Notice he didn’t say “Asch is a nice guy but I don’t endorse anyone.”

The real question is why Asch would think it’s okay even to suggest an endorsement.

President Kim: You are a very intelligent leader, and one appointed somewhat like the Chief Justice of the US. Please do not fall into the trap of getting engaged in the hurly-burly world of things political. We are sure you have endorsed no one, but even making comments has its dangers. Your comments about candidates not micro-managing and coming from global companies have already been used by Mr. Asch’s opponents to his disadvantage. His posting wondering if you endorsed him was an apparent attempt to use humor to make the point that he understands the non-micromanaging role of trustees, and also runs a global company even if one smaller in size.

While taking your time here, another comment: Do not be discouraged about these elections. Alumni need to do more to insure level playing fields, but attempts to regulate the discourse will only lead to more uneveness. We must trust the discernment of alumni, when presented with all information, to make the right choices.

Jim Wright claimed to be a neutral observer of alumni governance, yet he voted rather than abstained in the board vote to end parity.

President Kim is a great guy and all, but this “global” and “wildly successful” language along with not “micromanaging” are all templates of the Alumni Relations Office and Kondracke/Replogle in opposition to Joe Asch and the President has used all of them. Now, even though no one has suggested that he has endorsed them he comes out to say that he doesn’t endorse Asch. OK, with the even playing field where is the non endorsement of the others. Where is the denunciation of the dirty tricks played in this campaign by the JoevsDartmouth hoaxer official of the Kondracke/Replogle campaign. How about the endorsement of a real discussion about College problems based on the facts? I have seen no facts of any kind about anything from the Kondracke/Replogle side of things. Kondracke and Replogle are under the misimpression that they are entitled to seats on the Board by virtue of checking whatever mental ability that they have remaining in the hallway outside the Trustee Boardroom. They have both been stripped of their ability to think and act independently by the process used to nominate them.

Is this how this is done? Is this the quality of a campaign for the Board of trustees that has the two insiders standing for nothing and backing it up with no facts about anything? What indication has either Kondracke or Replogle given that they know anything at all about what is going on at the College? Any suggestions about the budget? No. Any ideas about the class availability problem? No. Any sense of intellectual vitality on the part of Kondracke and Replogle? No. Not unless you count their excited attacks on Joe Asch. They are nothing but negative and they are wrong about what they targeted to complain about as far as Joe is concerned. So what does that leave us with? It leaves us with two campaigns that have no ideas where they should have ideas, no facts where they should have facts and they are wrong about what they are negative about, which is, Joe Asch. Does this make anyone feel better about voting for the two wrong nothings in the contest? Not me. I would be happy to hear other thoughts on this.

President Kim – why have you failed to also say you have not endorsed and will no tolerate those who implicitly or explicitly claim you’ve endorsed a candidate? A letter emailed by the alumni council itself, using college resorces, makes such an offense by pairing your words with their statement about John Replogle. This act turns honest election process into a real circus. Unless you distance yourself from both sides, you’re in the ring with the animals. My 2 cents.

To correct the record, in an interview with Ed Haldeman, Chairman of the Board of Trustees, “to remove any question whatsoever about his role in the Board’s actions, President Wright chose to recuse himself from both the Board’s deliberations and voting on these governance issues.” Readers can see the quote and the full interview with Mr. Haldeman at http://www.dartmouth.edu/~news/features/governance/faq-090907.html.

Merle is correct. The comment above should have referenced the Board vote to endorse the AGTF proposal and thereby influence the alumni vote on it.

@ not remembering well: according to Zywicki, the board never voted to endorse the AGTF constitution – only some trustees sent out a letter.

I was pleased by Pres. Kim’s accession to the Presidency, but his response to Mr Asch’s candidacy is unworthy of his position. It is, in my view, inappropriate for the President to openly support ANY candidate for the Board of Trustees. Is he not supposed to be an open and objective observer/participant in College affairs? If he approaches the Board while evincing any bias, he will diminish his authority and doom us to more internecine bickering among the governing and advisory bodies. Like many others, I am appalled at the blatant attempt by the Board to water down or expunge the “parity” requirement for Board composition. This how cliques form, comprised of people who, like politicians, care only for remaining in office. I don’t care one whit about “insiders” or “outsiders” as long as the College is being managed for the benefit of the students and within sound fiscal guidelines. Let’s have Pres. Kim take the high road, and get—and remain—above the fray.