Quote:

---

Are you aware an outside firm was used to confirm the implementation of the 105 PH recommendations?

---

Outside Counsel generally does what the client is paying them to do. The use of outside counsel does not guarantee transparency or positive results.

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

Dman said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

But who trust what the BOR tell us right?

OK, one more thing most don't realize is that the same Pepper Hamilton investigators, Smith & Gomez (now working for the law firm Cozen O'Conner) did an extensive audit to confirm the completion of the 105 recommendations. That report with attachments is 775 pages long and provides a wealth of detail. It is available to the public on baylor.edu

. and BTW, Baylor did indeed implement all 105 recommendations that included changes to the BOR and Athletics and many more. That audit will put you to sleep, but if you really want to be informed it is good stuff.

---

Keyser. Hoping for one intellectually honest answer. Just one.

Should the same BoR that was found guilty of needing such drastic reform, have been the ones to implement these changes? We know why they were..they decided that unilaterally and answer to no one. ...but should they have been the ones? Or would have it been more logical and unifying to have others, easily just as capable if not more, have taken in that responsibility. There would have been no shortage of viable alum options. Ensuring transparency, no conflict of interests in findings, and the ability for the universe to heal.

It's a simple Question. Why avoid answering?

---

Bump for Keyser. It's such a simple question.

---

Maybe he is waiting for an intellectually honest question.

---

Still upset about others not reading your posts from 7 years ago?

The question is actually boiled down to the most basic, intellectually honest form possible. It's why he can't answer. No room for spin.

"Did it make sense, and was it the best option for Baylor to have the same group oversee and implement their own reforms? When other options at the very least as qualified, if not more,
could have been transitioned in under a controlled process. Reforms that were needed due to their own conflicts of interest, meddling, lack of institutional oversight and transparency, etc were literally given as reasons. I'm not touching many more debatable decisions and reasons.

Yes or no?

I understand it's difficult for him to answer and maintain his position, but at its root, it's THE BASIC QUESTION and the most intellectually honest. What was best Baylor? Not individuals..

---

I chopped your legs out from labeling me a BOR apologist when I have posted on a Baylor board against the regents for a dozen years. Plenty around like Stranger that know that.

My contention is that you are a CABer with a new username. Your regent complaints are an opportunity to talk about poor Art. You are attempting to "shout down" all dissent to your posts. I intend to continue to say I think that you lie when you say this is about regents. That lie makes your posts hollow.

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

Dman said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

But who trust what the BOR tell us right?

OK, one more thing most don't realize is that the same Pepper Hamilton investigators, Smith & Gomez (now working for the law firm Cozen O'Conner) did an extensive audit to confirm the completion of the 105 recommendations. That report with attachments is 775 pages long and provides a wealth of detail. It is available to the public on baylor.edu

. and BTW, Baylor did indeed implement all 105 recommendations that included changes to the BOR and Athletics and many more. That audit will put you to sleep, but if you really want to be informed it is good stuff.

---

Keyser. Hoping for one intellectually honest answer. Just one.

Should the same BoR that was found guilty of needing such drastic reform, have been the ones to implement these changes? We know why they were..they decided that unilaterally and answer to no one. ...but should they have been the ones? Or would have it been more logical and unifying to have others, easily just as capable if not more, have taken in that responsibility. There would have been no shortage of viable alum options. Ensuring transparency, no conflict of interests in findings, and the ability for the universe to heal.

It's a simple Question. Why avoid answering?

---

Bump for Keyser. It's such a simple question.

---

Maybe he is waiting for an intellectually honest question.

---

Still upset about others not reading your posts from 7 years ago?

The question is actually boiled down to the most basic, intellectually honest form possible. It's why he can't answer. No room for spin.

"Did it make sense, and was it the best option for Baylor to have the same group oversee and implement their own reforms? When other options at the very least as qualified, if not more,
could have been transitioned in under a controlled process. Reforms that were needed due to their own conflicts of interest, meddling, lack of institutional oversight and transparency, etc were literally given as reasons. I'm not touching many more debatable decisions and reasons.

Yes or no?

I understand it's difficult for him to answer and maintain his position, but at its root, it's THE BASIC QUESTION and the most intellectually honest. What was best Baylor? Not individuals..

---

I chopped your legs out from labeling me a BOR apologist when I have posted on a Baylor board against the regents for a dozen years. Plenty around like Stranger that know that.

My contention is that you are a CABer with a new username. Your regent complaints are an opportunity to talk about poor Art. You are attempting to "shout down" all dissent to your posts. I intend to continue to say I think that you lie when you say this is about regents. That lie makes your posts hollow.

---

You have a large insecurity complex you really need to deal with. Posts from years ago? I don't remember you from Adam. I never engaged in BoR talk before this scandal. Did football play a part in bringing out the skeletons in everyone's closets....yes! It was indeed PART of a sandal much bigger than just football. Read carefully...You mean literally nothing to me. Why try SO hard to make it about you? It's sad.

I'm not rehashing this tired and childish thought train. "I cared before you cared, about REAL problems...so you don't care". It's old. It's a waste of my time. Feel free to keep making a fool of yourself.

New username? Now you're childish and dealing with
Dementia? That's not an easy combo to pull off. (In my line of work I can line up testing from some our countries best and brightest neurologists. We should get that looked at.). It's easy to throw out baseless claims. Please..tell me..what was my username.

I'll borrow Keysers line: feel free to use that search button. I've been critical of Cab, as things came out, and openly said he needed to run a tighter ship. I've just not been hypocritical in my application of accountability. I just literally agreed with a staff post saying the same..it's just a few back.. do yourself a favor and go read. Read slowly. Let's aboid 4 more posts due to comprehension skills.

Yawn...

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

Dman said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

But who trust what the BOR tell us right?

OK, one more thing most don't realize is that the same Pepper Hamilton investigators, Smith & Gomez (now working for the law firm Cozen O'Conner) did an extensive audit to confirm the completion of the 105 recommendations. That report with attachments is 775 pages long and provides a wealth of detail. It is available to the public on baylor.edu

. and BTW, Baylor did indeed implement all 105 recommendations that included changes to the BOR and Athletics and many more. That audit will put you to sleep, but if you really want to be informed it is good stuff.

---

Keyser. Hoping for one intellectually honest answer. Just one.

Should the same BoR that was found guilty of needing such drastic reform, have been the ones to implement these changes? We know why they were..they decided that unilaterally and answer to no one. ...but should they have been the ones? Or would have it been more logical and unifying to have others, easily just as capable if not more, have taken in that responsibility. There would have been no shortage of viable alum options. Ensuring transparency, no conflict of interests in findings, and the ability for the universe to heal.

It's a simple Question. Why avoid answering?

---

Bump for Keyser. It's such a simple question.

---

Maybe he is waiting for an intellectually honest question.

---

Still upset about others not reading your posts from 7 years ago?

The question is actually boiled down to the most basic, intellectually honest form possible. It's why he can't answer. No room for spin.

"Did it make sense, and was it the best option for Baylor to have the same group oversee and implement their own reforms? When other options at the very least as qualified, if not more,
could have been transitioned in under a controlled process. Reforms that were needed due to their own conflicts of interest, meddling, lack of institutional oversight and transparency, etc were literally given as reasons. I'm not touching many more debatable decisions and reasons.

Yes or no?

I understand it's difficult for him to answer and maintain his position, but at its root, it's THE BASIC QUESTION and the most intellectually honest. What was best Baylor? Not individuals..

---

I chopped your legs out from labeling me a BOR apologist when I have posted on a Baylor board against the regents for a dozen years. Plenty around like Stranger that know that.

My contention is that you are a CABer with a new username. Your regent complaints are an opportunity to talk about poor Art. You are attempting to "shout down" all dissent to your posts. I intend to continue to say I think that you lie when you say this is about regents. That lie makes your posts hollow.

---

I think you are exactly right. I'm all for open conversation about making Baylor better but all of this from so many of the posters simply rings hollow bc it's simply not genuine. It is anger stemming from the firing of a winning football coach. All the talk about decades old stuff is mostly nonsense. Most of it is the general politics of so many institutions that was there before and after this scandal. Slight variance in the aspect of Baylor being a private religious affiliated school compared to state school but institutional politics all the same. Only now are so many crying foul or looking at reasons to justify their anger. Again, no one was saying much when the previous football staff kept getting raises. That's the true hypocrisy.

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

Dman said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

But who trust what the BOR tell us right?

OK, one more thing most don't realize is that the same Pepper Hamilton investigators, Smith & Gomez (now working for the law firm Cozen O'Conner) did an extensive audit to confirm the completion of the 105 recommendations. That report with attachments is 775 pages long and provides a wealth of detail. It is available to the public on baylor.edu

. and BTW, Baylor did indeed implement all 105 recommendations that included changes to the BOR and Athletics and many more. That audit will put you to sleep, but if you really want to be informed it is good stuff.

---

Keyser. Hoping for one intellectually honest answer. Just one.

Should the same BoR that was found guilty of needing such drastic reform, have been the ones to implement these changes? We know why they were..they decided that unilaterally and answer to no one. ...but should they have been the ones? Or would have it been more logical and unifying to have others, easily just as capable if not more, have taken in that responsibility. There would have been no shortage of viable alum options. Ensuring transparency, no conflict of interests in findings, and the ability for the universe to heal.

It's a simple Question. Why avoid answering?

---

Bump for Keyser. It's such a simple question.

---

Maybe he is waiting for an intellectually honest question.

---

Still upset about others not reading your posts from 7 years ago?

The question is actually boiled down to the most basic, intellectually honest form possible. It's why he can't answer. No room for spin.

"Did it make sense, and was it the best option for Baylor to have the same group oversee and implement their own reforms? When other options at the very least as qualified, if not more,
could have been transitioned in under a controlled process. Reforms that were needed due to their own conflicts of interest, meddling, lack of institutional oversight and transparency, etc were literally given as reasons. I'm not touching many more debatable decisions and reasons.

Yes or no?

I understand it's difficult for him to answer and maintain his position, but at its root, it's THE BASIC QUESTION and the most intellectually honest. What was best Baylor? Not individuals..

---

I chopped your legs out from labeling me a BOR apologist when I have posted on a Baylor board against the regents for a dozen years. Plenty around like Stranger that know that.

My contention is that you are a CABer with a new username. Your regent complaints are an opportunity to talk about poor Art. You are attempting to "shout down" all dissent to your posts. I intend to continue to say I think that you lie when you say this is about regents. That lie makes your posts hollow.

---

You have a large insecurity complex you really need to deal with. Posts from years ago? I don't remember you from Adam. I never engaged in BoR talk before this scandal. Did football play a part of that..yes! It was indeed PART of the scandal. You mean literally nothing to me. Why must this be about you?

I'm not rehashing this tired and childish thought train. "I cared before you cared, about REAL problems...so you don't care". It's old. It's a waste of my time. Feel free to keep making a fool of yourself.

New username? Now you're childish and dealing with
Dementia? That's not an easy combo to pull off. It's easy to throw out baseless claims. Please..tell me..what was my username.

I'll borrow Keysers line: feel free to use that search button. I've been more than critical of Cab, as things came out, and openly said he needed to run a tighter ship. I just literally agreed with a staff post saying the same..it's just a few back.. do yourself a favor and go read.

Yawn...

---

It hurts that you can't just dismiss me as a BOR apologist. Continue to distort and go personal. Posters see through that. At least Chuckroast is honest in his analysis and motivations. I respect that.

Keyser Soze said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Done, read the audit report also on Baylor.edu

---

Where is apology?

"We're sorry if any of you were offended"
Touching

---

You really didn't take the time to look did you? This is kind of of typical MO. Just shout louder. Stop doing that.

From the independent audit:

On May 26, 2016, the University also released a statement by Ron Murff, Chair of Baylor Board of Regents: "We, as the governing Board of this University, offer our apologies to the many who sought help from the University. We are deeply sorry for the harm that survivors have endured." Two additional letters of apology were issued by Interim President Dr. David Garland. During the summer of 2016, Baylor began the process of reaching out to the eight individual complainants, as identified in the investigation, to offer personal apologies and support. Members of Baylor's Board of Regents and senior leadership, including Dr. Garland, Dr. Kevin Jackson, Vice President for Student Life, Dr. Reagan Ramsower, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Mack Rhoades, Athletics Director, Christopher Holmes, General Counsel, Patty Crawford, Title IX Coordinator, and Dr. Livingstone, the incoming President, met individually with complainants and their families to hear their perspective and experience, offer personal and institutional apologies, and seek to provide remedial and restorative remedies

---

Thanks. I was referring to an apology to alumni for the manner in which this was handled.

I thought I looked. I did not see the passage you pasted above.

Keyser, I think things are pretty clear, at least from my perspective. I'll try not to trouble you again.

I am unreconstructed. BOR has robbed me of something that was precious to me, love for Baylor and college football in general.

Life goes on. There are a lot of disappointments in life; everyone has them.

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

Dman said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

But who trust what the BOR tell us right?

OK, one more thing most don't realize is that the same Pepper Hamilton investigators, Smith & Gomez (now working for the law firm Cozen O'Conner) did an extensive audit to confirm the completion of the 105 recommendations. That report with attachments is 775 pages long and provides a wealth of detail. It is available to the public on baylor.edu

. and BTW, Baylor did indeed implement all 105 recommendations that included changes to the BOR and Athletics and many more. That audit will put you to sleep, but if you really want to be informed it is good stuff.

---

Keyser. Hoping for one intellectually honest answer. Just one.

Should the same BoR that was found guilty of needing such drastic reform, have been the ones to implement these changes? We know why they were..they decided that unilaterally and answer to no one. ...but should they have been the ones? Or would have it been more logical and unifying to have others, easily just as capable if not more, have taken in that responsibility. There would have been no shortage of viable alum options. Ensuring transparency, no conflict of interests in findings, and the ability for the universe to heal.

It's a simple Question. Why avoid answering?

---

Bump for Keyser. It's such a simple question.

---

Maybe he is waiting for an intellectually honest question.

---

Still upset about others not reading your posts from 7 years ago?

The question is actually boiled down to the most basic, intellectually honest form possible. It's why he can't answer. No room for spin.

"Did it make sense, and was it the best option for Baylor to have the same group oversee and implement their own reforms? When other options at the very least as qualified, if not more,
could have been transitioned in under a controlled process. Reforms that were needed due to their own conflicts of interest, meddling, lack of institutional oversight and transparency, etc were literally given as reasons. I'm not touching many more debatable decisions and reasons.

Yes or no?

I understand it's difficult for him to answer and maintain his position, but at its root, it's THE BASIC QUESTION and the most intellectually honest. What was best Baylor? Not individuals..

---

I chopped your legs out from labeling me a BOR apologist when I have posted on a Baylor board against the regents for a dozen years. Plenty around like Stranger that know that.

My contention is that you are a CABer with a new username. Your regent complaints are an opportunity to talk about poor Art. You are attempting to "shout down" all dissent to your posts. I intend to continue to say I think that you lie when you say this is about regents. That lie makes your posts hollow.

---

You have a large insecurity complex you really need to deal with. Posts from years ago? I don't remember you from Adam. I never engaged in BoR talk before this scandal. Did football play a part of that..yes! It was indeed PART of the scandal. You mean literally nothing to me. Why must this be about you?

I'm not rehashing this tired and childish thought train. "I cared before you cared, about REAL problems...so you don't care". It's old. It's a waste of my time. Feel free to keep making a fool of yourself.

New username? Now you're childish and dealing with
Dementia? That's not an easy combo to pull off. It's easy to throw out baseless claims. Please..tell me..what was my username.

I'll borrow Keysers line: feel free to use that search button. I've been more than critical of Cab, as things came out, and openly said he needed to run a tighter ship. I just literally agreed with a staff post saying the same..it's just a few back.. do yourself a favor and go read.

Yawn...

---

It hurts that you can't just dismiss me as a BOR apologist. Continue to distort and go personal. Posters see through that. At least Chuckroast is honest in his analysis and motivations. I respect that.

---

You started this insane logic train. I've openly given you credit for being on the "BoR is bad" train before me and gave you a Gold star. What more do you want? i simply don't get your incessant need for self validation: "i cared before you cared, about REAL problems...so you don't care". My position is clear and consistent. ALL SINNED. ALL FAILED OUR SCHOOL. NOT ALL WERE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. This is hypocrisy. It's not in the schools best interest. It's in individual members of the BoRs best interest.

Waiting on the my other usernames. Please provide. It's just your Credibility on the line.

"You mean literally nothing to me." HAHAHAHA

My crazy girlfriend at 22 said that to me when we broke up. Yes NoBSU we see where the crazy talk is generated. But we are supposed to give credibility to that logic and reasoning?!?

TheDom said:

---

"You literally mean nothing to me." HAHAHAHA

My crazy girlfriend at 22 said that to me when we broke up. Yes NoBSU we see where the crazy talk is generated. But we are supposed to give credibility to that logic and reasoning?!?

---

Looks like your girlfriend came out ahead and saved herself many years of grief.

Osodecentx said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Done, read the audit report also on Baylor.edu

---

Where is apology?

"We're sorry if any of you were offended"
Touching

---

You really didn't take the time to look did you? This is kind of of typical MO. Just shout louder. Stop doing that.

From the independent audit:

On May 26, 2016, the University also released a statement by Ron Murff, Chair of Baylor Board of Regents: "We, as the governing Board of this University, offer our apologies to the many who sought help from the University. We are deeply sorry for the harm that survivors have endured." Two additional letters of apology were issued by Interim President Dr. David Garland. During the summer of 2016, Baylor began the process of reaching out to the eight individual complainants, as identified in the investigation, to offer personal apologies and support. Members of Baylor's Board of Regents and senior leadership, including Dr. Garland, Dr. Kevin Jackson, Vice President for Student Life, Dr. Reagan Ramsower, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Mack Rhoades, Athletics Director, Christopher Holmes, General Counsel, Patty Crawford, Title IX Coordinator, and Dr. Livingstone, the incoming President, met individually with complainants and their families to hear their perspective and experience, offer personal and institutional apologies, and seek to provide remedial and restorative remedies

---

Thanks. I was referring to an apology to alumni for the manner in which this was handled.

I thought I looked. I did not see the passage you pasted above.

Keyser, I think things are pretty clear, at least from my perspective. I'll try not to trouble you again.

I am unreconstructed. BOR has robbed me of something that was precious to me, love for Baylor and college football in general.

Life goes on. There are a lot of disappointments in life; everyone has them.

---

Fair enough.

I know due to my of side of different arguments this is hard for most to believe, but it killed me too to see us go so far in football only to have to take a giant step backwards. There was nothing more for me than going to shaggy after we had beat the horns (again) and read the laments & hate on their board.

YoakDaddy said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Done, read the audit report also on Baylor.edu

---

Where is apology?

"We're sorry if any of you were offended"
Touching

---

You really didn't take the time to look did you? This is kind of of typical MO. Just shout louder. Stop doing that.

From the independent audit:

On May 26, 2016, the University also released a statement by Ron Murff, Chair of Baylor Board of Regents: "We, as the governing Board of this University, offer our apologies to the many who sought help from the University. We are deeply sorry for the harm that survivors have endured." Two additional letters of apology were issued by Interim President Dr. David Garland. During the summer of 2016, Baylor began the process of reaching out to the eight individual complainants, as identified in the investigation, to offer personal apologies and support. Members of Baylor's Board of Regents and senior leadership, including Dr. Garland, Dr. Kevin Jackson, Vice President for Student Life, Dr. Reagan Ramsower, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Mack Rhoades, Athletics Director, Christopher Holmes, General Counsel, Patty Crawford, Title IX Coordinator, and Dr. Livingstone, the incoming President, met individually with complainants and their families to hear their perspective and experience, offer personal and institutional apologies, and seek to provide remedial and restorative remedies

---

I've read those parts from other places. Livingstone wasn't here in 2016; she was named in April 2017. You might want to check your copy/paste work there.

---

read more closely - it began in the summer of 2016, it didn't say it occurred in 2016

Even if that error had occurred, would such a small detail really shake things up that much for you? Do you really think apologies have not been issued?

---

I saw "During the summer of 2016". The date isn't that big of a deal to me, but they need to be more specific. As to apologies....I've had bad meals at restaurants and had managers come to the table to apologize. Sexual assault at my university and we get a letter.....chickenshlts couldn't even get in front of a camera for that (or even ride in the 2016 HC parade)...unless I missed it in 2016. At least Garland had the stones to take questions in front of a camera from the subcommittee in Austin last session.

Serious, separate question: how many of the 10 Jane Does are related to the university at large and how many are related to athletics? Curious because I don't know and figured you might.

---

What part of "met individually with complainants and their families to hear their perspective and experience, offer personal and institutional apologies, and seek to provide remedial and restorative remedies" sounds like a letter?

Keyser Soze said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Done, read the audit report also on Baylor.edu

---

Where is apology?

"We're sorry if any of you were offended"
Touching

---

You really didn't take the time to look did you? This is kind of of typical MO. Just shout louder. Stop doing that.

From the independent audit:

On May 26, 2016, the University also released a statement by Ron Murff, Chair of Baylor Board of Regents: "We, as the governing Board of this University, offer our apologies to the many who sought help from the University. We are deeply sorry for the harm that survivors have endured." Two additional letters of apology were issued by Interim President Dr. David Garland. During the summer of 2016, Baylor began the process of reaching out to the eight individual complainants, as identified in the investigation, to offer personal apologies and support. Members of Baylor's Board of Regents and senior leadership, including Dr. Garland, Dr. Kevin Jackson, Vice President for Student Life, Dr. Reagan Ramsower, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Mack Rhoades, Athletics Director, Christopher Holmes, General Counsel, Patty Crawford, Title IX Coordinator, and Dr. Livingstone, the incoming President, met individually with complainants and their families to hear their perspective and experience, offer personal and institutional apologies, and seek to provide remedial and restorative remedies

---

Thanks. I was referring to an apology to alumni for the manner in which this was handled.

I thought I looked. I did not see the passage you pasted above.

Keyser, I think things are pretty clear, at least from my perspective. I'll try not to trouble you again.

I am unreconstructed. BOR has robbed me of something that was precious to me, love for Baylor and college football in general.

Life goes on. There are a lot of disappointments in life; everyone has them.

---

Fair enough.

I know due to my of side of different arguments this is hard for most to believe, but it killed me too to see us go so far in football only to have to take a giant step backwards. There was nothing more for me than going to shaggy after we had beat the horns (again) and read the laments & hate on their board.

---

I agree, but this is more than football. Trust is fundamental to the relationship.

YoakDaddy said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Done, read the audit report also on Baylor.edu

---

Where is apology?

"We're sorry if any of you were offended"
Touching

---

You really didn't take the time to look did you? This is kind of of typical MO. Just shout louder. Stop doing that.

From the independent audit:

On May 26, 2016, the University also released a statement by Ron Murff, Chair of Baylor Board of Regents: "We, as the governing Board of this University, offer our apologies to the many who sought help from the University. We are deeply sorry for the harm that survivors have endured." Two additional letters of apology were issued by Interim President Dr. David Garland. During the summer of 2016, Baylor began the process of reaching out to the eight individual complainants, as identified in the investigation, to offer personal apologies and support. Members of Baylor's Board of Regents and senior leadership, including Dr. Garland, Dr. Kevin Jackson, Vice President for Student Life, Dr. Reagan Ramsower, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Mack Rhoades, Athletics Director, Christopher Holmes, General Counsel, Patty Crawford, Title IX Coordinator, and Dr. Livingstone, the incoming President, met individually with complainants and their families to hear their perspective and experience, offer personal and institutional apologies, and seek to provide remedial and restorative remedies

---

I've read those parts from other places. Livingstone wasn't here in 2016; she was named in April 2017. You might want to check your copy/paste work there.

---

read more closely - it began in the summer of 2016, it didn't say it occurred in 2016

Even if that error had occurred, would such a small detail really shake things up that much for you? Do you really think apologies have not been issued?

---

I saw "During the summer of 2016". The date isn't that big of a deal to me, but they need to be more specific. As to apologies....I've had bad meals at restaurants and had managers come to the table to apologize. Sexual assault at my university and we get a letter.....chickenshlts couldn't even get in front of a camera for that (or even ride in the 2016 HC parade)...unless I missed it in 2016. At least Garland had the stones to take questions in front of a camera from the subcommittee in Austin last session.

Serious, separate question: how many of the 10 Jane Does are related to the university at large and how many are related to athletics? Curious because I don't know and figured you might.

---

Really don't know at all. I would think at least one to open the door for the AD to come testify, but who knows. Maybe Franko could shine some light on to for us.

Thee University said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

Reporter said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

Cue Richard the Dildo Salesman in 3..2..1

---

First I will most certainly not tell you I love you. Second, you have shown an Abnormal fascination with sex toys!!!

---

Don't leave out the male enhancement pills.

Just sayin.

---

Lets not forget that Dick's company also sells anal beads too.

---

I would like to suggest that a very large number of you Briles Boys have some of those beads stuck for several years now!

---

I would suggest it.
Art and Warren Jeffs' followers are about the same minus screwing of the under aged kids. It's a cult and the guy at the top is it's high leader.

NoBSU said:

---

Eball said:

---

Whether you are pro BOR, anti CAB or just tired of the mess and hoping it goes away it is impossible to ignore the sworn testimony of our former AD. You have to stick your head so far into the sand I fear for your safety.

This is not some anonymous internet fan posting on a forum or blog...it is not any media member with an agenda it is a guy who was successful in his role whether you liked him or not for 13 years. He should know something and the only real way to discount his testimony is to believe he just lied under oath and committed perjury.

---

It rings a little empty to be schooled on how to weigh plaintiff attorney filings by a group of posters that have poo-pooed plaintiff attorney filings for two years. Some of those filings have been from depositions. Plus one of Ian's biggest bombshells was related to him. It was second/third/forth hand data.

You seem to be upset that Ian's testimony has not motivated alums to march on Pat Neff with pitchforks and torches. My reply to you is that I have been ticked off at regents for years. McCaw and Briles had two football players convicted of sexual assault. They deserved to go. They were both paid handsomely to go. The FOB regents have been a stain on Baylor for over 12 years. We need to clean house. I knew that before Ian's deposition. Do you have a personal need for me to dislike regents past level 11?

---

He is looking for Defcon Level 1 dislike. Nothing else is good enough.

Osodecentx said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Done, read the audit report also on Baylor.edu

---

Where is apology?

"We're sorry if any of you were offended"
Touching

---

You really didn't take the time to look did you? This is kind of of typical MO. Just shout louder. Stop doing that.

From the independent audit:

On May 26, 2016, the University also released a statement by Ron Murff, Chair of Baylor Board of Regents: "We, as the governing Board of this University, offer our apologies to the many who sought help from the University. We are deeply sorry for the harm that survivors have endured." Two additional letters of apology were issued by Interim President Dr. David Garland. During the summer of 2016, Baylor began the process of reaching out to the eight individual complainants, as identified in the investigation, to offer personal apologies and support. Members of Baylor's Board of Regents and senior leadership, including Dr. Garland, Dr. Kevin Jackson, Vice President for Student Life, Dr. Reagan Ramsower, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Mack Rhoades, Athletics Director, Christopher Holmes, General Counsel, Patty Crawford, Title IX Coordinator, and Dr. Livingstone, the incoming President, met individually with complainants and their families to hear their perspective and experience, offer personal and institutional apologies, and seek to provide remedial and restorative remedies

---

Thanks. I was referring to an apology to alumni for the manner in which this was handled.

I thought I looked. I did not see the passage you pasted above.

Keyser, I think things are pretty clear, at least from my perspective. I'll try not to trouble you again.

I am unreconstructed. BOR has robbed me of something that was precious to me, love for Baylor and college football in general.

Life goes on. There are a lot of disappointments in life; everyone has them.

---

How long did you follow college football? It's always been a beauty contest.

Are you planning on going to Briles' retirement party?

Dman said:

---

TheDom said:

---

"You literally mean nothing to me." HAHAHAHA

My crazy girlfriend at 22 said that to me when we broke up. Yes NoBSU we see where the crazy talk is generated. But we are supposed to give credibility to that logic and reasoning?!?

---

Looks like your girlfriend came out ahead and saved herself many years of grief.

---

Speaking of Briles' retirement party? You looking forward to it? When is he announcing? So far, the dildo beed salesman quit the board. One bad school regent gone from his position. Retired from the board. When is the big "official" retirement party for Briles?

Why is Briles not retired? Willis retired.

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

Dman said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

But who trust what the BOR tell us right?

OK, one more thing most don't realize is that the same Pepper Hamilton investigators, Smith & Gomez (now working for the law firm Cozen O'Conner) did an extensive audit to confirm the completion of the 105 recommendations. That report with attachments is 775 pages long and provides a wealth of detail. It is available to the public on baylor.edu

. and BTW, Baylor did indeed implement all 105 recommendations that included changes to the BOR and Athletics and many more. That audit will put you to sleep, but if you really want to be informed it is good stuff.

---

Keyser. Hoping for one intellectually honest answer. Just one.

Should the same BoR that was found guilty of needing such drastic reform, have been the ones to implement these changes? We know why they were..they decided that unilaterally and answer to no one. ...but should they have been the ones? Or would have it been more logical and unifying to have others, easily just as capable if not more, have taken in that responsibility. There would have been no shortage of viable alum options. Ensuring transparency, no conflict of interests in findings, and the ability for the universe to heal.

It's a simple Question. Why avoid answering?

---

Bump for Keyser. It's such a simple question.

---

Maybe he is waiting for an intellectually honest question.

---

Still upset about others not reading your posts from 7 years ago?

The question is actually boiled down to the most basic, intellectually honest form possible. It's why he can't answer. No room for spin.

"Did it make sense, and was it the best option for Baylor to have the same group oversee and implement their own reforms? When other options at the very least as qualified, if not more,
could have been transitioned in under a controlled process. Reforms that were needed due to their own conflicts of interest, meddling, lack of institutional oversight and transparency, etc were literally given as reasons. I'm not touching many more debatable decisions and reasons.

Yes or no?

I understand it's difficult for him to answer and maintain his position, but at its root, it's THE BASIC QUESTION and the most intellectually honest. What was best Baylor? Not individuals..

---

I chopped your legs out from labeling me a BOR apologist when I have posted on a Baylor board against the regents for a dozen years. Plenty around like Stranger that know that.

My contention is that you are a CABer with a new username. Your regent complaints are an opportunity to talk about poor Art. You are attempting to "shout down" all dissent to your posts. I intend to continue to say I think that you lie when you say this is about regents. That lie makes your posts hollow.

---

You have a large insecurity complex you really need to deal with. Posts from years ago? I don't remember you from Adam. I never engaged in BoR talk before this scandal. Did football play a part of that..yes! It was indeed PART of the scandal. You mean literally nothing to me. Why must this be about you?

I'm not rehashing this tired and childish thought train. "I cared before you cared, about REAL problems...so you don't care". It's old. It's a waste of my time. Feel free to keep making a fool of yourself.

New username? Now you're childish and dealing with
Dementia? That's not an easy combo to pull off. It's easy to throw out baseless claims. Please..tell me..what was my username.

I'll borrow Keysers line: feel free to use that search button. I've been more than critical of Cab, as things came out, and openly said he needed to run a tighter ship. I just literally agreed with a staff post saying the same..it's just a few back.. do yourself a favor and go read.

Yawn...

---

It hurts that you can't just dismiss me as a BOR apologist. Continue to distort and go personal. Posters see through that. At least Chuckroast is honest in his analysis and motivations. I respect that.

---

You started this insane logic train. I've openly given you credit for being on the "BoR is bad" train before me and gave you a Gold star. What more do you want? i simply don't get your incessant need for self validation: "i cared before you cared, about REAL problems...so you don't care". My position is clear and consistent. ALL SINNED. ALL FAILED OUR SCHOOL. NOT ALL WERE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. This is hypocrisy. It's not in the schools best interest. It's in individual members of the BoRs best interest.

Waiting on the my other usernames. Please provide. It's just your Credibility on the line.

---

Yes, I understand your MO. In a few hours, you post your request again as if I have some responsibility to respond to your random questions. Oops, another of your standards chopped out from under you. Another thing you like to do is claim posters are obsessed with you.
You are a BOR Apologist
You aren't responding to my question
You are obsessed with me

Forest Bueller said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Eball said:

---

Whether you are pro BOR, anti CAB or just tired of the mess and hoping it goes away it is impossible to ignore the sworn testimony of our former AD. You have to stick your head so far into the sand I fear for your safety.

This is not some anonymous internet fan posting on a forum or blog...it is not any media member with an agenda it is a guy who was successful in his role whether you liked him or not for 13 years. He should know something and the only real way to discount his testimony is to believe he just lied under oath and committed perjury.

---

It rings a little empty to be schooled on how to weigh plaintiff attorney filings by a group of posters that have poo-pooed plaintiff attorney filings for two years. Some of those filings have been from depositions. Plus one of Ian's biggest bombshells was related to him. It was second/third/forth hand data.

You seem to be upset that Ian's testimony has not motivated alums to march on Pat Neff with pitchforks and torches. My reply to you is that I have been ticked off at regents for years. McCaw and Briles had two football players convicted of sexual assault. They deserved to go. They were both paid handsomely to go. The FOB regents have been a stain on Baylor for over 12 years. We need to clean house. I knew that before Ian's deposition. Do you have a personal need for me to dislike regents past level 11?

---

He is looking for Defcon Level 1 dislike. Nothing else is good enough.

---

Been there on the regents that were FOB members for a longtime. That is the lot that needs scrubbed. I started the explicit Pharmaca links so there is that. I am all in on Murff dislike. Beyond that, the regents around in 2015-16 are sheep.

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

Dman said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

But who trust what the BOR tell us right?

OK, one more thing most don't realize is that the same Pepper Hamilton investigators, Smith & Gomez (now working for the law firm Cozen O'Conner) did an extensive audit to confirm the completion of the 105 recommendations. That report with attachments is 775 pages long and provides a wealth of detail. It is available to the public on baylor.edu

. and BTW, Baylor did indeed implement all 105 recommendations that included changes to the BOR and Athletics and many more. That audit will put you to sleep, but if you really want to be informed it is good stuff.

---

Keyser. Hoping for one intellectually honest answer. Just one.

Should the same BoR that was found guilty of needing such drastic reform, have been the ones to implement these changes? We know why they were..they decided that unilaterally and answer to no one. ...but should they have been the ones? Or would have it been more logical and unifying to have others, easily just as capable if not more, have taken in that responsibility. There would have been no shortage of viable alum options. Ensuring transparency, no conflict of interests in findings, and the ability for the universe to heal.

It's a simple Question. Why avoid answering?

---

Bump for Keyser. It's such a simple question.

---

Maybe he is waiting for an intellectually honest question.

---

Still upset about others not reading your posts from 7 years ago?

The question is actually boiled down to the most basic, intellectually honest form possible. It's why he can't answer. No room for spin.

"Did it make sense, and was it the best option for Baylor to have the same group oversee and implement their own reforms? When other options at the very least as qualified, if not more,
could have been transitioned in under a controlled process. Reforms that were needed due to their own conflicts of interest, meddling, lack of institutional oversight and transparency, etc were literally given as reasons. I'm not touching many more debatable decisions and reasons.

Yes or no?

I understand it's difficult for him to answer and maintain his position, but at its root, it's THE BASIC QUESTION and the most intellectually honest. What was best Baylor? Not individuals..

---

I chopped your legs out from labeling me a BOR apologist when I have posted on a Baylor board against the regents for a dozen years. Plenty around like Stranger that know that.

My contention is that you are a CABer with a new username. Your regent complaints are an opportunity to talk about poor Art. You are attempting to "shout down" all dissent to your posts. I intend to continue to say I think that you lie when you say this is about regents. That lie makes your posts hollow.

---

You have a large insecurity complex you really need to deal with. Posts from years ago? I don't remember you from Adam. I never engaged in BoR talk before this scandal. Did football play a part of that..yes! It was indeed PART of the scandal. You mean literally nothing to me. Why must this be about you?

I'm not rehashing this tired and childish thought train. "I cared before you cared, about REAL problems...so you don't care". It's old. It's a waste of my time. Feel free to keep making a fool of yourself.

New username? Now you're childish and dealing with
Dementia? That's not an easy combo to pull off. It's easy to throw out baseless claims. Please..tell me..what was my username.

I'll borrow Keysers line: feel free to use that search button. I've been more than critical of Cab, as things came out, and openly said he needed to run a tighter ship. I just literally agreed with a staff post saying the same..it's just a few back.. do yourself a favor and go read.

Yawn...

---

It hurts that you can't just dismiss me as a BOR apologist. Continue to distort and go personal. Posters see through that. At least Chuckroast is honest in his analysis and motivations. I respect that.

---

You started this insane logic train. I've openly given you credit for being on the "BoR is bad" train before me and gave you a Gold star. What more do you want? i simply don't get your incessant need for self validation: "i cared before you cared, about REAL problems...so you don't care". My position is clear and consistent. ALL SINNED. ALL FAILED OUR SCHOOL. NOT ALL WERE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. This is hypocrisy. It's not in the schools best interest. It's in individual members of the BoRs best interest.

Waiting on the my other usernames. Please provide. It's just your Credibility on the line.

---

Yes, I understand your MO. In a few hours, you post your request again as if I have some responsibility to respond to your random questions. Oops, another of your standards chopped out from under you. Another thing you like to do is claim posters are obsessed with you.
You are a BOR Apologist
You aren't responding to my question
You are obsessed with me

---

Forgot one.

You will not be getting an invitation to Coach Art Briles' retirement party.

The regents FOB group wrecked about 1/2 the time prior to no discipline, no control Briles. These groups were on a collision course but Art underestimated what they would do when his program damaged the brand. The regent board acted like they had in the past. Art didn't realize his normal wreckless behavior would catch up with him. He acted no differently than his reputation pegged him.
Great coach but does what he pleases and answers to no one (which is now true and he won't answer to anyone except the NCAA IF NECESSARY).

NoBSU said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Eball said:

---

Whether you are pro BOR, anti CAB or just tired of the mess and hoping it goes away it is impossible to ignore the sworn testimony of our former AD. You have to stick your head so far into the sand I fear for your safety.

This is not some anonymous internet fan posting on a forum or blog...it is not any media member with an agenda it is a guy who was successful in his role whether you liked him or not for 13 years. He should know something and the only real way to discount his testimony is to believe he just lied under oath and committed perjury.

---

It rings a little empty to be schooled on how to weigh plaintiff attorney filings by a group of posters that have poo-pooed plaintiff attorney filings for two years. Some of those filings have been from depositions. Plus one of Ian's biggest bombshells was related to him. It was second/third/forth hand data.

You seem to be upset that Ian's testimony has not motivated alums to march on Pat Neff with pitchforks and torches. My reply to you is that I have been ticked off at regents for years. McCaw and Briles had two football players convicted of sexual assault. They deserved to go. They were both paid handsomely to go. The FOB regents have been a stain on Baylor for over 12 years. We need to clean house. I knew that before Ian's deposition. Do you have a personal need for me to dislike regents past level 11?

---

He is looking for Defcon Level 1 dislike. Nothing else is good enough.

---

Been there on the regents that were FOB members for a longtime. That is the lot that needs scrubbed. I started the explicit Pharmaca links so there is that. I am all in on Murff dislike. Beyond that, the regents around in 2015-16 are sheep.

---

You did open those up and confirmed that those threads were real. In fact, those first posters' posts were questioning the dildo thread's validity. You weren't getting a Christmas card from First Baptist Arlington Texas or other board associated churches after you confirmed the sex toy industry leader sat on our board with the leader of Christian children's sock puppet ministries.
Briles' group was late to the regent party. The regents had already filled up the swimming pool and drowned Briles by having him grab the blood/rape kit money.
Now, the mission is to destroy the FOFs, a carefully worded piece used as regent bread and butter. Briles' friends tried to take them on with little success to the point Briles' reputation was slapped harder than Stormy Daniels' on the job butt.

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

Dman said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

But who trust what the BOR tell us right?

OK, one more thing most don't realize is that the same Pepper Hamilton investigators, Smith & Gomez (now working for the law firm Cozen O'Conner) did an extensive audit to confirm the completion of the 105 recommendations. That report with attachments is 775 pages long and provides a wealth of detail. It is available to the public on baylor.edu

. and BTW, Baylor did indeed implement all 105 recommendations that included changes to the BOR and Athletics and many more. That audit will put you to sleep, but if you really want to be informed it is good stuff.

---

Keyser. Hoping for one intellectually honest answer. Just one.

Should the same BoR that was found guilty of needing such drastic reform, have been the ones to implement these changes? We know why they were..they decided that unilaterally and answer to no one. ...but should they have been the ones? Or would have it been more logical and unifying to have others, easily just as capable if not more, have taken in that responsibility. There would have been no shortage of viable alum options. Ensuring transparency, no conflict of interests in findings, and the ability for the universe to heal.

It's a simple Question. Why avoid answering?

---

Bump for Keyser. It's such a simple question.

---

Maybe he is waiting for an intellectually honest question.

---

Still upset about others not reading your posts from 7 years ago?

The question is actually boiled down to the most basic, intellectually honest form possible. It's why he can't answer. No room for spin.

"Did it make sense, and was it the best option for Baylor to have the same group oversee and implement their own reforms? When other options at the very least as qualified, if not more,
could have been transitioned in under a controlled process. Reforms that were needed due to their own conflicts of interest, meddling, lack of institutional oversight and transparency, etc were literally given as reasons. I'm not touching many more debatable decisions and reasons.

Yes or no?

I understand it's difficult for him to answer and maintain his position, but at its root, it's THE BASIC QUESTION and the most intellectually honest. What was best Baylor? Not individuals..

---

I chopped your legs out from labeling me a BOR apologist when I have posted on a Baylor board against the regents for a dozen years. Plenty around like Stranger that know that.

My contention is that you are a CABer with a new username. Your regent complaints are an opportunity to talk about poor Art. You are attempting to "shout down" all dissent to your posts. I intend to continue to say I think that you lie when you say this is about regents. That lie makes your posts hollow.

---

You have a large insecurity complex you really need to deal with. Posts from years ago? I don't remember you from Adam. I never engaged in BoR talk before this scandal. Did football play a part of that..yes! It was indeed PART of the scandal. You mean literally nothing to me. Why must this be about you?

I'm not rehashing this tired and childish thought train. "I cared before you cared, about REAL problems...so you don't care". It's old. It's a waste of my time. Feel free to keep making a fool of yourself.

New username? Now you're childish and dealing with
Dementia? That's not an easy combo to pull off. It's easy to throw out baseless claims. Please..tell me..what was my username.

I'll borrow Keysers line: feel free to use that search button. I've been more than critical of Cab, as things came out, and openly said he needed to run a tighter ship. I just literally agreed with a staff post saying the same..it's just a few back.. do yourself a favor and go read.

Yawn...

---

It hurts that you can't just dismiss me as a BOR apologist. Continue to distort and go personal. Posters see through that. At least Chuckroast is honest in his analysis and motivations. I respect that.

---

You started this insane logic train. I've openly given you credit for being on the "BoR is bad" train before me and gave you a Gold star. What more do you want? i simply don't get your incessant need for self validation: "i cared before you cared, about REAL problems...so you don't care". My position is clear and consistent. ALL SINNED. ALL FAILED OUR SCHOOL. NOT ALL WERE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. This is hypocrisy. It's not in the schools best interest. It's in individual members of the BoRs best interest.

Waiting on the my other usernames. Please provide. It's just your Credibility on the line.

---

Yes, I understand your MO. In a few hours, you post your request again as if I have some responsibility to respond to your random questions. Oops, another of your standards chopped out from under you. Another thing you like to do is claim posters are obsessed with you.
You are a BOR Apologist
You aren't responding to my question
You are obsessed with me

---

Read carefully:

I'm not calling you a BoR apologist. For the life of me, I can't figure out what you beef is. The irony. If I'd of read your posts from 7 years ago about everything related to the BoR, I'd of probably agreed. Apparently, We both don't trust this BoR. You, sooner than I...So why aren't we having a beer and focusing on that? Versus "I cared before you cared, so you don't care". What's your deal?

And yes. You have an obligation to answer and prove your own baseless/false accusations. That's how that works. You make an accusation. You must prove it. Or it's your credibility. ( Funny, you made that claim right after Keyser did when I stumped him as well.)

Please provide my screen names. Yes. Your credibility, just like his, is on the line.

Friscobear said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Done, read the audit report also on Baylor.edu

---

Where is apology?

"We're sorry if any of you were offended"
Touching

---

You really didn't take the time to look did you? This is kind of of typical MO. Just shout louder. Stop doing that.

From the independent audit:

On May 26, 2016, the University also released a statement by Ron Murff, Chair of Baylor Board of Regents: "We, as the governing Board of this University, offer our apologies to the many who sought help from the University. We are deeply sorry for the harm that survivors have endured." Two additional letters of apology were issued by Interim President Dr. David Garland. During the summer of 2016, Baylor began the process of reaching out to the eight individual complainants, as identified in the investigation, to offer personal apologies and support. Members of Baylor's Board of Regents and senior leadership, including Dr. Garland, Dr. Kevin Jackson, Vice President for Student Life, Dr. Reagan Ramsower, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Mack Rhoades, Athletics Director, Christopher Holmes, General Counsel, Patty Crawford, Title IX Coordinator, and Dr. Livingstone, the incoming President, met individually with complainants and their families to hear their perspective and experience, offer personal and institutional apologies, and seek to provide remedial and restorative remedies

---

I've read those parts from other places. Livingstone wasn't here in 2016; she was named in April 2017. You might want to check your copy/paste work there.

---

read more closely - it began in the summer of 2016, it didn't say it occurred in 2016

Even if that error had occurred, would such a small detail really shake things up that much for you? Do you really think apologies have not been issued?

---

I saw "During the summer of 2016". The date isn't that big of a deal to me, but they need to be more specific. As to apologies....I've had bad meals at restaurants and had managers come to the table to apologize. Sexual assault at my university and we get a letter.....chickenshlts couldn't even get in front of a camera for that (or even ride in the 2016 HC parade)...unless I missed it in 2016. At least Garland had the stones to take questions in front of a camera from the subcommittee in Austin last session.

Serious, separate question: how many of the 10 Jane Does are related to the university at large and how many are related to athletics? Curious because I don't know and figured you might.

---

What part of "met individually with complainants and their families to hear their perspective and experience, offer personal and institutional apologies, and seek to provide remedial and restorative remedies" sounds like a letter?

---

Did you meet with them? I didn't. All alumni and stakeholders got was a press release from the sex toy salesman.

I see more BOR assault apologists visiting recently. You forgot your talking points...Briles Briles Briles Starr Starr Starr. Come on. Get with the program.

Keyser Soze said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Done, read the audit report also on Baylor.edu

---

Where is apology?

"We're sorry if any of you were offended"
Touching

---

You really didn't take the time to look did you? This is kind of of typical MO. Just shout louder. Stop doing that.

From the independent audit:

On May 26, 2016, the University also released a statement by Ron Murff, Chair of Baylor Board of Regents: "We, as the governing Board of this University, offer our apologies to the many who sought help from the University. We are deeply sorry for the harm that survivors have endured." Two additional letters of apology were issued by Interim President Dr. David Garland. During the summer of 2016, Baylor began the process of reaching out to the eight individual complainants, as identified in the investigation, to offer personal apologies and support. Members of Baylor's Board of Regents and senior leadership, including Dr. Garland, Dr. Kevin Jackson, Vice President for Student Life, Dr. Reagan Ramsower, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Mack Rhoades, Athletics Director, Christopher Holmes, General Counsel, Patty Crawford, Title IX Coordinator, and Dr. Livingstone, the incoming President, met individually with complainants and their families to hear their perspective and experience, offer personal and institutional apologies, and seek to provide remedial and restorative remedies

---

I've read those parts from other places. Livingstone wasn't here in 2016; she was named in April 2017. You might want to check your copy/paste work there.

---

read more closely - it began in the summer of 2016, it didn't say it occurred in 2016

Even if that error had occurred, would such a small detail really shake things up that much for you? Do you really think apologies have not been issued?

---

I saw "During the summer of 2016". The date isn't that big of a deal to me, but they need to be more specific. As to apologies....I've had bad meals at restaurants and had managers come to the table to apologize. Sexual assault at my university and we get a letter.....chickenshlts couldn't even get in front of a camera for that (or even ride in the 2016 HC parade)...unless I missed it in 2016. At least Garland had the stones to take questions in front of a camera from the subcommittee in Austin last session.

Serious, separate question: how many of the 10 Jane Does are related to the university at large and how many are related to athletics? Curious because I don't know and figured you might.

---

Really don't know at all. I would think at least one to open the door for the AD to come testify, but who knows. Maybe Franko could shine some light on to for us.

---

Thanks. I appreciate the answer. Agree that it's at least one due to AD depo. Patulski and one other formerly with athletics gave depos. Any idea as to who from admin side has or is scheduled or could Franco shed light on that also?

NoBSU said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Eball said:

---

Whether you are pro BOR, anti CAB or just tired of the mess and hoping it goes away it is impossible to ignore the sworn testimony of our former AD. You have to stick your head so far into the sand I fear for your safety.

This is not some anonymous internet fan posting on a forum or blog...it is not any media member with an agenda it is a guy who was successful in his role whether you liked him or not for 13 years. He should know something and the only real way to discount his testimony is to believe he just lied under oath and committed perjury.

---

It rings a little empty to be schooled on how to weigh plaintiff attorney filings by a group of posters that have poo-pooed plaintiff attorney filings for two years. Some of those filings have been from depositions. Plus one of Ian's biggest bombshells was related to him. It was second/third/forth hand data.

You seem to be upset that Ian's testimony has not motivated alums to march on Pat Neff with pitchforks and torches. My reply to you is that I have been ticked off at regents for years. McCaw and Briles had two football players convicted of sexual assault. They deserved to go. They were both paid handsomely to go. The FOB regents have been a stain on Baylor for over 12 years. We need to clean house. I knew that before Ian's deposition. Do you have a personal need for me to dislike regents past level 11?

---

He is looking for Defcon Level 1 dislike. Nothing else is good enough.

---

Been there on the regents that were FOB members for a longtime. That is the lot that needs scrubbed. I started the explicit Pharmaca links so there is that. I am all in on Murff dislike. Beyond that, the regents around in 2015-16 are sheep.

---

And most of those are still there due to 3- 3 year terms.

YoakDaddy said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Eball said:

---

Whether you are pro BOR, anti CAB or just tired of the mess and hoping it goes away it is impossible to ignore the sworn testimony of our former AD. You have to stick your head so far into the sand I fear for your safety.

This is not some anonymous internet fan posting on a forum or blog...it is not any media member with an agenda it is a guy who was successful in his role whether you liked him or not for 13 years. He should know something and the only real way to discount his testimony is to believe he just lied under oath and committed perjury.

---

It rings a little empty to be schooled on how to weigh plaintiff attorney filings by a group of posters that have poo-pooed plaintiff attorney filings for two years. Some of those filings have been from depositions. Plus one of Ian's biggest bombshells was related to him. It was second/third/forth hand data.

You seem to be upset that Ian's testimony has not motivated alums to march on Pat Neff with pitchforks and torches. My reply to you is that I have been ticked off at regents for years. McCaw and Briles had two football players convicted of sexual assault. They deserved to go. They were both paid handsomely to go. The FOB regents have been a stain on Baylor for over 12 years. We need to clean house. I knew that before Ian's deposition. Do you have a personal need for me to dislike regents past level 11?

---

He is looking for Defcon Level 1 dislike. Nothing else is good enough.

---

Been there on the regents that were FOB members for a longtime. That is the lot that needs scrubbed. I started the explicit Pharmaca links so there is that. I am all in on Murff dislike. Beyond that, the regents around in 2015-16 are sheep.

---

And most of those are still there due to 3- 3 year terms.

---

The most disturbing part to me is the direct involvement in questionable acts by the regents who were on the Friends of Baylor main committee and advisory group (all on one page on that old website). Only one person in that FOB group that is prominent in current BOR dissent. I would explain how to pull up the archives on FOB via The Wayback Machine but I make Dman's head spin when I discuss such things.

NoBSU said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Eball said:

---

Whether you are pro BOR, anti CAB or just tired of the mess and hoping it goes away it is impossible to ignore the sworn testimony of our former AD. You have to stick your head so far into the sand I fear for your safety.

This is not some anonymous internet fan posting on a forum or blog...it is not any media member with an agenda it is a guy who was successful in his role whether you liked him or not for 13 years. He should know something and the only real way to discount his testimony is to believe he just lied under oath and committed perjury.

---

It rings a little empty to be schooled on how to weigh plaintiff attorney filings by a group of posters that have poo-pooed plaintiff attorney filings for two years. Some of those filings have been from depositions. Plus one of Ian's biggest bombshells was related to him. It was second/third/forth hand data.

You seem to be upset that Ian's testimony has not motivated alums to march on Pat Neff with pitchforks and torches. My reply to you is that I have been ticked off at regents for years. McCaw and Briles had two football players convicted of sexual assault. They deserved to go. They were both paid handsomely to go. The FOB regents have been a stain on Baylor for over 12 years. We need to clean house. I knew that before Ian's deposition. Do you have a personal need for me to dislike regents past level 11?

---

He is looking for Defcon Level 1 dislike. Nothing else is good enough.

---

Been there on the regents that were FOB members for a longtime. That is the lot that needs scrubbed. I started the explicit Pharmaca links so there is that. I am all in on Murff dislike. Beyond that, the regents around in 2015-16 are sheep.

---

And most of those are still there due to 3- 3 year terms.

---

The most disturbing part to me is the direct involvement in questionable acts by the regents who were on the Friends of Baylor main committee and advisory group (all on one page on that old website). Only one person in that FOB group that is prominent in current BOR dissent. I would explain how to pull up the archives on FOB via The Wayback Machine but I make Dman's head spin when I discuss such things.

---

I'll admit that didn't keep a close watch on those issues having not joined BF until the second B12 implosion in 2010. I only kept up via word of mouth at that time. I'd still like to see it tho.

YoakDaddy said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Eball said:

---

Whether you are pro BOR, anti CAB or just tired of the mess and hoping it goes away it is impossible to ignore the sworn testimony of our former AD. You have to stick your head so far into the sand I fear for your safety.

This is not some anonymous internet fan posting on a forum or blog...it is not any media member with an agenda it is a guy who was successful in his role whether you liked him or not for 13 years. He should know something and the only real way to discount his testimony is to believe he just lied under oath and committed perjury.

---

It rings a little empty to be schooled on how to weigh plaintiff attorney filings by a group of posters that have poo-pooed plaintiff attorney filings for two years. Some of those filings have been from depositions. Plus one of Ian's biggest bombshells was related to him. It was second/third/forth hand data.

You seem to be upset that Ian's testimony has not motivated alums to march on Pat Neff with pitchforks and torches. My reply to you is that I have been ticked off at regents for years. McCaw and Briles had two football players convicted of sexual assault. They deserved to go. They were both paid handsomely to go. The FOB regents have been a stain on Baylor for over 12 years. We need to clean house. I knew that before Ian's deposition. Do you have a personal need for me to dislike regents past level 11?

---

He is looking for Defcon Level 1 dislike. Nothing else is good enough.

---

Been there on the regents that were FOB members for a longtime. That is the lot that needs scrubbed. I started the explicit Pharmaca links so there is that. I am all in on Murff dislike. Beyond that, the regents around in 2015-16 are sheep.

---

And most of those are still there due to 3- 3 year terms.

---

The most disturbing part to me is the direct involvement in questionable acts by the regents who were on the Friends of Baylor main committee and advisory group (all on one page on that old website). Only one person in that FOB group that is prominent in current BOR dissent. I would explain how to pull up the archives on FOB via The Wayback Machine but I make Dman's head spin when I discuss such things.

---

I'll admit that didn't keep a close watch on those issues having not joined BF until the second B12 implosion in 2010. I only kept up via word of mouth at that time. I'd still like to see it tho.

---

The irony. I'd love to know more as well. I have a feeling I'd agree on most of what he was complaining about regarding the BoR well before this scandal. I have NO idea why it's offended him that I hadn't read his earlier issues about the BoR and wasn't up to speed on all their games.

And yes NoBs. Still waiting on those other screen names of mine. Or do you just want to drop all that BS (irony of your screen name) and move on?

Dman said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Eball said:

---

Whether you are pro BOR, anti CAB or just tired of the mess and hoping it goes away it is impossible to ignore the sworn testimony of our former AD. You have to stick your head so far into the sand I fear for your safety.

This is not some anonymous internet fan posting on a forum or blog...it is not any media member with an agenda it is a guy who was successful in his role whether you liked him or not for 13 years. He should know something and the only real way to discount his testimony is to believe he just lied under oath and committed perjury.

---

It rings a little empty to be schooled on how to weigh plaintiff attorney filings by a group of posters that have poo-pooed plaintiff attorney filings for two years. Some of those filings have been from depositions. Plus one of Ian's biggest bombshells was related to him. It was second/third/forth hand data.

You seem to be upset that Ian's testimony has not motivated alums to march on Pat Neff with pitchforks and torches. My reply to you is that I have been ticked off at regents for years. McCaw and Briles had two football players convicted of sexual assault. They deserved to go. They were both paid handsomely to go. The FOB regents have been a stain on Baylor for over 12 years. We need to clean house. I knew that before Ian's deposition. Do you have a personal need for me to dislike regents past level 11?

---

He is looking for Defcon Level 1 dislike. Nothing else is good enough.

---

Been there on the regents that were FOB members for a longtime. That is the lot that needs scrubbed. I started the explicit Pharmaca links so there is that. I am all in on Murff dislike. Beyond that, the regents around in 2015-16 are sheep.

---

And most of those are still there due to 3- 3 year terms.

---

The most disturbing part to me is the direct involvement in questionable acts by the regents who were on the Friends of Baylor main committee and advisory group (all on one page on that old website). Only one person in that FOB group that is prominent in current BOR dissent. I would explain how to pull up the archives on FOB via The Wayback Machine but I make Dman's head spin when I discuss such things.

---

I'll admit that didn't keep a close watch on those issues having not joined BF until the second B12 implosion in 2010. I only kept up via word of mouth at that time. I'd still like to see it tho.

---

The irony. I'd love to know more as well. I have a feeling I'd agree on most of what he was complaining about regarding the BoR well before this scandal. Just not sure why it's offended him that I hadn't read his earlier gripes and wasn't up to speed on all their games.

And yes NoBs. Still waiting in those other screen names of mine. Or do you just want to drop all that BS (irony of your screen name) and move on?

---

It is in your MO to keep popping it up. I don't think that you understand that this board does not have a search function. If you posted in a thread and did not stop the follow with the binoculars, then you can easily look up old threads. I promise you that I will do so when I have a chance to read a few of the long ones that you might have posted.

I was reading something you posted Friday and Saturday and a bell went off that something was familiar even though your username is new to me. I haven't placed it but Keyser's post hit home. Rest assured that I am man enough to admit f I find something or not. The Baylorfans threads are gone forever. So, who you were there is moot.

Goto the Wayback Machine
https://archive.org/web/
Next to Wayback Machine logo enter the desired website to check the archive.
In this case:
http://friendsofbaylor.com:80/membership.html
click "browse history"
It will show you a collection of archived pages.
Pick a year like 2004.
Go down to the yearly calendar and pick a date. I picked June 6, 2004.

Read the names. There is one Co-Chair that is not in the regent group and is openly in dissent of their actions. Maybe another. But many of the Co-Chairs and the Steering committee members will sound familiar.

That's all I have time for now. Coincidence? You decide for yourself.

NoBSU said:

---

Goto the Wayback Machine
https://archive.org/web/
Next to Wayback Machine logo enter the desired website to check the archive.
In this case:
http://friendsofbaylor.com:80/membership.html
click "browse history"
It will show you a collection of archived pages.
Pick a year like 2004.
Go down to the yearly calendar and pick a date. I picked June 6, 2004.

Read the names. There is one Co-Chair that is not in the regent group and is openly in dissent of their actions. Maybe another. But many of the Co-Chairs and the Steering committee members will sound familiar.

---

Thanks!

OK...I know CAB is not coming back...

I think he deserves to be coaching somewhere and that the BOR smeared him either by design or just by pure coincidence...When I say BOR I don't mean the entire BOR

I think the BOR and Sr. Administration folks botched this whole title IX issue from the time of the dear colleague letter and that our moral code at BU jumped up and bit us in the butt. Certainly the code of conduct and how we handled allegations of sexual assault predated CAB and was a campus wide problem not a football culture issue per se.

I support CMR because he is who we got. I still am interested in and loyal to CAB for all the good he did for BU and the fun I had watching his teams play...does that make me a CAB lover?

Why is it so stinking bad to admit that at least part of what drives me to post about this stuff is a desire to see a good guy and great coach get some redemption? I don't see how that makes me anti-BU just the opposite if it turns out that he was used by some to take the hit and it becomes apparent that there was nothing worthy of terminating him for, will that not help BU come to grips with problem regents?

I want to win as bad as the next person and I want BU to be known as a great place to send your sons and daughters for great education and that it is safe.

I guess I don't understand the anti CAB folks saying that we make it all about CAB when the BOR pretty much made it all about CAB?

I get the moving on sentiment but how do we move on when there are such strong feelings throughout BU Nation? Every time something dribbles out like Ian's deposition or Mac Engel's change of heart and direction it causes the issue to re-ignite...how do we ever get past it and heal without some additional transparency..seriously how could it hurt? to all those who say let it go...clearly I am not the only person who can't let it go...

NoBSU said:

---

Dman said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Eball said:

---

Whether you are pro BOR, anti CAB or just tired of the mess and hoping it goes away it is impossible to ignore the sworn testimony of our former AD. You have to stick your head so far into the sand I fear for your safety.

This is not some anonymous internet fan posting on a forum or blog...it is not any media member with an agenda it is a guy who was successful in his role whether you liked him or not for 13 years. He should know something and the only real way to discount his testimony is to believe he just lied under oath and committed perjury.

---

It rings a little empty to be schooled on how to weigh plaintiff attorney filings by a group of posters that have poo-pooed plaintiff attorney filings for two years. Some of those filings have been from depositions. Plus one of Ian's biggest bombshells was related to him. It was second/third/forth hand data.

You seem to be upset that Ian's testimony has not motivated alums to march on Pat Neff with pitchforks and torches. My reply to you is that I have been ticked off at regents for years. McCaw and Briles had two football players convicted of sexual assault. They deserved to go. They were both paid handsomely to go. The FOB regents have been a stain on Baylor for over 12 years. We need to clean house. I knew that before Ian's deposition. Do you have a personal need for me to dislike regents past level 11?

---

He is looking for Defcon Level 1 dislike. Nothing else is good enough.

---

Been there on the regents that were FOB members for a longtime. That is the lot that needs scrubbed. I started the explicit Pharmaca links so there is that. I am all in on Murff dislike. Beyond that, the regents around in 2015-16 are sheep.

---

And most of those are still there due to 3- 3 year terms.

---

The most disturbing part to me is the direct involvement in questionable acts by the regents who were on the Friends of Baylor main committee and advisory group (all on one page on that old website). Only one person in that FOB group that is prominent in current BOR dissent. I would explain how to pull up the archives on FOB via The Wayback Machine but I make Dman's head spin when I discuss such things.

---

I'll admit that didn't keep a close watch on those issues having not joined BF until the second B12 implosion in 2010. I only kept up via word of mouth at that time. I'd still like to see it tho.

---

The irony. I'd love to know more as well. I have a feeling I'd agree on most of what he was complaining about regarding the BoR well before this scandal. Just not sure why it's offended him that I hadn't read his earlier gripes and wasn't up to speed on all their games.

And yes NoBs. Still waiting in those other screen names of mine. Or do you just want to drop all that BS (irony of your screen name) and move on?

---

It is in your MO to keep popping it up. I don't think that you understand that this board does not have a search function. If you posted in a thread and did not stop the follow with the binoculars, then you can easily look up old threads. I promise you that I will do so when I have a chance to read a few of the long ones that you might have posted.

I was reading something you posted Friday and Saturday and a bell went off that something was familiar even though your username is new to me. I haven't placed it but Keyser's post hit home. Rest assured that I am man enough to admit f I find something or not. The Baylorfans threads are gone forever. So, who you were there is moot.

---

Id advise against taking Keysers attempt to discredit seriously. Notice he hasn't backed up his accusations. So Who's credit is on the line?

But I'll take you at your word. Look. Scour. You'll find nothing but this username. Then We can have a beer and catch me up on all your previous discussions about the BoR. I'd honestly like to know more. And quit worrying about trivial matters of when others should have started caring.

And next time, might I recommend you do the searching and validating of your theories before making the accusations.

Dman, you are either a new poster or went by another username. No one recognizes your username.

Stranger told us about the regents, told us we didn't need a new stadium (which put him at odds with the big spender regents) and told us that bad would happen. He was discredited by those in the wrong but gets to laugh these days.
Stranger probably didn't predict it would be a known wild man who would crash into the regents causing the second biggest s-storm in the history of Texas college football (SMU still leads but Art did enough to get him on stage for the biggest s-storm awards). Stranger would have needed to be a prophet to predict that the loose running regent ship could take out someone who was more loose than the Captain of the Exxon Valdez (that would be Art and his deckhand, Shill). There weren't many folks that ran as loose as the ***** Pump Captain's ship.