Saturday, April 30, 2005

Is the champagne I polished off last night a waste of time?

From Anonymous:

This is from the previous post reciting a NY times article.
Chris Harrington, a university spokesman based in Washington, denied that Dr. Nanos was about to resign and defended him as "clearly understanding the mission of the lab."
Is the champagne I polished off last night a waste of time? or am I stuck in a cruel version the ground hog day movie where Nanos's departure is only 2 weeks away. If Chris Harrington is correct, tomorrow starts another day in hell with no end in site. If a poster has something concrete about the directors departure, please post so I can break my unending cycle of hope then despair.

1:33 -

I would sure like to know where you work that you can so certain. I want to believe you, don't get me wrong, I just want to know why I should.

My bottle of bubbly is still chilling, waiting on the news.
There is never any end in site, it is always a distance away even if it is in sight.
Remember the original "Baghdad Bob" declaring that all the Americans had been pushed into the ocean and then had a difficult time explaining why it was not possible to go to the Baghdad International Airport to see what all the noise and smoke was about. Statements from Kevin Roark and Chris Harrington fall in that "Baghdad Bob" category. Save your bubbly until Friday 13th. Then savor the fruit of the vine in freedom. The grapes of wrath have been trampled with vengeance.
Just as surely as US tanks appeared in the streets of Baghdad following PR denials to the contrary, Nanos will depart soon. Some managers have already been briefed about this fact.

While some managers may not have been told, others surely have. Maybe you should ask your bosses why they are not publicizing that information. Give them the benfit of the doubt when they deny knowing anything, but remember what they said, and when they said it, so that if later you find they lied, you will know which ones to trust.
I work on the 4th floor -- and I can tell you it is not even a "secret" that Nanos is leaving on the 13th. Cobb is making all the operational decisions (but apparently he is also to be gone soon), and Mara is providing UC oversight. PN will be back in LA for a cameo this week (that should be real interesting).

Don't get me wrong, PN can still cause some damage between now and the 13th, but everything is done.
If you REALLY work on the fourth floor, send your name to Doug in confidence, from an anonymous email account (e.g., Yahoo mail). Doug can then publish a verification without identifying you.

Otherwise, I don't believe a thing about Nanos leaving - we've "cried wolf" too many times before...
The publishing of the NY Times article on the blog could actually end up slowing down Nanos' exit. UC may not want it to look like their man is leaving in distress. They may now need to wait a bit longer to gain sufficient cover for his final exit.
9:53 PM: I thought about that too. Basically, UC is going to continue to look foolish and inept no matter what they do. They supported Nanos way past when it was reasonable to have done so, and now they have lied about his new, unofficial departure date. I suspect that even Robert Dynes will realize that it is time to cut his losses, and cut Nanos loose, the sooner the better. He waited this long, and look at the publicity it got him!
Ah, The Blog is the Source of All Good--and All Evil:
Good for giving The Boot to the Vice Admiral.
Evil for giving UC the Willies about booting him and looking Bad.
How many others, besides myself, failed to receive their copy of the Sunday Times (containing the blog article) this morning? Is this "Physics Today" redux??
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?