For almost a half-decade the Wofford alumni community has been riven by conflict, mirroring the social and political disruption in our nation at large. The causes are well known and not the point of this essay. Every facet of alumni life has been affected, from participation in Homecoming events to contributions to the financial well-being of the college.
Some alumni are totally estranged from their alma mater, while others have maintained their relationship with the college unchanged. Within the estranged group some simply have withdrawn passively; others have tried to develop an active, vocal opposition to the administration and its policies. This attempt to create a “loyal opposition” was hampered by the lack of a platform from which alumni could speak to the Wofford community.
As is typical today, lacking an alternative, the attempted dialog migrated to the internet where, also typical, things were said that would never be said in person. The situation degenerated with both those opposing and those supporting the administration making vicious, ad hominem attacks. Also, local Wofford events, which had always been pleasant social occasions, now were looked on as opportunities for a “Gotcha” moment to attack and embarrass the president.
By the Spring of 2024, the situation had become intolerable. I called for a moratorium with no internet commentary and suggested that everyone take the summer to reconsider who we were as Wofford alumni. I suggested that these recent behaviors did not reflect our best, and that we should be able to disagree without such rancor. Finally, I offered to host a dinner after this period of reflection to consider solution(s) to resolve our conflicts and find a way forward.
Remarkably, a period of relative quiet ensued and a dinner was held last October at the Piedmont Club in Spartanburg. Those attending included members of the administration, the faculty and the Board of Trustees. Current students, mostly representing student government or publications, were present. Finally, alumni across geographic and age distributions were represented. Very specifically, Dr. Carroll Player, the most prominent spokesperson for the “loyal opposition”, was present to make the case for that point of view.
The discussion was frank and robust, but very collegial. Several hours of debate resulted in the following proposals being accepted by the group. Dr. Samhat supported each of these and agreed to take the administrative steps necessary to put them into effect.
First, The Old, Gold, & Black will publish communications from alumni, both Letters to the Editor and Op-Ed type essays. These will be edited according to the standards of journalism: brevity, grammar, appropriateness of language, etc. No personal attacks will be published. Submissions are encouraged from across the socio-political spectrum, but will neither be selected, denied, nor edited due to content. Every submission must be signed; and the author’s email address will be published.
Second, Dr. Dwain Pruitt will inaugurate a series of town hall meetings via a video chat type format. The exact details and schedule are to be determined. But one great advantage of this modality is its existence essentially in real time; Dr. Pruitt could respond almost instantly to events on campus or in the outside world, providing a platform for alumni to speak to each other and to the Wofford Community, even in a “crisis” situation.
Finally, there had been concerns that there were no means by which alumni could communicate with the Board of Trustees. Previously, the function of the Alumni Executive Committee had been enhanced, so that its Chairperson attended the quarterly Board meetings to serve as a liaison between the alumni and the Board. Now, as a result of a proposal from the October meeting, alumni will be able to communicate directly with the Board of Trustees by contacting the chairperson at:
I want to thank everyone who gave their time to participate in this event. I am grateful to President Samhat and the administration for their support and their openness to new ideas. I especially note board member Costa Pleicones, whose judicial temperament and wisdom were invaluable. I remain in awe of Dr. Rachel Vanderhill and Ron Robinson, both of whom were incredibly quiet through almost the entire evening, but then made insightful comments that clarified key points in our discussion. The alumni present fulfilled admirably the charge they were given; and each of them made valuable contributions. Finally, the students were magnificent, reinforcing my confidence in Wofford and in our future.
So this is an invitation to all Wofford alumni to engage, to comment on all things Wofford. Submit letters to the editor and Guest essays. Let us have a vigorous debate that is rational and respectful.
George S. Tyson, MD ‘72
Letters to the editor can be submitted at [email protected]
Guest Essay Policy
We welcome guest essay submissions from the entire Wofford community. Guest essay authors must be affiliated with Wofford College. Guest essays are evaluated at the discretion of the Editorial Staff. They should be submitted via email to [email protected] and should run between 300 and 500 words. Guest essays are subject to editing for libel, grammar, content and space and may be published in print, online or both, depending on space and editorial needs. Except in highly unusual cases, we require that guest essays be signed by one to three named individuals. We will not accept articles that have been authored under a pseudonym or by an organization as a whole; even for pieces with named individual authors, we will not accept articles that do not advance an argument beyond the mission statement of a given organization. Guest essays by non-Old Gold & Black writers may not include reported content such as interviews with other parties. We also will not accept guest essays that are explicitly written in response to previously published content; please submit a “Letter to the Editor” for pieces in response to our content.
