone else has: skateboarder hats, ski hats. There are a lot more guys knitting. It’s not a stigma anymore. Last year, I had a guy from Sac State. His assignment was to take a class where he’d be made really uncomfortable. And so he thought a knitting class. … Tattooed, bald, beard, big guy—kinda scary. He came to class and everyone was just like, “Oh nice to meet you.” Everyone was helpful and nice. At the end of class, he said, “I thought it would be different.”
So it didn’t make him uncomfortable? That’s really funny.
Knitters are so inclusive and not judgmental—most of the time. … One day, I was at the store and three big, rough-looking guys rushed through the door and I thought, “Oh, I’m gonna be robbed.” And they were the cutest, nicest guys. They were in to buy yarn for crochet. It really has changed."
Though she's still getting paid as a chancellor for another year? Barf.
Napolitano puts it short and sweet: "The investigation is now concluded, and it found numerous instances where Chancellor Katehi was not candid, either with me, the press or the public, that she exercised poor judgment and violated multiple university policies. In these circumstances, Chancellor Katehi has now offered to resign, and I have accepted that resignation."
Oh, sure, now you resign? After all of this? How bad were the results that that happened?
I spent most of last night reading through Katehi's resignation letter (holy shit, girl) and the 102-page report on whether or not she's done anything wrong. Katehi and her lawyer amusingly claim she's been exonerated from most of the charges against her and the other two were a misunderstanding between her and Napolitano. O RLY, I say? Then why at the presumed moment of her triumph did she resign? HMMMMM, I say.
A few notable bits from the resignation letter:
"I have every intention of proceeding with a gift to the university to benefit students."
DIDN'T YOU SAY IN THE MEDIA THAT YOU WERE PONDERING NOT GIVING THE MONEY?! (Check the 102 page report for all the citations of this.)
"All in all, I am grateful for the work of the investigation team in exonerating me in 5 of the 7 items which they ultimately investigated. It has been very important for me that the investigation team conduct this investigation and confirm that I did not violate policies that are central to the mission of the academy and to my family, namely the issues of nepotism, conflicts, financial management or personal gain. The other two issues concern unintentional misunderstandings between me and President Napolitano, and it remains my hope that over time these differences will be resolved.
It is true that the past few months have been very difficult for the campus and my family the two things I have loved the most. As a result, at this time, and for the benefit of our campus and my family, I have decided to resign my position as Chancellor...."
Anyway, having spent all dang night reading this report, let me summarize the good bits for you. I'll be fair in that yeah, in some aspects she was exonerated. In others, however, there's some policy violations (some deliberate and some not) and there was DEFINITELY SOME LYING GOING ON.
Here we go. Before we begin: note that there's a bunch of redacted bits, and I can't for the life of me figure out why they redacted the name of Katehi's son when it's pretty clear they're talking about him and thanks to hyphenation, we do literally see his last name in the report when (sometimes) referring to his wife. Yeah, he's not guilty of anything, but duh, WE CAN TELL WHO THAT PART IS, so what's the point?
On disclosing who's related to who: Katehi did it....EVENTUALLY, I'll put it that way. But regardless of whether or not that paperwork was filed, it sounds like she was genuinely "walled off" from those decisions. Policy violation by not getting that done sooner, but otherwise ... mostly okay-ish.
On her daughter-in-law's supervising of her son: yeah, that's pretty clear that in a technical sense of the word, that happened, and people including Katehi and their boss knew this wasn't good and should be changed. However, their overall supervisor (who sounds like she just adores DIL) wasn't down with that, apparently. What it boils down to is that while she didn't supervise her husband's work, she did have administrative oversight over where he worked. Available evidence suggests this wasn't intentional but rather the result of a lack of administrative oversight, limited awareness about relative status, and lack of understanding of university policies. They phrase that nicely.
On her daughter-in-law's amazing number of raises: okay, technically doesn't sound like Katehi was actually involved in this. That said, it seems fishy on the part of other people that DIL was getting raises every six months to a year, either through being reclassed or a merit raise. Meanwhile, everyone I know hasn't gotten a raise in years.
But seriously, here's the schedule of raises: Reclass/raise 1: March 2014 (they were already discussing a reclass after her holding the job a month). 15% July 2014--got a merit based salary increase October 2014--she got another raise. July 2015--got a 3.8% raise. October 2015--got a equity increase. July 2016--got another merit-based increase.
On her travel reimbursements: technically she did not make money or make UCD lose money through her travel arrangements. She did, however, violate some policies by getting a third party to reimburse her and then using their money to reimburse UCD, which bypassed the travel accounting system to boot. They were all pretty open about doing this and it wasn't a secret there.
On social media consultants: UCD hired THREE of them to scrub pepper spray results from the Internet. Yes, even more money was spent than we heard. Yes, Katehi was definitely involved with this and knew about it and was proven to have lied about it to Napolitano. There's also some amusing anecdotes about how she was super concerned with her own search results and getting things "off the Google" and wanting some anonymous aide to alter her Wikipedia page, even after the aide pointed out that they would be deleted for bias. The first company got paid $92,970.73, the second got $44,600, the third got $270,000. All of this was pretty much coming from the chancellor's unrestricted fund. "In sum, the evidence supports a finding that Chancellor Katehi violated the UC's Standards of Ethical Conduct by misrepresenting her involvement with the communications consultants." Also, "Accordingly, based on the available evidence, Chancellor Katehi appears to have violated UC policies requiring that she conduct herself "honestly in all dealings" when she represented to the public and the President that she was "not aware of" or "involved" in the social media and communications contracts."
Where's that scholarship money you promised? The report is quite annoyed that Katehi publicly promised scholarship money and then reneged on it. Katehi basically said Napolitano made it sound like she had to volunteer the money, Napolitano said she suggested it as a way to make it up to the public but wasn't forcing her to.
On joining all those shifty boards: she knew those boards were shifty and against policy to join, she didn't do due diligence, and she flat out lied to Napolitano that she hadn't started doing board work for DeVry yet when she actually had. "Chancellor Katehi did not comply with University policies governing the reporting and approval of her outside professional activities."
She claims not to remember a lot of things. Uh-huh.
The good news is that (a) there's no evidence that she tried to retaliate against anyone, (b) she had nothing to do with a whistleblower report that was called in.
How'd they get this information, folks?
Katehi refused to give access to her e-mails or devices, UCOP got permission to get "nonconsentual access" to read anything in the cloud, they let a third party discovery vendor of Katehi's choice conduct their own review on her devices.
DIL's supervisor: let them see her devices but not e-mail. Nonconsentual access happened, EXCEPT she got her faculty e-mails routed into her personal Gmail account and she wouldn't let them have access to it and they couldn't get it.
Son and DIL didn't provide access, they did not have nonconsentual access granted for them, they did consent to looking for targeted search terms and turning in relevant e-mails.
The Academic Senate head didn't provide access, but turned over e-mails from his own personal search.
The team received over 2 million e-mails and electronic documents, actually read 67,796 of them.
The recent ex-vice chancellor of finance (who quit suddenly and without warning) wouldn't talk unless he got paid, and he wouldn't let them talk to his lawyer either.
Regarding the dramz of April:
Napolitano wanted to discuss Katehi's resignation on April 25 and Katehi asked for time, Napolitano gave her a day.
The next day Katehi's lawyer said she wanted a reasonable and graceful exit, which they'd discuss in two days.
However, after the news made it into the media, Katehi changed her mind in a hurry and said she wouldn't resign.
The university near relative policies were not timely followed, but she wasn't involved and was walled off at all times, she probably wasn't deliberately lying to Napolitano about this aspect of her life.
She definitely knew all about the social media companies.
She didn't have any involvement in the use of SASI fees for PE instruction.
No evidence of intentional misconduct regarding her travel reimbursements, but there were policy violations. No personal profit for her or UCD loss from that though.
She hasn't donated that scholarship money.
She didn't exercise due diligence prior to joining certain boards and lied to Napolitano about beginning DeVry board service, violated policies governing reporting and approval of her outside professional activities.
No evidence that she threatened retaliation against anyone for cooperating with UCOP.
I'm guessing that between the deliberate policy violations and the deliberate lying...buh-bye!
"The investigation is now concluded, and it found numerous instances where Chancellor Katehi was not candid, either with me, the press or the public, that she exercised poor judgment and violated multiple university policies. In these circumstances, Chancellor Katehi has now offered to resign, and I have accepted that resignation."