Fraternities change party rules

[TSteven]

Fraternities change party rules
The Murray State News
Published: Friday, February 18, 2005
Staff Report

Murray State fraternity party goers who were upset by restrictions placed on guest lists last semester may feel relief soon.

Eric Geissler, president of the Interfraternity Council, said the IFC passed an amendment three weeks ago to make the Greek social event policy more effective.

Last semester, the policy held that the host fraternity had to compile a guest list that did not exceed the fire marshal occupancy rating of the site of the social event.

The new amendment will replace the "Guest List" section of the policy. The new "Approved List and Guest List" amendment states that the approved list consists of friends of chapter members who will be invited to the fraternity's social event. The guest list will include all individuals from the approved list who actually attend the event.

The maximum number of guests allowed to enter the social event shall not exceed the fire marshal occupancy rating. When the number of guests who have signed into the social event reaches the rating, no more guests will be allowed to enter the event, despite of the number of guests who have left.

The approved list must be turned into the Curris Center Office by 4 p.m. the day of the event. Guest lists must be turned into the office within three days after the event.

Geissler, senior from Germantown, Tenn., said there is no limit to the approved list, as there was last semester.

"There could be 800 people or something (on the list), if the fire limit is 300, there's a little more room for people who don't show up for some reason," Geissler said.

Geissler said most college students do not know if they are going to a party until 11 p.m.

"Half of those people might not show up," Geissler said, referring to college students' uncertain party plans. "(The change) allows parties to be better and bigger."

Geissler said he has been working with the University since last semester to adapt the previous policy. He said the IFC had to compromise on several issues, but he was pleased with the result.

For the amendment to go into effect, each fraternity must have the policy approved by its chapter adviser and national headquarters. The rest of the policies will remain the same.

"(It's) left up to individual chapters in order (for the amendment) to be applicable," Geissler said. "Some fraternities have already implemented the amendment and two had it approved within a week."

Individual fraternity presidents could not comment on the changes because of national chapter regulations.

[Tom Earp]

Of course it has come to this because of Stupidity.

But does sound like over booking on a Air Flight or Hotel Room doesnt it?

[roqueemae]

It is almost like a "velvet rope" thing. I think it is a good change in policy.

I don't think it is som much like over-reserving at a airline. Really I think it is more like Rush. We do have more people on our bid lists than we can take, they may go other places so it allows others to move up. Only thing with this it is first come first serve. Could you imagine that on Bid Day?!

[Little E]

I think it seems like a creative solution...we had all campus parties and have been very very lucky...

[hoosier]

I've never understood why a chapter spends its money on a party for non-members?

[AXORissa]

Originally posted by hoosier
I've never understood why a chapter spends its money on a party for non-members?

because people dont like to go to parties they have to pay for?

I never once paid for a party. Neither did the guys who werent in the fraternity-- they just either werent let in, had to show they were interested in rushing (only worked freshman year), or had to have like 10 cute girls on his arm.

Free parties = more girls. If I had to pay, I would go to a house party instead.

[TSteven]

I've got friends who are Murray State alumni and they said this was a bad policy.

First off, the policy wasn't just for random open house type parties but covered all events. From chapter events such as Homecoming, Founders Day, Parents Day etc. to mixers and exchanges.

But more of an issue were the thank you parties that the fraternities held for the sororities (and in some cases women's dorms) who had participated in their annual philanthropic projects like Lambda Chi Alpha's Watermelon Bust or Sigma Chi's Derby Days.

So for one of these thank you events, if the fraternity wanted to invite just the members of say just the sororities and their own chapter, that would be a guest list of over 500 people. The previous policy said that the fraternity could only have their party at a site that held at least 500. Not many off campus sites could hold that number and the few that could usually cost a lot to rent. On campus events at say the student center would be considered dorky. In any case, after other costs are added and you factor in that there is no guarantee that all 500 guests would show up, it was a bad policy.

And the same was true for chapter-only events like Founders Day or Homecoming. My understanding is that it was a logistics nightmare to figure out how many alumni were attending so that the chapter could insure that there was a site to cover the possible number. And it really didn't allow for any 'walk ins' or late arrivals since the fraternities would have to book well in advance.

Now the latest version makes more sense, however, I'm not sure about this part.

When the number of guests who have signed into the social event reaches the rating, no more guests will be allowed to enter the event, despite of the number of guests who have left.

My guess is that this is directed toward 'house' parties more than third party vendor sites.

[AGDee]

I wondered about that part too, and then I realized, they are trying to avoid having huge crowds waiting in line outside of a house, waiting for one or two people to leave and letting in 1 or 2 more in the interim. I imagine that mob mentality could take over and they could cause a lot of problems while waiting outside in line waiting to go in.

[TSteven]

Originally posted by AGDee
I wondered about that part too, and then I realized, they are trying to avoid having huge crowds waiting in line outside of a house, waiting for one or two people to leave and letting in 1 or 2 more in the interim. I imagine that mob mentality could take over and they could cause a lot of problems while waiting outside in line waiting to go in.

I agree. Having college kids hanging around out side of the house waiting to get into the party - even if they are 'well behaved' - just isn't going to cut it in a small college town.

I am fairly sure all the houses are in residential areas with most right across from campus. For the most part, there has been an excellent relationship between the fraternities (and sororities), the university and the local community/neighbors. I'm sure everyone wants to keep it that way. Especially since there are many alumni who reside in town. They - the alums - pretty much ensure that nothing gets out of hand with their chapters.

The flip side would be the local authorities cracking down hard if there were complaints or issues. Again, the houses aren't on campus property and as such, fall under the city/county authorities.

[Little E]

Originally posted by hoosier
I've never understood why a chapter spends its money on a party for non-members?

Not all schools really give you a lot of choice. My college expected it and we did the main social planning, though we were allowed to help fund DJs through social funding board (not that they were actually friendly). We closed parties for a while to Greek only because of some pretty bad vandalism, and people just didn't get it. When there is already a campus culture where greeks throw parties, it is hard to reign them in and make them realize we are doing a service to the campus, it is not their right to have a party in our houses. It's a very tough situation

[TSteven]

Originally posted by hoosier
I've never understood why a chapter spends its money on a party for non-members?

Because the members would like to have someone other than their brothers to dance with?

Seriously, at MSU - and I would venture to guess most other colleges - house parties are usually for chapter members *and* their guests. Guests may include dates, sororities members, prospective members, alumni and their dates, chapter advisors etc. But usually not open to the whole campus. Which is why there is a guest list.

Campus wide parties are usually held in conjunction with a chapter's philanthropic projects.

[Tom Earp]

Totaly open partys cause to many problems=leads to GLO getting expelled when the S**t hits the fan.

[exlurker]

Northern Illinois University (NIU) just had a stabbing occur over someone being denied entrance to an fraternity party. The alleged perp is being charged with attempted murder, and NIU is suspending parties.

http://www.star.niu.edu/articles/?id...ticles/?id=576

While an incident this serious doesn't happen every weekend, there do seem to be a lot of fights, scuffles, attacks, etc. associated with the problem of who does / does not get into (or asked to leave) a fraternity party. The large "open" (or nearly open) party concept may need to be rethought on quite a few campuses.

[AchtungBaby80]

Originally posted by TSteven
Seriously, at MSU - and I would venture to guess most other colleges - house parties are usually for chapter members *and* their guests. Guests may include dates, sororities members, prospective members, alumni and their dates, chapter advisors etc. But usually not open to the whole campus. Which is why there is a guest list.

Yeah. Whenever we had "unofficial" parties (i.e. not formally-planned date functions where we rented a venue) like mixers, they were usually restricted to just members of my sorority and whatever other fraternity/sorority we were having the party with. This was sort of the unspoken rule. You just didn't go crashing other groups' mixers very often.

A girl at work was b*tching the other day about how she and her friend were denied entrance at a mixer one night, and about how she thought Greeks were just so elitist for not allowing non-members in. I tried to explain to her that it just isn't done that way, that it isn't because we hate non-Greeks, it's mostly for safety/liability reasons, but she just didn't get it.

"Well," she sniffed, "I won't say anything else because I see you've got letters on your necklace."

Hmmmm, with that attitude I wouldn't have let her in, either.

[AGDee]

You should tell her that if she pays for her friends like we do, she would get to go to the parties!