While it was always an unfair critique, it should be noted that Summers' spokeswoman called your book "sensationalist gossip," though I suppose that falls short of questioning its accuracy. But in any event, I think a book can be both scathing and accurate -- and in the case of "Harvard Rules," both words are appropriate. Why shy away from being scathing?
 

The poster above beat me to my point. "Truthful" and "scathing" aren't necessarily mutually exclusive terms.
 

What does this mean:

"The new president needs to have a provost who’s completely simpatico," Hyman says. "You know, I understand that."

Would logic, semantics or the philosophy of language help decipher this comment?
 

A group has forwared to the Corporation the nomination of Jeffrey Sachs for President. They have also established a web-site endorsing his nomination:

http://www.sachsforpresident.org/
 

To 9:32, just come out and say what you think rather than trying too hard to be clever. Everyone knows what it means on the surface, that Hyman realizes a president should have the opportunity to appoint his/her own provost. Now enlighten us with your psychoanalysis.
 

Anonymous one...she did call it "sensationalist gossip," yes, but she would never say that there was anything untrue in the book, because there wasn't.

I dislike the term "scathing" because it's used in this context as a way to suggest that the book is not objective or is somehow one-sided.
 

Perhaps John Etchemendy could help, those are his fields of expertise:

http://www-csli.stanford.edu/hp/etchemendy.html
 

Simpatico is the ninth album by British band The Charlatans (known in the United States as The Charlatans UK), released on April 17, 2024 everywhere but the U.S., where it was released on May 2, 2006. The album incorporates hints of dub and reggae into the band's traditional sound and debuted at #10 on the UK album chart.

The title 'Simpatico' means "Pleasing, likeable; congenial, understanding; sensitive, sympathetic" according to the Oxford English Dictionary
 

12:15

so.....
 

That's spam, I have a feeling; there's a kind of spam machine which leaves junk on website comment boards.

For what it's worth, I'm actually a fan of the band, but this record is far from their best. Try the first Charlatans album, "Some Friendly"—it's a classic.
 

Spam has gone really nuts in the past few weeks, it seemed to double almost over night.
 

This entry about a possible Hyman presidency has generated remarkably little enthusiasm among participants in this blog.

Is this indicative of the interest his Presidency would generate among donors, alumni, faculty and students.

Or perhaps more generally the lack of activity on this blog is just reminiscent of that Time magazine cover 'Who cares about Harvard?'

Will the day come when what happens at Harvard is really inconsequential to life in America? Would the kind of President they choose matter to that proposition?

Is the real problem the way Harvard chooses Presidents? Perhaps it is unavoidable that a seven person board would make choices in isolation from important national trends and needs. Even the election of the Pope is a more perfect system because the larger and more diverse base of the college of cardinals.

But of course the Harvard President is not the Pope, even if some of them have enjoyed pontificating in the past.
 

The President of Harvard is or course not the Pope, but perhaps the leadership of the University could learn from the Bishop's letter on race relations:

http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=22439