PDA

View Full Version : Listserv


James
05-24-2001, 05:47 PM
Are you guys following the debate on the National Listserv? Sometimes it makes you wonder if there is an IQ requirement for the Fraternitity http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif

KSig RC
05-28-2001, 09:44 PM
I followed it for a while - I got disgusted, and decided it wasn't worth all the freakin email i get. I think i dropped the list like 2 weeks ago? anything new?

James
06-06-2001, 12:28 AM
Not really, you can tell people are grinding political axes and telling us what they want us to know . . . most of the arguments, especially on the SEC defenders' side, reek of sophistry and illogic.

KSig RC
06-07-2001, 12:08 AM
yeah . . . the politics of the thing is freaking ridiculous, also the fact that every random alumni/PGM/PDGM/whoever has to dime in w/ their bit, even if it's a week late, drives me nuts.

w/ SEC elections coming up, this COULD be a good lesson on how the SEC can screw everyone over as our overall representatives . . . but instead it's a big pissing contest - which is weird, b/c the SEC positions really seem like more of a pain in the ass to actually perform than anything. Unless you want to just dump chapters you don't like (cough Tau cough), then maybe it's ideal? who knows.

Rob

James
06-07-2001, 12:46 AM
Yah, the more they rant against Tau the more sympathy I feel for them . . . they are worse than the evil empire that Regan labeled the Soviets, according to the listserv.

I read the transcript of when they went before the SEC and was horrified. All they asked for was due process. And it was denied them! Boggled my mind. And worse, they were labeled evil for asking for it!

Wow, and I auditioned fraternities before I decided to start a Kappa Sigma chapter . . . and it was entirely my call. They certainly hid the stupid stuff from me.

KSig RC
06-13-2001, 03:07 PM
so true - our chapter got wrecked on after winning a FACE award last year (which, by the way, may end up being a negative thing - nothing worse than a chapter that's just out to win awards, especially ones from national) b/c, in our DGM's mind, we "would rather be Mu-Psis than Kappa Sigs" . . . which is really ironic considering all the crap on the listserve that seems to bash people based on chapter affiliation and/or thinking larger than even national officers. By the way, I don't know if you remember reading a post to the listserve a while ago from Anthony Pijerov against blind support of the SEC? well, he's in my chapter (so's KSigKid from this board, both stand-up guys) - i have some great stories about responses he received, from district and national officers . . . it's bizarre, almost disheartening. The UAC rep for area I is from our chapter as well - those clowns are so into pulling charters it's disgusting, it's like they do it for fun. The kid's views don't even fully represent those of his own chapter, but somehow he was selected to the highest national undergrad panel . . . I don't understand sometimes. SAJ's rolling around in his grave somewhere, smashing his head in w/ a caduceus.

PartyShark69
06-14-2001, 01:45 PM
Uh, Yeah the SEC is just out to take charters for fun! YEAH RIGHT! Its more of a huge pain in there ass.
What!? You feel sympathy for Tau, are you guys insane. Jeesus, you know in life there are certain rules that we all must abide by and if you cant do it now then when are you ever going to? After I heard about Tau and how they were, I was all for takin there charter, hell yeah, get rid of those guys, they are not representing KS well at all. It's unbeleivable how many brothers out there like yourselves think that the SEC is just out to get you. No, they are here to help us be better men and if you cant follow the rules that they set in front of us, maybe you should reconsider being a Kappa SIg. I know my chapter follows the rules and does everything right, and we are very good because of that.
James, I cant beleive you called our SEC evil, they are the reason that we can sleep well at night, knowing that the Fraternity is in good hands.
Trust me, you have to be a pretty shitty chapter to have your charter pulled, and if you're a chapter that just cares about partying and wreckin shit, then Im all for revokin your charter. Kappa Sigma has so much more to offer than a freakin hangover and a destroyed house. Maybe if you guys worked harder for the order you would understand that!

KSig RC
06-15-2001, 04:28 PM
Originally posted by PartyShark69:
Uh, Yeah the SEC is just out to take charters for fun! YEAH RIGHT! Its more of a huge pain in there ass.
What!? You feel sympathy for Tau, are you guys insane. Jeesus, you know in life there are certain rules that we all must abide by and if you cant do it now then when are you ever going to? After I heard about Tau and how they were, I was all for takin there charter, hell yeah, get rid of those guys, they are not representing KS well at all. It's unbeleivable how many brothers out there like yourselves think that the SEC is just out to get you. No, they are here to help us be better men and if you cant follow the rules that they set in front of us, maybe you should reconsider being a Kappa SIg. I know my chapter follows the rules and does everything right, and we are very good because of that.
James, I cant beleive you called our SEC evil, they are the reason that we can sleep well at night, knowing that the Fraternity is in good hands.
Trust me, you have to be a pretty shitty chapter to have your charter pulled, and if you're a chapter that just cares about partying and wreckin shit, then Im all for revokin your charter. Kappa Sigma has so much more to offer than a freakin hangover and a destroyed house. Maybe if you guys worked harder for the order you would understand that!

OK . . . Hi, I'm Rob - I'm from Mu-Psi at BU, how are ya brother Partyshark? Nice to meet you, good to see more brothers on here.

Now . . .

1.) hmmm . . . I don't know that it's all that important for you to tell me that i should 'work harder for the order' - I love and cherish the fraternity as much as anybody, and it's not really all that cool or informed of you to tell me or James what our level of involvement or understanding is. Thanks.

2.) You make a LOT of very good points, man. I agree totally w/ the 'more to offer than a hangover' part, and that each of us must represent kappa sig to the best of our abilities - however, I find this application troublesome. First of all, Tau was screwed in a lot of ways, and the SEC is not implicitly infallable. In fact, mismanagement by the SEC is what brought about this whole memorial foundation mess to begin with. The SEC is made up of brothers who may or may not work for all of our best interests - all i can see is that Tau was refused many basic rights to defend themselves, including a written record of the proceedings, and was railroaded. Add that to the fact that the SEC has outspoken personal problems w/ Tau alumni (including some on the memorial foundation), and this looks very suspicious; human nature would dictate that these feelings may have played a role in the proceedings. I DO feel sorry for the UT guys. The SEC should not, ideally, be a policing force in any way that your GM in your chapter should be a policing agent. The SEC should be a promotional force, attempting to further the growth and prosperity of KS worldwide and on a local level. They should attempt to help EVERY brother live by the Star and Crescent. Recall: HELP - not ditch them to alumni status and revoke the charter. Unbelievable. In fact, the original plan didn't even assure recolonization of a 110-yr-old charter; this came much later. The school was fairly OK with the chapter, advising that "action take place" to alleviate any potential future problems - but the SEC decided that they were bounced. Look at the chapters losing charters - Tau, Gamma at LSU, NEU(LA) for "conduct unbecoming of KS", etc. These are OLD OLD charters, are extremely strong chapters, and have huge alumni bases. Where do the problems stem from? That's the issue - not "band-aid"ing the situation by revoking the charter - that's the easy way out. I think Tau was shafted (and maybe even gamma too - that's another story though).

3.) You can sleep well at night, b/c the fraternity is in good hands . . . that's great, but is it? A common sentiment in my district, in fact one overly-used cliche is IMH often appears as nothing more than a giant insurance company, with only negative impact on our everyday fraternal lives. Now, I realize the importance of having our national structure the way it is, and I respect the hard work of brothers making an impact for all of their fellow brothers nationwide - but not everyone's goals are so noble. Sometimes I wonder what the overall focus of our fraternity, nationally, has become. Remember this:

Kappa Sigma is, first and foremost and by founding, a SOCIAL FRATENITY.

This fact is lost on too many brothers. Yes, I've achieved many a hangover with my brothers. yes, some of my finest college memories are of PHILANTHROPIC events, which are inordinate amounts of fun. Yes, we keep a busy social calendar. Yes, the busiest offices in the chapter are often philanthropy and social chairs (along w/ rush and GS). The kappa sigma experience is personalized to each person - is the SEC helping me to do this? I don't know - all i can say is that I feel for my brothers at other chapters who just wanted to be heard, to get a fair shake, to be allotted the respect and love that AEKDB and the star and crescent dictate. I do not think the SEC has tempered its actions with either wisdom or brotherhood. Or do you not consider the Tau men your 'brothers'? I can only say to look into the docet and re-read about SAJ, who was almost denied membership in our order. In much the same way, you do not know the UT guys - get to know them, their lives, their campus before you drop the anvil. On the flip side, how would you feel if 2 or 3 guys (accounting for <4% of my chapter) got in serious trouble? Would you be for the revokation of your own charter? Would you think, "We're goddamned monsters! Why, I must put more effort into learning and loving the order! I MUST WORK HARDER TO KNOW THAT KAPPA SIGMA IS NOT JUST A HANGOVER AND A RUINED HOUSE!" I highly doubt it. Over 200,000 men have come into our order, and most have emerged for the better. Let's utilize our principles to not judge them, as well as applying them in a blanket manner over those made out to be 'bad'. remember, there are other possible motives behind the tau chapter fiasco - examine the board members and trustees of the memorial foundation, and research the history of the SEC members w/ these guys . . . it's sordid, on all sides. But don't trust blindly any man - rather, afford every brother the love and respect he deserves, and DEMAND the same; the brothers that provide these things, even to those who've strayed from the path or lost their way, are those that live up to their obligation. and that is, after all, what makes us Kappa Sigmas. Thanks dude - take care, later - if you're ever in the NE, stop by!

Rob

[This message has been edited by KSig RC (edited June 15, 2001).]

KSigkid
06-16-2001, 12:01 AM
A couple of you have hit on the one thing that angers me most about the whole Tau mess - many of the messages on the listserve have been characterizing the entire Tau chapter in a horrible, horrible way. Now, it may be true that some brothers in the chapter committed violations of the conduct code - but to characterize a whole chapter on the actions of a few? I'm not in agreement with that.

In addition, have you also noticed that most of the messages on the listserve say the same thing - the reason: the people who post are quick to shoot down any differing opinions or anyone who chances to call the SEC into question. I also know Brother Pijerov, and it's ridiculous how brothers (including those in power) jumped down his throat when he dared to call the SEC's decision into question (mind you, he did so in a respectful and reasonable manner) - DGM's, AA's, and others in positions of power threw criticisms at him left and right. Now, my belief is that people in positions of power should encourage debate - differing opinions can do nothing but introduce new, fresh ideas, right? That's just my two cents - I can understand some of the points of those backing up the SEC, but there are just some points of this that don't make me happy.

Now, I agree with KSigRC (who, if you want to question his commitment to Kappa Sig, you can have me list the extensive amount of work he's done for Mu-Psi) in that I also believe that Kappa Sigma is more than a "freakin hangover." And yes, before you call my commitment into question, I have served the order (Grand Scribe, Alumni Chair, delegate to Leadership Conference and upcoming Grand Conclave). But remember, this is a social organization, and part of the whole point of this is having good times with a bunch of some of the best friends you'll ever meet in your life - and if we lose sight of that (as maybe the SEC has with their constant pulling of charters, then I don't know what to say. AEKDB, and I for one will welcome a healthy debate on this subject on this board - I'm surprised it hadn't been mentioned already.

James
06-18-2001, 04:26 AM
PartyShark69:

Your error:Please go back and read my posts more carefully! I don't call the SEC evil in any of them. I point out that Tau was characterized like Regan's comment about Evil empires and point out that Tau was deemed evil. See, misunderstandings are so easy.

Ideals:Concepts like due process, and consistant action chime in my soul as ideas that the country was founded on.

TauIt didn't seem that Tau alumni were disputing the facts of the case as much as asking for due process, a recording, and a consistant approach to the problem.

They seemed to be stressing that other chapters may have been as defficient but not called to task on it and/or proper remedial action according to the CBR wasn't proffered to Tau.

I found that the response refusing rigorous due process and accountability which stated that someone would suddenly and inadvertantly burst into Ritual speech to be a somewhat weak argument, especially when the Tau reps stipulated that the recorder would leave the room if Ritual subjects were to come up.

It was also implied that an accomadation would have been reached had the Tau chapter expressed their desire for due process and accountability in advance. In that case Tau could have just been placed on interim suspension until the next SEC meeting.

leadership:I agree that a fraternity experience is about more than just having a party. In fact I would say that in order to justify our existance, even our parties need to be taken to a whole other level.

I have an extraordinary committment to leadership both in philosophy and rhetoric as well as tools and practice. I applaud this SEC's attempt to create a better sense of proffesionalism . . . although I believe the message gets lost in the ranks.

Leadership, for those that don't realize it, is a combination of perspective and application of tools. The acid test for leadership is results.

I am a dual degree candidate and the first degree, which I have closed out, is in organizational psychology where I took an independant study/internship with a professional business leadership consultant and can say both from theory and experience that the results of my chapter's interactions with some of our alumni volunteers has been less that satisfactory and has ranged in damage to my chapter both in loss of morale and distruction of programs to as high as potentially opening the chapter, its officers, and the National organization to legal liability.

And this happened despite the good intentions I am sure these people had through their love of the Fraternity. I attribute it to a lack of experience, leadership tools and a useful leadership perspective.

I would be glad to post the specific instances here or in an email if you believe it is important to keep secret mistakes that are made. I documented everything and relayed much of it to the administration here at the school who were for the most part amazed.

However, I have seen no program with which the general Fraternity in the personages of the SEC have attempted to address these lacks. Also, there is no oversight set up that I as a chapter president was aware of to address these types of concerns. In fact whenever I addressed even a general question to IMH I was mostly told to refer to my alumni volunteers.

Committment I am not sure how to evaluate my committment to the order because you didn't offer a criteria that something like that could be measured against. You offered a value/comparison judgement without a framework to make the argument with.

I can say that I was chapter president for over 2 years and I started a chapter of Kappa Sigma and for the most part did all the conclusive work single-handedly. So my efforts have created anew chapter, which is more work than you might think, and therfore brought a whole new population of Kappa Sigmas into being.

More later . . . .

Semper

James

KSIG_DH
06-18-2001, 09:58 AM
I apologize for the lack of introduction on my last post, which by the way was under my old old user name "Partyshark69", which I felt needed to be changed.
My name is Dan from The Theta-Zeta chapter at ENMU.
I was not implying that any of you don't work hard for our order, but there are a lot of our chapters out there that still dont understand what the Fraternity is all about.
About the whole Tau thing, your only as strong as your weakest link, and as in life, you will be stereotyped for the actions of a few. So, if it was just a few that made Tau look bad, why didnt the EC punish them? I know our EC would not have stood for what they did and would have taken immediate action and since the EC didnt step in and take care of the problem, the SEC did.
The funny thing is though, that the more chapters of Kappa Sig that I see, the more I have found that the brothers and the EC, dont want to be the bad guys, or the guys that reenforce the rules. So basically everybody pussy-foots around and nothing gets done. This leadership needs to come from the EC and as an officer you need to modivate as well as punish.
At Tau it is just as much the chapters fault as it is the brothers that were in the wrong. All the brothers as well as the EC should have stepped in and and elminated the problem, they didnt, so everybody gets punished, thats life, deal with it.
As far as due process goes, do you really think anything would have been changed if they had gotten due process?

Its sad to say that being in a fraternity, you do have to look out for your PR, so when a brother screws up and the word gets out, something has to be done. Sadly, public image always has to be considered, that is why Fraternities have a bad name.
I totally support the SEC on punishing lousy chapters, cuz if they didnt then the undergrads will continue to walk all over the authority of the order, like they have been doing in the past. I think the present SEC is the strongest it has ever been and they arent taking any shit. After this conclave, they will be even stronger. After knowing a few officers on the SEC very well, I can assure you that they will only get stronger and not stand for any wrong doing. So basically you cant ride the fence, you have to pick a side, are you with em or against em?
Yes, it is a social fraternity, but along with that comes hard work, and beleive me, our chapter busts our ass day in and day out.
Yes, I consider Tau chapter my brothers, but I feel a true brother is someone that works hard for the order. Havent you noticed that the guys in your chapter that dont come around or participate, you arent as close to. It's true, you want to be around the guys that are always around and that work hard. There are a lot of slack-ass brothers out there that dont do anything and its frustrating to work so hard for KS and then go to another chapter and see those brothers do nothing significant and dont care about the overall purpose of the fraternity.
You have to remember that the fraternity is a microcosm of life and that the SEC is not going to go into a chapter like TAU and evaluate every brother and be nit-picky.

I wish I could answer all your replys, but Ive written enough as it is and I have to go, but I think this topic needs to be discussed. AEKDB brothers.

KSig RC
06-18-2001, 05:08 PM
I agree w/ you Dan, good discussion.

Definitely I agree with some of the principles you express, especially with regards to leadership and chapter business. However, I agree with them in the vein of James's model of leadership. He posted a leadership model in one of the forums a while back, it is a great model for chapter programming, one that hopefully my chapter will implement soon.

With regard to Tau - I can't speculate on whether things would have turned out differently had the process been altered, no one can, but I can say that I feel a deep sense of disappointment and disillusionment with how some of our brothers were treated, and that would not be there had process been upheld. I really cringe to think that my chapter might some day be in a similar situation, because any inconsistencies in SEC policy and action are frightening to me.

I'll agree that the chapter and especially the EC should be (cliche http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif their brothers' keepers, but should the SEC then be (theoretically) an institute of punishment? Do you think that the majority of actives view the SEC as more of: a.) a regulatory, policing force b.) an institution that reminds you when you're doing badly and helps out out, and commends you when doing well c.) a benign element in day-to-day fraternal life . . . etc. The viewpoints can vary, of course, but I'd guess from my interactions that most view 'national' as a policing element, and this is not without justification on a certain level, while I'd be more in favor of a 'b.)'-type leadership (of course, it is oversimplified in one line . . .). I disagree with the very premise of this sort of 'only serves to punish' SEC, and again I am disappointed that the SEC seems to foster this view.

I can't compare this SEC to any other, as I have only been active during this one, but I don't know that the 'getting stronger' bit is implicitly positive. Kevin Kaplan (one of your chapter's alumni, if I'm not mistaken, Dan?) hung out at our chapter for a weekend, and he's genuinely a good guy - very stand-up individual, has some good ideas, charismatic man, seems like a very good brother. I can imagine the rest of the SEC brothers to be the same, although I have not met them. However, this doesn't assure that I have the same views on what the fraternity is or where it should go, etc, and doesn't mean that they will serve me best. Personally, much like governmental policy, I'd like to see the SEC remain strong in terms of the brothers comprising it, but I take a more Republican view (if you will), thinking that perhaps more "control" (or oversight more likely) should be delegated to the chapters or districts. I am roundly opposed to an SEC that is "Strong" in terms of pulling charters, chartering new "pansy" chapters designed to win awards and churn out brothers with no real basis in the actual fraternity in general (this is probably very unclear; I can email a more detailed explaination if necessary. I'm only referring to the fact that there are chapters that are the least popular among rushees and the rest of the campus but win awards, and appear to have that as the only basis of their brotherhood; sometimes, it seems like some of our new charters come complete with an oversight panel attempting to guarantee this. I'd also like to have James's view on this, but I'll email you sometime about it), and contributing to a sort of 'police-state' (extreme term, but the only way i could think of it - i've been working w/ phenol all day, you'll have to excuse me) national rather than an organization set up for and by the brothers to help one another and further the order for all. That kind of strength is overrated, and will eventually lead to severe declination of the order overall. If the governing body is unresponsive to the needs of those governed, deterioration will ensue; I'm afraid that this may possibly be the next stage if the trend continues. Already, I feel uncomfortable in some ways about how the national organization works; hopefully, this can be righted with the new elections. Now, the "grandfathering" of positions in the SEC may contribute negatively to this, but that's another rant . . . semper, take care guys -

Rob
A~B

Kapsig1
06-26-2001, 05:31 PM
Let me say a couple things - if any Brother got "bitchslapped" for posting his personal opinions on the listserve; either publicly or privately, then the brother doing the slapping needs to be confronted. I know I personally confronted some much older, much more tenured brothers during this discussion. BUT - some of the posters to this thread have indicated some pretty harsh intolerance for these brothers' mistakes. Did you contact them privately and explain your concerns? If you didn't, you're no better than they are. As we all know, email isn't exactly a good communication device for emotional content.

I respect your concerns about charter pulling. As an undergrad, my chapter had ours suspended for a year - and I will tell you we deserved it. The Tau thing is NOT about 2 or 3 guys - the whole "spin" from some is that the "reindeer liberation" was the cause. Just not true. I have been in ALOT of show cause hearings with numerous SEC's and ONE THING HAS BEEN VERY CONSISTENT - if a chapter walks in, under KAPPA SIGMA's due process rules (sorry, legal proceeding it is not), I have rarely seen a chapter that represented itself as accepting responsibility, apologetic and sincere have their charter pulled. I have seen only a few show up combatant, denying doing anything wrong, and just damn arrogant - they go home without charters. In this case, after having already threatened lawsuits, the chapter GM shows up with 3 attorneys. Again, there is nothing in the CBR that provides that right or privilige. If you want that right/privilige - then put together a CBR ammendment. The bottom line, when your caught red handed (and trust me, there is LOTS of concrete evidence on Tau, incuding personal testimony of pledges, web site pictures, etc) take the damn heat! Be a man and accept responsibility. I can assure you, charters have been pulled throughout our history. Gamma? Come on, the Banyard Party was a disgrace. Beta? How about beating up a guy in your backyard (a house that slept 100+ with an 8 man chapter, GPA well below 2.0) and then stealing his credit card and using it!

My first week as a ADGM years ago, we had a charter pulled at Theta-Omega - I was very dissapointed because I thought I could make a difference. I protested, and got shot down. I personally went to the chapter and informed the brothers whom I had met just the week prior. I truly believed it was an opportunity missed. Well, guess what - the next night, the chapter house was completely vandalized by the membership. TRASHED! Two weeks later it was torched by an arsonist. In hindsight, I think the decision may have been best - 3 other major chapters have since been removed form the campus.

I trust that Mu-Psi won't face such issues because of the brothers I've met from that chapter. They are indeed outstanding, but like me, probably not without flaw. I can assure you, that this year, there are not "pansy chapters" that don't lead their campus with the rushees - winning face awards. That may very well have happened in the past, but I personally held the committee accountable for ensuring that we've got healthy, size competitive or dominant chapters being awarded with the highest awards. Look at the top 5 from last year - Xi, Nu-Omicron, Lambda-Tau, Theta-Zeta - these chapters are top 2 in pledge classes every year. You will find the same to be true this year when the awards are given.

Finally - I understand frustrations of undergrads with alumni leadership. Please, discuss it here, come up with solutions and then act on those solutions. Hold us alumni accountable too - but PLEASE have the facts first. We indeed are a social organization, but we also are made up of Brothers who share an oath and friendships that require SO much more than that. So when things get tough, and look bad - don't bail, jump in with both feet as I know you do in your own chapters! I for one will support your right to your voice WITHOUT YOUR being lashed out at. Your ideas will need to stand up to scrutiny, but you should not be bombed for sharing them! Call me on, it. I am,
Semper,
Brad Bracken


Originally posted by KSig RC:
I agree w/ you Dan, good discussion.

Definitely I agree with some of the principles you express, especially with regards to leadership and chapter business. However, I agree with them in the vein of James's model of leadership. He posted a leadership model in one of the forums a while back, it is a great model for chapter programming, one that hopefully my chapter will implement soon.

With regard to Tau - I can't speculate on whether things would have turned out differently had the process been altered, no one can, but I can say that I feel a deep sense of disappointment and disillusionment with how some of our brothers were treated, and that would not be there had process been upheld. I really cringe to think that my chapter might some day be in a similar situation, because any inconsistencies in SEC policy and action are frightening to me.

I'll agree that the chapter and especially the EC should be (cliche http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif their brothers' keepers, but should the SEC then be (theoretically) an institute of punishment? Do you think that the majority of actives view the SEC as more of: a.) a regulatory, policing force b.) an institution that reminds you when you're doing badly and helps out out, and commends you when doing well c.) a benign element in day-to-day fraternal life . . . etc. The viewpoints can vary, of course, but I'd guess from my interactions that most view 'national' as a policing element, and this is not without justification on a certain level, while I'd be more in favor of a 'b.)'-type leadership (of course, it is oversimplified in one line . . .). I disagree with the very premise of this sort of 'only serves to punish' SEC, and again I am disappointed that the SEC seems to foster this view.

I can't compare this SEC to any other, as I have only been active during this one, but I don't know that the 'getting stronger' bit is implicitly positive. Kevin Kaplan (one of your chapter's alumni, if I'm not mistaken, Dan?) hung out at our chapter for a weekend, and he's genuinely a good guy - very stand-up individual, has some good ideas, charismatic man, seems like a very good brother. I can imagine the rest of the SEC brothers to be the same, although I have not met them. However, this doesn't assure that I have the same views on what the fraternity is or where it should go, etc, and doesn't mean that they will serve me best. Personally, much like governmental policy, I'd like to see the SEC remain strong in terms of the brothers comprising it, but I take a more Republican view (if you will), thinking that perhaps more "control" (or oversight more likely) should be delegated to the chapters or districts. I am roundly opposed to an SEC that is "Strong" in terms of pulling charters, chartering new "pansy" chapters designed to win awards and churn out brothers with no real basis in the actual fraternity in general (this is probably very unclear; I can email a more detailed explaination if necessary. I'm only referring to the fact that there are chapters that are the least popular among rushees and the rest of the campus but win awards, and appear to have that as the only basis of their brotherhood; sometimes, it seems like some of our new charters come complete with an oversight panel attempting to guarantee this. I'd also like to have James's view on this, but I'll email you sometime about it), and contributing to a sort of 'police-state' (extreme term, but the only way i could think of it - i've been working w/ phenol all day, you'll have to excuse me) national rather than an organization set up for and by the brothers to help one another and further the order for all. That kind of strength is overrated, and will eventually lead to severe declination of the order overall. If the governing body is unresponsive to the needs of those governed, deterioration will ensue; I'm afraid that this may possibly be the next stage if the trend continues. Already, I feel uncomfortable in some ways about how the national organization works; hopefully, this can be righted with the new elections. Now, the "grandfathering" of positions in the SEC may contribute negatively to this, but that's another rant . . . semper, take care guys -

Rob
A~B

KSig RC
06-27-2001, 12:59 AM
Originally posted by Kapsig1:
Let me say a couple things - if any Brother got "bitchslapped" for posting his personal opinions on the listserve; either publicly or privately, then the brother doing the slapping needs to be confronted. I know I personally confronted some much older, much more tenured brothers during this discussion. BUT - some of the posters to this thread have indicated some pretty harsh intolerance for these brothers' mistakes. Did you contact them privately and explain your concerns? If you didn't, you're no better than they are. As we all know, email isn't exactly a good communication device for emotional content.

I respect your concerns about charter pulling. As an undergrad, my chapter had ours suspended for a year - and I will tell you we deserved it. The Tau thing is NOT about 2 or 3 guys - the whole "spin" from some is that the "reindeer liberation" was the cause. Just not true. I have been in ALOT of show cause hearings with numerous SEC's and ONE THING HAS BEEN VERY CONSISTENT - if a chapter walks in, under KAPPA SIGMA's due process rules (sorry, legal proceeding it is not), I have rarely seen a chapter that represented itself as accepting responsibility, apologetic and sincere have their charter pulled. I have seen only a few show up combatant, denying doing anything wrong, and just damn arrogant - they go home without charters. In this case, after having already threatened lawsuits, the chapter GM shows up with 3 attorneys. Again, there is nothing in the CBR that provides that right or privilige. If you want that right/privilige - then put together a CBR ammendment. The bottom line, when your caught red handed (and trust me, there is LOTS of concrete evidence on Tau, incuding personal testimony of pledges, web site pictures, etc) take the damn heat! Be a man and accept responsibility. I can assure you, charters have been pulled throughout our history. Gamma? Come on, the Banyard Party was a disgrace. Beta? How about beating up a guy in your backyard (a house that slept 100+ with an 8 man chapter, GPA well below 2.0) and then stealing his credit card and using it!

My first week as a ADGM years ago, we had a charter pulled at Theta-Omega - I was very dissapointed because I thought I could make a difference. I protested, and got shot down. I personally went to the chapter and informed the brothers whom I had met just the week prior. I truly believed it was an opportunity missed. Well, guess what - the next night, the chapter house was completely vandalized by the membership. TRASHED! Two weeks later it was torched by an arsonist. In hindsight, I think the decision may have been best - 3 other major chapters have since been removed form the campus.

I trust that Mu-Psi won't face such issues because of the brothers I've met from that chapter. They are indeed outstanding, but like me, probably not without flaw. I can assure you, that this year, there are not "pansy chapters" that don't lead their campus with the rushees - winning face awards. That may very well have happened in the past, but I personally held the committee accountable for ensuring that we've got healthy, size competitive or dominant chapters being awarded with the highest awards. Look at the top 5 from last year - Xi, Nu-Omicron, Lambda-Tau, Theta-Zeta - these chapters are top 2 in pledge classes every year. You will find the same to be true this year when the awards are given.

Finally - I understand frustrations of undergrads with alumni leadership. Please, discuss it here, come up with solutions and then act on those solutions. Hold us alumni accountable too - but PLEASE have the facts first. We indeed are a social organization, but we also are made up of Brothers who share an oath and friendships that require SO much more than that. So when things get tough, and look bad - don't bail, jump in with both feet as I know you do in your own chapters! I for one will support your right to your voice WITHOUT YOUR being lashed out at. Your ideas will need to stand up to scrutiny, but you should not be bombed for sharing them! Call me on, it. I am,
Semper,
Brad Bracken




Thanks Brad - I agree with a lot of what you have to say; often it's a matter of semantics and being unable to express views adequately on this forum. I can especially appreciate the fact that you come from the alumni/officer standpoint, and that your views aren't rehashed national policy but rather intelligent views gleaned from actual experience.

Just a couple things, to boil it down further:

-I'll be the first to admit that I don't know the whole story about the Tau case; same with the MF fiasco, and even other chapters in trouble etc. Why is this? Why is it that so few brothers at the undergraduate level know about these important events in our fraternal organization? What can be done to increase knowledge? The listserve is a sorry solution; the politicking and sometimes-flippant posting make it uncomfortable for many; also, as an example, those attempting to get another side of the story (of the MF case, for example) sometimes meet with unfortunate amounts of resistance. I just wonder how myself (and those not as active as myself) may learn more about these things.

-I appreciate the assurance that the top awards will go to the most deserving chapters - definitely this adds validity to the process, and makes it seem more worthwhile to apply (vs. being out to 'just win awards', which is ridiculous). Just out of curiosity, how is this determined? From raw numbers from campus, or is there any polling of IFC officers or greek life counselors? (I'm just wondering - I watched our FACE application being done this semester and how it was judged was something that i just didn't understand fully)

-I'm sorry to hear about the theta-omega case, if you would could you explain more about the situation? Again, it is something i didn't hear much about. Trashing the chapter house and whatever is dispicable, and the fact that you tried to help out is admirable. What attempts were made before you became aware of the situation? This is simply to learn more about the process of helping out a chapter in need of attention from national officers, as it is something i have not had any experience with as a brother.

Overall, Brad, I'm glad to hear from you - opinions such as your own (with your unique perspective, but sans political bias) exist as a resource sometimes unavailable. AEKDB,

Rob

Kapsig1
06-27-2001, 10:00 AM
Rob - thanks for the reply - I'll do my best to answer things below:

<<-I'll be the first to admit that I don't know the whole story about the Tau case; same with the MF fiasco, and even other chapters in trouble etc. Why is this? Why is it that so few brothers at the undergraduate level know about these important events in our fraternal organization? What can be done to increase knowledge? The listserve is a sorry solution; the politicking and sometimes-flippant posting make it uncomfortable for many; also, as an example, those attempting to get another side of the story (of the MF case, for example) sometimes meet with unfortunate amounts of resistance. I just wonder how myself (and those not as active as myself) may learn more about these things.>>

This is an EXCELLENT point, and one that many in the Order have struggled with for years. I have requested on numerous occasions that we "open up" the bandwidth and frequency of our communication. I'm not sure what the solution is. Even if we had a third party "news service", that was completely disconnected from the General Fraternity there would be "media bias." For me personally, the answer has always been - find people that I trust throughout the organization, and network with them for the real details. More recently, I have opened up very honest channels with those that I really like, but often find myself on opposite sides of arguments with. Bottom line, don't shut anyone out regardless of rhetoric, and seek out folks you trust. If you've got a possible active solution, I'd love to hear it and help pull it off.

<< I appreciate the assurance that the top awards will go to the most deserving chapters - definitely this adds validity to the process, and makes it seem more worthwhile to apply (vs. being out to 'just win awards', which is ridiculous). Just out of curiosity, how is this determined? From raw numbers from campus, or is there any polling of IFC officers or greek life counselors? (I'm just wondering - I watched our FACE application being done this semester and how it was judged was something that i just didn't understand fully)>>

Basically, there is an Awards Selection Committee that is appointed by the Communications Commissioner (Phil Thames) and his Deputy for Awards (Kyle Van Hoften). Beginning last year, our commission (Mem Dev) began having a representative appointed, primarily to review the Brotherhood Development Award applications, but also to make recomendations on FACE applicants with respect to the chapter's BDP. This year, I sat on the committee myself. My involvement aside, I thin HUGE strides have been made to make the process more dependent on results in view of greek environment that the chapter exists in. There are "baseline" guidelines in each area of statistical data (rush, size, grades, ritual, involvement, service, etc). This year, I came armed with US News and World Report data on every applicant's host institution - so that we could place out chapters in terms of initiation rates vs. school freshmen retention rates, growth vs. campus growth, etc. In addition, a letter from an AA/DGM is required, and a letter of rec from an administrator is required that validates grades, top 1/3 in size, and a couple other things. What this means - chapters at regional state universities where only 40% of freshmen return after one year are NOT held to an arbitrary 80% pledge initiation rate. However, if the chapter is getting smaller when the school has grown, we looked twice. At the same time, if a chapter at an Ivy league school has a 3.3 chapter GPA, and the All Men's is 3.4, we did not disqualify them from a FACE if all the other ducks were in a row. It is definately an art, not a science, and a very difficult one at that. The presentation is as important as the content, full documention is a MUST, and "tone" can kill a deal. I've got some SUPER funny stuff from this years applications that shot down some applications. This year, the committtee is providing very specific feedback to each applicant chapter - win, lose or draw. Hopefully, that will help communicate changing expectations and levels of achievement.

<<-I'm sorry to hear about the theta-omega case, if you would could you explain more about the situation? Again, it is something i didn't hear much about. Trashing the chapter house and whatever is dispicable, and the fact that you tried to help out is admirable.>>

Theta-Omega was closed in 1995 if my memory serves me. The host school had been going through a shift from a traditional 4 year school to a "commuter" campus with LOTS of
students that are "English Second Language." Our chapter, chose to attempt to remain pretty lily white, in an environement in which they were quickly becoming a small minority. Grades were consistently below the AMA/AFA for 3 years. Because the chapter shrank almost 50% in 3 years, there were major financial delinquencies to the general fraternity and vendors. The chapter rarely practiced the ritual as required by the CBR. Many members had been through the initation ceremony, but their initation fees had been squandered by the chapter. There were serious violations of the alcohol policies, that fortunately did NOT result in any injuries, but nevertheless were indicative of the general lack of leadership. I think I recall describing it as an overall failure to thrive.

<<What attempts were made before you became aware of the situation? This is simply to learn more about the process of helping out a chapter in need of attention from national officers, as it is something i have not had any experience with as a brother.>>

Probably why I was most disappointed about the closing - the entire district had been abandoned by the DGM before I affiliated to Epsilon-Upsilon in 1988. I was an AA under this Brother in 1991, and can tell you absolute horror stories (probably not too disimilar from the way things were in your part of the country no too long ago.) Now, I understand that DGM's are not always welcomed commodities, and when that is the case - it's usually a deserved reputation. But this guy just did NOTHING, even return phone calls when we needed him to sign a form. Anyway, we had a new DGM appointed (after we raised hell with some SEC members for 3 years) about 3 months before the Theta-Omega thing reached critical mass. At that point, it was probably too late, BUT I was sent in to try to clean things up, and there was some progress, but the chapter was so small (16), and only 5 of those were REALLY committed to turning the boat on a dime. It just wasn't there. The university has since asked us back, after seeing some recolonizations and the strength of the district today, but it is a DAMN tough campus to thrive on. I would have a hard time supporting a move to recolonize.

<<Overall, Brad, I'm glad to hear from you - opinions such as your own (with your unique perspective, but sans political bias) exist as a resource sometimes unavailable. AEKDB, >>

Thanks Brother, likewise. I was hesitant to post because of the very "uncomfortable" feelings that are sometimes evident to me on the general list. But, I would have felt like a liar just "trolling" the threads here.

Please know that I am as "in the middle" of all the major issues facing Kappa Sigma as my priorities allow, which means I have VERY strong feelings about what's going on. The Brothers and friends that I serve Kappa Sigma with are my family, and if unjustly attacked, I respond. These same men I would die for, I hold accountable to the ideals we profess. That is how I define brotherhood.
(Stepping off soapbox)

But also know that, given the choice, I would spend time with a bunch of undergraduates instead of alumni ANYTIME. To this day, I visit my chapter in Denton at least once a week, and know all the members by name. I have always found immense respect afforded me for the time I spend on their "turf." I pray the same will be true here. I appreciate your affirmation. I will always be honest, straight forward, and do my best to not make things personal while remaining as on fire PASSIONATE as I am about Kappa Sigma!

Are you going to Memphis - I'd love to meet you. Maybe we brainstorm some solutions on the communication thing.

AEKDB
Brad Bracken

Rob[/B][/QUOTE]

KSig RC
06-27-2001, 06:43 PM
yeah, the memphis thang is still up in the air . . . hopefully i'll be able to pull it off, but there's some other stuff i gotta get out of the way first in terms of making lab work fit around being gone for a long weekend - i'll drop you a line though, again thanks for a response w/ personal feelings and experience, and devoid of rhetoric. Later,

Rob

KSigkid
07-01-2001, 07:10 PM
Brad,
First thanks for the info and the thoughts, glad to see someone feels the way you do - I was thinking about it, and maybe a message board such as this would be a good idea on the Kappa Sig website, and undergrad board. Put it under Brother Services, and give undergrads a chance to voice their opinions and thoughts in a forum a little less intimidating than the listserve. Also, alumni can see what the undergrads are thinking about and what the major issues are in their minds. Also, maybe the UAC should give updates to their districts after SEC meetings. We know the UAC is supposed to represent the undergrad perspective, but if they sent out updates via email/snail mail to chapters, explaining what went on at SEC meetings, it would allow undergrad chapters to be more "in the know" about what's going on. Just a couple ideas, drop me a line if you can; I'll be at Conclave, look forward to talking to you there.

AEKDB
Collin
Mu-Psi

Kapsig1
07-02-2001, 09:28 AM
Both really good ideas Collin. This conclave will have "Commission Conferences" which represents a change. Each undergraduate delegate has already been assigned to a commission. The conferences will ideally bring good ideas like this, put action items behind them and prioritize for implementation. Any undegraduate "non-delegates" will be able to attend the conference of their choice - so, since you're going, GO to the communications one, and take these ideas with you. I would recommend you fully develop them for implementation (what your ideal looks like, with specifics) and then be ready to work with the other Brothers to iron it out.

See you in Memphis,
AEKDB
Brad


Originally posted by KSigkid:
Brad,
First thanks for the info and the thoughts, glad to see someone feels the way you do - I was thinking about it, and maybe a message board such as this would be a good idea on the Kappa Sig website, and undergrad board. Put it under Brother Services, and give undergrads a chance to voice their opinions and thoughts in a forum a little less intimidating than the listserve. Also, alumni can see what the undergrads are thinking about and what the major issues are in their minds. Also, maybe the UAC should give updates to their districts after SEC meetings. We know the UAC is supposed to represent the undergrad perspective, but if they sent out updates via email/snail mail to chapters, explaining what went on at SEC meetings, it would allow undergrad chapters to be more "in the know" about what's going on. Just a couple ideas, drop me a line if you can; I'll be at Conclave, look forward to talking to you there.

AEKDB
Collin
Mu-Psi

KSigkid
07-02-2001, 08:16 PM
Brad,
One thing - I'm the Mu-Psi delegate, and I've already been placed on the By-Laws and Rules Review Committee - would I be able to switch over to the Communications Committee, or do I stay with the one I'm assigned to? Would there be a way to get my ideas out on the table, so to speak, if I can't go to the Communications Committee meeting? Thanks.

AEKDB
Collin - GS
Mu-Psi

------------------
If you ever get that feeling you can't go on, just remember the side it is that
you're on...you've got friends with you 'til the end. If you're ever in a tough
situation, we'll be there, no hesitation...Brotherhood's our rule we cannot
bend.

Kapsig1
07-03-2001, 09:48 AM
Collin- find me ASAP when you get to Memphis and we'll negotiate a "trade" between the CBR chair (Adam Apatoff) and the Communications Chair (Phil Thames). I think your ideas need to be heard and developed, and if that's where you feel you'd be best utilized, we'll do our best to make it happen. I think I'm getting into Memphis on Wednesday - so look me up.

AEKDB
Brad

Originally posted by KSigkid:
Brad,
One thing - I'm the Mu-Psi delegate, and I've already been placed on the By-Laws and Rules Review Committee - would I be able to switch over to the Communications Committee, or do I stay with the one I'm assigned to? Would there be a way to get my ideas out on the table, so to speak, if I can't go to the Communications Committee meeting? Thanks.

AEKDB
Collin - GS
Mu-Psi

James
07-05-2001, 04:34 PM
Hey Brad thank you for responding. ITs nice to see A National Officer (unpaid) responding intellegently to general concerns.

I want to keep the tone positive as I respond with some ideas, concerns, and suggestions so let me begin with writing that I believe that probably all the people passionately arguing on the listserv probably have the best of intentions in their involvement with Kappa Sigma.

I believe that beyond whatever value that they personally derive from being an alumni volunteer, most likely everyone has an idea of giving good service. In fact they probably want to give the best service they are capable of within the limitations they impose upon themselves involving their personal lives, employment, and the major one: experience and access to leadership information.

I also believe that they are probably nice people. Most people practice their entire lives creating a nice personality (personality as a method of communication). In fact I can say that everyone I have met in the fraternity has been kind of cool to hang out with within the limitations of my acquaintance with them.

What I find strange is that most people I have met don't differentiate between nice personality, good intentions, and knowledge and competence.

They are different. You can be very effective at task completion and not be nice or have good intentions towards others and you can be a virtual saint and not be able to find your ass with two hands a flashlight and an instructional video.

Somebody can be your best friend and not someone you would make VP of your company in a position that matters, and someone could be not pleasant and you would know that the job would definitely get done.

When people confuse these things it makes it more difficult to argue positions because it seems to imply that we are attacking the person rather than the action or concept.

Suggestion number 1: We should make a concerted effort to teach this differentiation and how to set up Criteria to evaluate decisions, ideas, performance and people as part of our overall leadership program. I'd be glad to write it up for everyone http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif

What I believe we have been expressing here is our dissapointment with the character assassination we have seen on the listserv. It seems, and this mostly applies to the people against the sale of IMH, that when they are confronted with a point that is difficult to argue they fall back on the age old tried and true method of destroying the credibility of the messenger.

ITs a great tactic and it works. Destroy someone's repuation or cast doubts on their motives and you can destroy the validity of their message.

The people that are doing it unconsciously I tend to respect less: it just shows poor emotional control. But I have to feel a faint admiration for the people that set out to destroy the others person's standings within the Fraternity Community. Such a tenacious desire to win their point at any cost is noteworthy.

However, for those of us more removed from the problem it weakens the argument, especially if we don't tend to use that tactic ourselves. To us, the issue isn't whether this or that Brother is Satan's spawn, we are just trying to evaluate the point being made. And if the point is avoided and someone resorts to character attacks . . . it makes us wonder.

With Tau, we don't have access to what actually happened, but common sense tells us that certainly the whole chapter isn't likely to be evil. And when they are writing that they just want a fair process and many others are are just writing attacks on their character, it builds a certain degree of sympathy.

Although I do agree with you Brad, if you do it, own up to it, and live up to it.

I agree that the CBR doesn't provide for a strict process, but I am not sure it doesn't not provide for it. Documents such as the CBR tend to be and can't cover every situation. And usually the intent behind them is that we act with "good will". So just because the CBR doesn't have an explicit due process doesn't mean we couldn't have given one. Tau's request wasn't unreasonable and the attourney's present were Tau alumni . . . I know we don't like lawyers in general but we shouldn't discriminate against alumni just because they took up such an inherently evil occupation http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif.

Also 40 eyewitnesses guarentee 40 DIFFERENT versions.

I don't want to beat the Tau horse to death because I, and probably no one posting here, is really a Tau partisan per se, but its easy to sympathize with a group that keeps getting blasted, especially when many of their arguments were at least on the surface, reasonable.

Also, it bothers me fundamentally to know that members of a fraternity might go in with the idea upfront that they might not be given a fair chance based on likes/dislikes and the negative portrayal of their actions, motives, and history. And the responses of many on the listserv has done nothing to dispell the idea that their assumption may have been correct: That the process may have been tampered with before they ever got to the hearing based on people's personal opinions. I think we are all enough students of human nature to know this happens. Leadership is about minimizing this . . .

Coming back full circle to intentions vs. competencies . . .


A first rule for alumni leaders, and once you interfere you are a leader in its most basic capacity: an agent for change . . . would be to do no harm. I have no problem with people messing up themselves, but its a crime to diminish the experience or educational value for others, especially when you volunteer for it. Unacceptable and inexcusable.

My next suggestion is more a holisitic approach: we need to stop pussyfooting around and complete the trend Greek Organizations seem to be heading towards, which is to design a Kappa Sigma all inclusive leadership program, that more than deals with just pledging, and goes beyond basic disjointed chapter operations.

I know we have BIA now, which is based on Sig Ep's Balanced Man, which is a much more mature version of SAE's LEading Edge program. I have both of those programs but haven't seen the completed BIA program . . . so haven't been able to evaluate it.

And the leadership needs to flow as much from the top down as anything, we need to develop and then train the alumni volunteers in it. There shoould be basic consistent Kappa Sigma LEadership responses to most situations and they should be based on sound theory . . .

I would love to enter a serious dialouge about this kind of stuff.

Got to cut this short http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif bye for now.

Semper

James

Kapsig1
07-05-2001, 06:26 PM
James - very lucid thoughts and I can't necissarily argue any of them. They are based on what I place as a fundamental truth in ALL interactions - "perception is reality."

Couldn't AGREE more with your "nice" vs "competent" point, and appreciate the maturity with which you perceive the flame artists - you're kinder than I.

I would add - you can be RIGHT and be ineffective. In other words, you can be exercising what you profess to be the "right thing" and not get crap for results because of your approach.

I feel your frustration on the Tau thing. However, the sabre rattling element of some chapter make me sick too. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are some fine, upstanding young men in the group. In our case, we had ALL the leadership on capmus, great grades, etc. -We did everything "right," had awesome parties, rush etc, but we hazed like crazy - which we KNEW was wrong, and against policy/law etc. But we NEVER expected to be let off for the wrong, because we were otherwise good. I have not seen any evidence that the Tau undegrads are/have been willing to do the same. Know what I mean?

<<Also, it bothers me fundamentally to know that members of a fraternity might go in with the idea upfront that they might not be given a fair chance based on likes/dislikes and the negative portrayal of their actions, motives, and history.>>

Attorneys get paid to think that way http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif

<<Leadership is about minimizing this . . .>>

Agreed


<<My next suggestion is more a holisitic approach: we need to stop pussyfooting around and complete the trend Greek Organizations seem to be heading towards, which is to design a Kappa Sigma all inclusive leadership program, that more than deals with just pledging, and goes beyond basic disjointed chapter operations.>>

It's interesting you mention this, because in an offline conversation with one of the Tau alums who has been very vocal on the listserve, this is PRECISELY what they don't want. And I kind of agree with both of you. The reality is (and Sig Ep acknowledges this) that an attempt to provide a single program solution to the vast diversity of chapter situations may indeed be "right" but not necessarily effective. Balanced Man, and BIA have been recevied with varying degrees of effectiveness. Doesn't mean we give up - by any means - means we have to work harder. I helped architect BIA, and I did so on sound principles I had used in a very diverse district. BIA is NOT like Balanced Man by design - it is instead designed to create effective, and incremental change in each unique chapter.

<<And the leadership needs to flow as much from the top down as anything, we need to develop and then train the alumni volunteers in it. There shoould be basic consistent Kappa Sigma LEadership responses to most situations and they should be based on sound theory . . . >>

This - to quote Marisa Tomei from "My Cousin Vinney" is "Dead on, balls accurate." Regardless of what BIA evolves into - the vols from top down HAVE to be engaged. We won't do BIA without DGM's/ADGM'/AA's, etc. PARTICIPATING. We have some that could implement today, but not many.

We have also chosen not to make the program MANDATORY. And I guess that comes from greater faith in our undergraduates to make decisions regarding their own chapters. Sometimes that faith gets us in trouble. It's an interesting balancing act between creating a learning environment and imposing the "General Fraternity's" will.

I don't have the all the answers - but like talking about it. We'll make progress that way.

AEKDB
Brad

James
07-06-2001, 12:56 AM
I would add - you can be RIGHT and be ineffective. In other words, you can be exercising what you profess to be the "right thing" and not get crap for results because of your approach.

I feel you there . . .sometimes the population you are dealing with just doesn;t WANT TO DO. And you could more correct than God and it wouldn't matter. ITs why we need to build failsafes for the important stuff into the system.


I'll answer the rest tomorrow http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif

Semper

James

GPBGirl
10-16-2001, 06:49 PM
Hi Gentlemen:

I am a Gamma Phi Beta married to a Kappa Sig. I attended UT Austin. I know how TAU feels, because we too got kicked off campus after I graduated. I am so disappointed that I spent all that time and money and have nothing to show for it. I have no chapter at UT and there are few alums that will admit they are Gamma Phi's. The parties at UT were beyond compare, and what went on after the parties too! I remember the ATO's having all their pledges in the hospital because they smashed them with rotten eggs and they all got Staff infections. I remember crosses burned in the Jewish Frat yards during Kappa Alpha Old South. The PIKES had "Big John's Porter Party" .
Times have changed and I have gotten a little older. I still remember my wild days with great fondness, but I am not sure that my husband or I will recommend the Greek life for either my son or daughter. Believe me when I say that it was NOT just the Kappa Sigs that behaved badly. Sigma Nu killed two pledges with alcohol poisoning; that is much worse than destroying property.

KSig RC
10-21-2001, 06:18 PM
Originally posted by GPBGirl
Hi Gentlemen:

I am a Gamma Phi Beta married to a Kappa Sig. I attended UT Austin. I know how TAU feels, because we too got kicked off campus after I graduated. I am so disappointed that I spent all that time and money and have nothing to show for it. I have no chapter at UT and there are few alums that will admit they are Gamma Phi's. The parties at UT were beyond compare, and what went on after the parties too! I remember the ATO's having all their pledges in the hospital because they smashed them with rotten eggs and they all got Staff infections. I remember crosses burned in the Jewish Frat yards during Kappa Alpha Old South. The PIKES had "Big John's Porter Party" .
Times have changed and I have gotten a little older. I still remember my wild days with great fondness, but I am not sure that my husband or I will recommend the Greek life for either my son or daughter. Believe me when I say that it was NOT just the Kappa Sigs that behaved badly. Sigma Nu killed two pledges with alcohol poisoning; that is much worse than destroying property.

The unfortunate part of this is that, ideally, as a national organization, we could tailor our responses to the situation at a particular campus . . .

. . . however this is impossible, and horribly ineffective from a leadership standpoint.

I am fully of the belief that any chapter at a school like UT that walks the 'straight and narrow' according to national policy (from any GLO, not just ours) will have severe difficulties. In that environment, there is a decided advantage to houses that can go nuts, and there is a general desire among rushees to join houses that support fraternal stereotypes, regardless of if they 'should'.

However, I totally understand how leadership can say that there's no way to turn a blind eye on behavior, and that environmental concerns don't lessen the impact (ie "everyone else is doing it!" won't hold up . . . ). The situation here in the Northeast is not at all similar to the situation at UT-Austin, but I can see why the SEC would need to view each as the same in terms of judicial action.

Frustrating situation - this is a school where I would LOVE to have a strong presence, but I'm not sure it will ever happen again. The "Good Ol' Boy" network apparently extends to certain houses, but not to others, in these situations - I just don't know if it's right, or wrong.