NoiseInsideMyHead

OPEN LETTER TO ALL PROSPECTIVE DONORS TO THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH DAKOTA: Don't. Signed, Everyone here except @Frozen4sioux (Patiently waiting for donations to immediately drop to zero, in awe of own power.)

You do realize, you just called a fellow Sioux fan an "arrogant ashole (sic)" because you believe that some donor somewhere might give so much as a single flying flip about what is said about them anonymously on some sports board. Wow. Think about that for a minute.

I don't think that the ultra-rich are known for their thin skin. But just to be safe, I will lead the charge to say "F*** off, lying Engelstads, and take your stinking money back to the desert. UND don't need you no mo'."

I know it's not universally loved on this board, but I'd settle for Lee Ann Chin.

That court adjourned a long time ago.

You mean, like giving the Engelstad family a pass forever and refusing to acknowledge even the possibility that they may be acting out of self-interest rather than the best interests of UND?

A portrait of a scantily clad Kris Engelstad McGarry laying on a sofa.

Finally, some semblance of balanced reporting. http://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/4446387-emails-show-kennedy-engelstad-feud-centered-logo-betty (LOLZ - The Herald got scooped by Rob Port.)

http://undnews.areavoices.com/2018/05/15/und-vp-for-research-eyes-december-retirement/

Nominee for best 'your mom' post of 2018.

I think that viewpoint had already been made clear. 25 pages ago.

Now you're just sounding silly. In no version of reality is the reaction to art even remotely capable of being 'objective.' Art is subjective.

It would make an impressive showcase for someone's car collection say, from 1930s Europe.

Definitely not internal. It was some design trade mag or something. It's on here for someone who wants to go digging.

You still don't get it. You followed the words "my opinion" with "objective standard." Does that not seem the least bit contradictory? News flash -- your opinion is the very definition of subjectivity. That's what it means.

Re-read those two sentences. Then have a sober person interpret and explain them to you.

So that's license to abuse and take advantage in perpetuity? Sorry, not buying it. I got railed for my battered wife reference a few days ago, but your attitude is what reinforces it for me.

Not trying to be too insensitive, but is it okay to bring the sticks inside yet?

I'm willing to bet you're not nearly as emotionally invested in your clients' businesses. Changes things a little bit. Not saying you're not entitled to an opinion, but the FH logo did garner some high praise from unbiased sources. I'm too lazy to look, but it ranked pretty highly on a well-regarded, published list of new designs.

Status quo is a powerful tool, and the path of zero resistance. It's one thing to tweak numbers here and there each year; it's another thing entirely to reconstruct the math. Kennedy played the renegotiation card (probably the first time it's ever been played) and look where it's gotten him. Kelley, having presided over years of ND prosperity and loose cash, didn't want to exercise the nuclear option so late in his tenure, so it fell to Kennedy. Depending on the net gain to UND if the gambit ultimately works, a little PR smudge may be a small price to pay. One that will be forgotten over time, accelerated by a period of financial stability and athletic successes. The jury is still out (for me, at least) as to whether the risk was worth it. Engelstads can do with their money whatever they want. Thin-skinned philanthropists are a curious breed.

It may have been ugly. But the truth is often ugly, and painful. The real question, was it effective?

Here's an analogy for the soft crowd: Let's say you've been renting a home. After 18 years, you hit some hard times. You ask the landlord for some help. Maybe rent forgiveness, maybe reduced rent, maybe renegotiate the lease entirely. After all, you've been a good tenant. The landlord says no. How do you respond? Frustration? Anger? Fight back? Move out? Bite the bullet and stay? Sprinkle in some new facts: 1. The home cost > $100MM, was custom built for you, and becomes yours in 12 years. 2. The landlord is a non-profit corporation set up almost entirely for your benefit. 3. Your proposals are objectively reasonable, and do not cause the landlord any grievous economic harm. Does your response change?

What's "moronic" is blindly supporting the Engelstads based on nothing but past generosity, and dismissing wholesale Kennedy's selected negotiation tactic without even the slightest understanding of what has been said or what is on the table. If someone with an in-depth knowledge of the current deal and the parties' respective proposals and the economic impact on UND of each wants to go out on a limb and call Kennedy a moron, I'll listen.

I suppose you would also counsel a battered wife to stay with her abuser, because he gave her a really nice wedding ring 20 years ago?