<p>Yep! All I know is that no matter what, I will never, ever again reach under a stall and ask the next woman if she has any toilet paper!</p>
<p>I could be wrong, but I think reaching under the stall is only a problem if you are a guy. Haven't heard that certain stalls in Nordstroms were known to be places to pick up quickie anonymous lesbian sex...</p>
<p>I suspect it is something that may not be illegal but is certainly immoral...sexual improprieties maybe?</p>
<p>Re Post #8. Trade secrets are usually committed to during the employment offer phase, with dissemination of those prohibited for a 2-3 yr. period after leaving the employ. At least that's how it works in private commercial enterprises (including those involving for-profit educational companies). Perhaps nothing so formal, or in writing, is established in college admissions departments, which could explain anxiety about the instant availability of that.</p>
<p>Get your heads out of the Enquirer.
He had a melanoma a few years ago.
Sometimes things are not what they seem.</p>
<p>True, but in this day and age, it is rare to resign abruptly for health reasons and keep it a secret, unless you are dying because of a sexually transmitted infection. Why not just mention "health" reasons if its his health? You have to admit, with no reason given one thinks the worst...</p>
<p>I am thinking the worst. I am thinking he is dying from melanoma.He didn't publicize the original diagnosis, so why should he feel the need to reveal it now.</p>
<p>So who did he have sex with, get money from, or admit, and were the three related? ;) (I wish him well.)</p>
<p>another theory posted in response to the earlier Daily Pennsylvanian article (<a href="http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2007/08/30/News/Stetson.Makes.Sudden.Departure-2942734.shtml%5B/url%5D">http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2007/08/30/News/Stetson.Makes.Sudden.Departure-2942734.shtml</a> ) is that Stetson was adamently opposed to jettisoning early decision perhaps in conflict with the administration.....this one seems like a stretch to me; that is, that such a dispute could cause the abrupt acceleration of retirement with no positiive fanfare.</p>
<p>btw, its been a week since the last word (official or conjecture article) on this issue....I am surprised that any community can keep such a lid on an issue like this.</p>
<p>It is precisely that lack of "positive fanfare " that makes me believe that "something" negative was happening that neither party wants made public. My money is on financial ;).</p>
<p>Penn Admissions Office is in the midst of putting in a brand new admissions tracking system that cost multi-millions of dollars...my guess is that there was some "consideration" for Stetson that coloured his recommendation...since the student loan scandals came to light there is more probably more sensitivity to this type of thing...</p>
<p>worknprogress, yes! No longer will I reach under and ask for paper, either. That was the first thing I thought of when I heard about this.</p>
<p>Papa Chicken,</p>
<p>RE: post #31 - In my time working in higher ed, I think most of the time when people have "left for other opportunities" in a quick, no happy send-off party, it's because of $ or having an inappropriate relationship.
Never something as mundane as being incompetent.
NOT suggesting that Stetson was/is incompetent...merely that people can hang out in academia for a LOOONG time, only marginally fulfilling their job description, and never be shown the door.
But put your hand in the cookie jar & misuse funds or sleep around & you are gone quickly (& hopefully quietly).</p>
<p>In July, when the original announcement of his "resignation" was made public, effective 2008, I though it a bit odd that it was a resignation and not a retirement. When one leaves a job after 30 years at the same institution, it is generally looked at as a retirement of sorts, even if one pops up at a new/different job later. So I immediately began to think he was leaving to take a different position. If he were ill, certainly he would be thinking retirement, at least for now. Then, if one fights and beats an illness it makes sense to come out of retirement. </p>
<p>When he suddenly called in and left a voicemail that he was making this effective immediately, and had someone come in later that day and collect his things, it still was not "a retirement", and still not consistant with illness. </p>
<p>The comment above on keeping our heads out of the Inquirer made me laugh, as this was said in the article from the Daily Pennsylvanian linked below
[quote]
"The same high-ranking University source, who was granted anonymity because he was not supposed to talk about the departure, said that even in a case such as that of Rafael Robb, who is charged with murdering his wife, more information was released to administrators by the University than has been for Stetson."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
What struck Political Science professor Henry Teune the most was an erroneous article in the Sept. 4 edition of the University's official newsletter, the Penn Almanac, which seemed unaware that Stetson's departure had moved up.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree it has to be something potentially embarrassing for the university as well as Stetson. This is a man who has helped Penn show a remarkable gain in prestige in recent years. One year alone there was a 20% increase in apps. This would be like Coach K quietly leaving Duke</p>
<ol>
<li><p>There's more than enough smoke here to make fire a reasonable hypothesis. </p></li>
<li><p>As a management fan, if not as a curious citizen consumer, I have to admire how tightly the lid has been screwed on here. That's a hard trick to pull off, and I'm surprised Penn has been so successful with it.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>
[quote]
One source claims that Stetson bumped up his resignation after the girl's parents threatened to contact the Inquirer (ouch... you guys almost had it!) Another heard that the parents were preparing a lawsuit against Stetson for something. Must have been some kinky sex.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Another reference to the Inquirer ;) from Ivygate.
<a href="http://www.ivygateblog.com/blog/2007/09/rumors_swirl_about_expenn_admissions_dean_admissions_office_hides.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.ivygateblog.com/blog/2007/09/rumors_swirl_about_expenn_admissions_dean_admissions_office_hides.html</a>
[quote]
The last rumor says that he ran off for poor health reasons. Hopefully that's not the case; we all want the ol' bugaroo to be healthy. And once he's healthy, we want to destroy his legacy with scandals....We'd like to reiterate that these are just rumors... sexual rumors. To our readers, continue sending in as much as you know... To the Penn Office of Admissions, just get over yourselves. Tell us the truth before one of these rumors presents a more marketable alternative.</p>
<p>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is becoming more fun than I could ever imagine.....Thank you for the IvyGate Blog.....LOL! As an alumni who has not particularly appreciated the Penn Admissions "policy change" as of late with respect to legacies, I could honestly care less why Stetson left, but I'm having a blast speculating...Maybe all the hedge fund managers from NY, NJ and CT who wanted their kids to go to their alma mater decided to pull their contributions when Stetson decided to intentionally reduce the % of students from the area....$$$$$$ talks as usual.....</p>
<p>Or maybe not.........</p>