3XNTGRAD

Man - I'm should have remembered that one!!!

Okay, then -- could you be a little more specific? King James Version? Latin? Aramaic? Or are you also assuming they will use the Martian translation?

To the best of my knowledge, no microorganisms can read -- so I can safely say there is a high probability that life on Mars, if it currently exists, does not read the Bible.

Because it is FUN! It is probably one of the few "whole crowd" participation things we have. I think that is always a good thing!

Your post is only half right. The "North" was added by Austin from the original name -- but in the 1890s, not the 1960s. So, North has been part of our name since almost the beginning -- it wasn't some late add on that has no history. When Texas Normal College and Teacher Training Institute (the founding name) applied for certification to offer teaching certificates after the founding of the school, the approved certificate came back with the name "North Texas Normal College" as the name -- and we have been "North Texas" ever since. We have no history of a TSU like name, so it is a stretch to think we should be TSU instead of UNT (and as already posted -- UNT is the name we asked for in the 1960s, rather than NTSU).

I've always read and heard that the UNT name was the one first put forward in the 1960s, and that UT legislators said now way to any "University of" name other than UT. That was when the NTSU compromise was finally approved. Anybody know if TSU was even considered back in the 60s, or if that was first considered with the name change in the 80s?

Since it never went to a vote, it is unlikely that we will never know if it could have been. The political issues you've mentioned may have been a reason that it was never seriously suggested beyond the initial talk. Personally, I went to North Texas and am damn proud of the moniker, even though one degree was from NTSU and the other two were from UNT, it has and always will be my school!

We flirted with the Texas State name in the 80s, but never asked for it -- so it was not voted on. I actually had a conversation with Dr. Hurley (I was a student at the time) about the choice between TSU or UNT as names before the name change was sent to Austin. I sided with UNT because "North Texas" was who we were and it united us all the way back to Normal days as alums.

There was a large, glossy "feel-good" brochures in my faculty mailbox late last week with quotes from students about how the stadium vote was so important and how those students felt good to be a part of helping UNT's legacy. It was sent out from Development, and is probably the start of a longer campaign (this one didn't ask for money -- but it was definitely moving in that direction). I wouldn't be surprised if those started showing up in mailboxes of alumni donors in the near future (that is just conjecture on my part).

On the ESPN list, You get a free pass off if you win.

Well -- even a broken clock is correct twice a day!

I'm with you on this. Dodge took a bold step and had the entire team tested. That kind of move has to set a tone that this type of behavior will not be acceptable in the future, no matter what has occurred in the past. That is a positive in my book.

But there is also a railroad track right behind the MG Village which might derail that idea (pun intended!).

I know there are at least 2 ways to do these. One is the in-ground pavers which are engraved with messages (they did this recently with Honors Hall on campus) that can be laid in walkways or patio areas. The second way is engraving on wall blocks (like on a cinder-block). This can be done after the wall is constructed, since a company can come and add the engravings to the existing wall (they have done this at the Denton Soccer Association building in Northlakes Park). You an always re-lay pavers and add to that with time, but it is probably easier to do those up-front. The wall-type engravings could potentially be added to continually (same as with the plaque ideas).

Just an addendum to this concept: Why does anyone have to wait to be asked before donating? You know this process has started - so make your donation and designate "Football Stadium Fund" on it right away.

59% YES!

And I'm still waiting on that hurricane to strike Denton.

Sorry - but this statement makes no sense whatsoever. The Dean of Arts & Sciences is on record supporting the stadium effort, so don't put the opinions of a few Daily staffers off onto the whole college.

Can we hire sock puppet lady to work her way through the parking lot -- driving tailgaters ahead of her and into Fouts?

Okay - then portions still exist next to the Music Building complex.

That was the "Lab Gym" that was converted into some of that space. The Women's Gym is the building next door (renamed Stovall Hall).

According to the "Story of North Texas", UNT built eleven buildings in 1950-1952, including Fouts. As a comparison in light of the need to replace Fouts, what has been the fate of these other buildings from that time period? 1950 - Lab School - demolished (I'm assuming this building was the old "Houston Hall" that was destroyed for the parking garage to be built) 1950 - Men's Gymnasium - refurbished and still in use 1951 - Masters Hall - demolished in 2008 to make way for new Life Science Complex 1951 - Women's Gym - still in use 1951-1952 - Quadrangle Dormitories and cafeteria (5 buildings total) - Cafeteria and one quad demolished, 2 Quads totally renovated for Music Practice, another renovated (so 3 of 5 still in use) 1952 - Kendall Hall - scheduled for demolition 2009 to make way for new Business complex 1952 - Fouts So, of the 10 other buildings built at the same time as Fouts, 5 have been or will shortly be demolished. 3 of them have been renovated (two extensively) and re-purposed. Only two of the 10 are still in use in a way similar to their original purpose. It is fairly obvious from this list that things designed 58 years ago don't fit the present needs of the university and should be either replaced or re-purposed when possible. Since there is no other purpose that Fouts can serve, replacement of this outdated infrastructure is the only real solution. Okay - I know I'm preaching to the choir, but just thought the comparison would be interesting.

Just a correction - That would be the new Life Sciences Complex, not a new chemistry building (they got theirs a few years ago), that just had the groundbreaking.

The AD is not telling us to "not get involved" in the program (that would be very different!). They are saying that we should let students take the lead in pushing a student vote. Backlash against alumni involvement was one of the motivating factors for the opposition in the last vote. It would be deja vu all over again if we give them ammunition to fire up the anti-crowd. Let the students handle this one. We've got passionate, capable leaders in student government who are pushing this among the student groups. I trust them to do what is necessary and appropriate.

As many have already said on this thread, any attempts by alums to sway this vote are likely to have more negative consequences than positive. As much as we all want this to pass, we are more likely to energize the "anti-" crowd with these tactics. Every comment made on this board is "public". We should do our very best to avoid giving the opposition bulletin board material to use against the referendum. The administration and RV are not saying that alumni cannot try to push this issue -- but they are saying loud and clear that it is a bad idea for us to get involved. This is a delicate time for UNT Athletics, and our own good intentions are more likely to backfire on us than help the cause. Let the current students like UNTFlyer handle this phase of the fight. Our turn will come with the legislature and when it is time to step up with our stadium fund donations.