UM disaffiliated fraternities create independent Interfraternity Council
 

*head-desk*

What could possibly go wrong here? :rolleyes:

It's not as if every single one of us don't have that sort of programming available and in most cases, mandatory. I get your point, but I'm not sure those things are that big of a deal. Many of use have been predicting for years that the heavy handed tactics at some public schools are going to force us to disassociate and self-govern.

I think her point is that the loss of those things means nothing at all to the members of these orgs who have decided to not go with the program. It doesn't say they lose social privileges or can't register parties, etc. What they "lose" is safety and anti-hazing programming? As if they care?

In reading this, I bow my head and weep.:o

One of My Chapters was put on Super Secret B S. They followed all of the rules set down by the Admin.
Then an ex Chapter Alums Daddy came in and complained to the Univ. It was his son who was one of the Hazers and was booted!

NOW in retrospect the Univ. decided to kick off the Chapter.:mad:

My IHQ told them about our Ritual and they took umbridge and said was hazing!:mad:

I was totally upset when My IHQ did not back them up for growing and doing the right thing. So that is the question? Should they have gone the way that we are discussing here or not?

So were these 6 fraternities disaffiliated prior to the zoning change? And if so, they formed their own council to satisfy the city zoning requirement of affiliation?

The zoning requirement only affects new chapters so I think they're just saying that they'll recruit when they want to. From the Michigan Daily article: The regulations apply to new chapters and do not affect existing chapters at the University.

AFC. Alternate fraternity council.