Tuesday, October 04, 2005

Wikipedia entry for George Peter Nanos


Please post this link to the Wikipedia entry for George Peter Nanos:


Thank you,


Just in case this thing gets changed back by Nanophants and Nanophiles, here it is in textual form, as of now.

George Peter Nanos [picture of same]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

´┐╝George Peter (Pete) Nanos was the former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory from January 2003 to May 2005. As of 2005 he was the shortest serving director of the laboratory. He took the helm at Los Alamos in the wake of a string of allegations and scandals involving security, safety and business issues. Initially he was given the title "interim director", but in July 2003 he was made a permanent director by the University of California without any further search. Controversy continued during his tenure including: a case of suspected missing classified disks (which turned out never existed, but were thought to be missing due to a flawed LANL proceedure for tracking the bar codes afixed to classified media), improper charges on lab credit cards, and a student injuring her eye with a laser ([1] PDF). Nanos made the unprecedented decision to stop all normal operations of core functions at the lab for nearly seven months (July 2004 to January 2005) to examine and supplement the Laboratory's procedures and practices. The shutdowns could have cost as much as $367 million in lost work time USD [2]. During an address to Laboratory personnel, he characterized alleged rule-breaking scientists at the Lab as "cowboys" and "buttheads," causing an uproar amongst personnel who felt Nanos had little respect for their efforts to function under what they saw as perpetually defective management practices. He abruptly resigned his position and left Los Alamos to take a job at the Department of Defense (specifically the Defense Threat Reduction Agency) under a Change of Station (COS) agreement with the University of California. Under that agreement, The Univeristy of California continues to pay Nanos' annual salary of $235,000 (2005 salary figure). The year he left there was a large spike in retirements [3]. An employee-run blog criticized Nanos [4] and his management of the institution. The blog was credited by many with expediting, or even facilitating Nanos' early departure. Nanos left under a cloud of employee discontent, missed programmatic milestones and doubts regarding the institution's future prospects. His successor was Robert W. Kuckuck, who took office on May 16, 2005.
Looks like there's only one typo in the Wikipedia entry for George Peter Nanos:

"The Univeristy of California"

Figures. UC can't even get THAT right.
How tiresome, move on, he's gone, you have savaged him, you have defamed him in this silly wikipedia site.

You have made it clear again and again that you hate him. You fret about Nanophants...whatever they are.

As someone who has looked at this blog for months it would be refreshing to see the main posters move to the future instead of the past.
Defamed him, 10:00:56 PM? Point out one word of the "silly" Wikipedia entry for Nanos that is inaccurate. What is written there is a pretty accurate description of George P. Nanos' career at Los Alamos.
Regarding the comment from A Mature Voice at 10/04/2005 10:00:56 PM, no, we will not let Nanos' behvior be forgotten. Nanos hurt and/or ruined the careers and lives of many LANL employees. He affected families. He was arrogant, abusive, inconsiderate, etc. Hopefully, continual reminders of Nanos' failings will serve as a deterent to others.

And, along with this, we need to remember that UC was complicit in all of this. Of course, UC is very quick to punish LANL employees who have done wrong. In fact, even those who are only accused of having done wrong (e.g., the buyer accused of procuring the Mustang) are punished promptly. But, Nanos, clearly the worst offender in the history of LANL, gets a golden parachute.
The 10:00:56 PM post made by "Mature Voice" is anything but mature. It is is a clear example of the type dishonesty that is not permitted on this blog. One is welcome to express one's opinion here; distorting the truth in a weak attempt to bolster one's point of view is not allowed. The Wikipedia entry for our former director is not very complimentary, but it is accurate; it certainly is not defamatory. If anything, it fails to fully characterize former director Nanos' abusive style of management.

I will leave "Mature Voice"'s contribution in place as an example of a comment that crosses the line between honesty and falsehood. Further contributions from this poster will be deleted if they are of similar quality.

Post a Comment

<< Home

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