I know ;).

I would make them sit through many, many boring meetings.
That's something noone likes, and it's a clear causal relationship: "If we hit people with bats, we have to do sensitivity training again."
Really bad cases are one thing, but to just get people to be a bit more civilised? Long, boring meetings.

I've had significant contact with them and they seem to be doing fairly well.

I don't think that has anything remotely close to do with reasons for joining a fraternity. I joined SAE at Texas because my father and grandfather pledged SAE, I liked the guys, it has a great house, and has a strong reputation on campus. Taking into account the rules and regulations made up by a bunch of guys in Illinois didn't really figure into my equation.

I disagree with a ton of new things that are IHQ has proposed........it doesn't mean that my reasoning for joining my particular fraternity should be questioned.

[QUOTE=tallgreekalum;1454547]Yeah, I realize they ARE shutting down chapters.....but keep in mind the type of chapters I was talking about. When they start shutting down chapters like SAE at Alabama or Phi Delt at Ole Miss.......then get back to me. There are plenty of chapters that I think most would agree are....above the law....so to speak.

[quote=macallan25;1454922]
Man, I used to agree with you.... I seriously thought that Sigma Nu at the following were way above the law & untouchable: Kansas, Arkansas, Arizona State, Washington State, LSU, Colorado State, Vanderbilt, and WAY back in the day - Texas.

However, our nationals has shown that they don't care how strong you are; you are subject to all the same regulations as even the smallest and newest chapter.

Ep Ep was never shut down... at least not that I know of.

I'm almost positive they were. For at least a year because of a monster fight or something. I'll look for the article and PM it to you.

[edit] removing Okie State as I don't see where nationals ever closed them down.

The "Nu Society" might be doing well. But not well enough to keep Sigma Nu from coming back. I mean this with all due respect to the society, but Sigma Nu is, and will be, bigger (on so many levels) at Vanderbilt than the society can ever hope to be. Their history, their tradition, their alumni etc.

As such, the "Nu Society" is a good example of why I don't feel many SEC (and or other Southern) chapters will withdraw from their fraternity. Especially when they are viewed as being a prominent fraternity on campus.

Frankly, the powerful, wealthy, and influential alumni are still Sigma Nus. Vandy Sigma Nus. The alumni have a long history and are respected for being Nus on the Vandy campus. As such, I would guess many of them have had a part in bringing their chapter back to Vanderbilt. So for example, when Homecoming comes around, Sigma Nu alumni will go to the Sigma Nu house to hang out and party. When a Vandy Sigma Nu alumnus is asked to open his check book to help *his chapter*, the name is going to be the Vandy Sigma Nu chapter and not some society that he doesn't have any ties with at all.

And the actives and alumni of other SEC and Southern chapters (of any fraternity) know and understand this as well. If not, we would have seen a heck of a lot of SEC and/or Southern chapters leaving years back. Not just a random few.

Another reason I don't see a concern on SEC campuses would be with the actives. Again as an example, I'd love to see some "Nu Society" guys go to the Sigma Nu house at Ole Miss, at Kentucky or at Bama and say "Hey, we are here for the football game tomorrow. We *use to be* Sigma Nu, but we aren't anymore. Can y'all put us up for the night?" My point is that when a chapter removes itself from the general fraternity, they no longer receive the benefits. Like being a part of a brotherhood that extends beyond the campus, and throughout the rest of the South and into the rest of the county. And the instant respect that can go with that.

And for what it is worth, the same may be said with the "Phi Society" and Phi Delta Theta at Virginia.

Well said. I did read something after they recolonized where the Vandy Sigma Nu chapter would NOT be rushing any of those Nu Society members back. They said they would be treated much like any other Fraternity on the campus. Seperate.

No matter what GLO some are going to go aganist IHQ Rules and when the do, they should be chastised!

Oh, my Chapter has a lot of Monied Alumni! They will not be closed!

Wrong! If they act like dill wads, they make not only their own GLO look bad, they make all look bad by association!:mad:

None of us want to beleive it can happen, but it does!:eek:

I am the Oldest Alimni of my Chapter, but, there are more who are more stearner than I am! They are some of the Younger Brothers!:)

Make your Chapter look like fools and all of us, who does that help?:mad:

wow,
I have to agree with the Earpism on this one.

I initially felt sympathy for the Nu Society until I talked to their "Commander" and he basically crapped all over Sigma Nu and said he had no intention of disbanding and rushing Sigma Nu ever...

ouch.

A tricky question Kevin.

At some level, IHQs have to set a tone. Not only for legal reasons but because any person who associates with any organization in life must adhere to certain standards that preserve the integrity of that organization.

The question is, where do you draw the line?

Of course IHQ has to publish and adhere to the legal requirements for alcohol possession and consumption. That is a no-brainer.

But should there be dry houses? I don't think so. At some point in life, every man has to learn to make his own decisions and suffer the consequences if a bad decision has bad ramifications.

If an underage active member of a fraternity drinks in the house and assaults a female guest- he puts himself in the same position as anyone else who does the same in any setting. Whether he gets in trouble will depend on whether the incident is reported and pursued. At this point it becomes a matter for the legal system- and the fraternity chapter and IHQ would be wise to disassociate someone found guilty just as an on-campus dorm or employer would do in the same situation.

But when you get into the issue of having a dry house to prevent that kind of thing from happening, suddenly you are babysitting- and in the process you are telling every member that you do not trust them. And the more research I do, the more history shows that babysitting accomplishes little if anything.

People have to start growing up at some point. Ideally it should start well before college, but college is certainly no time to revert back to parenting.

The very real fact is that people under 21 drink. Period. And if society really wanted to end that- a way could be found. But we don't- we seek merely to curb it and at least promote a strong sense of discretion about it. Whatever individual people tell you, this is the collective message of society.

Hazing is no different in my view.

Some GLOs have attempted to eliminate it completely- and they are having about as much luck as the GLOs trying to go dry.

An IHQ must have and enforce a hazing policy that reflects the law- but to go further is just creating a nightmare for everyone.

I will not name names (it is not my GLO) but I am personally aware of (meaning I am reporting the facts) a situation where a very strong GLO at a major school was completely shut down because of a political conflict.

Simply put, the chapter did engage in some hazing activities which were not illegal in the state of Texas, but were in violation of IHQ policy. The chapter also had a very clean record- no deaths, injuries or reported incidents.

Two members had a bitter battle for presidency of the chapter that was about personal interests and the general direction of the chapter, and the loser was so upset that he turned his chapter in to IHQ for hazing.

None of the pledges were ever interviewed, and to my knowledge there were few- if any- actives who were in support of such a move.

IHQ came crashing in with a live-in advisor who turned the place upside down.

So, over a 4 week period almost the entire chapter quit. 80% of the guys just left- and they moved out of the house too leaving the alumni who bought it holding the bag for upkeep and property taxes.

So the alumni sold the house. And that chapter has NEVER recovered. They are still around- but they have never come close to what they had before.

And it is all because IHQ set up a mindset of control and fear- and then allowed one disgruntled person to make personal use of that to the ruination of the chapter and a financial disaster for alumni (and how smart is it to alienate a group of alumni who have the money and dedication to pay for a $1 million+ house?)

What a waste. What a complete waste.

But that is what happens when you get beyond your basic legal responsibilities to manage an organization to help young men mature.

What you create is a situation where the guys hide what they do- and then someday someone will come along who will reveal what is going on for personal reasons and then it all comes crashing down.

Advisors and IHQs don't have time to be there every second. Most violations come to light because they are reported- not because they are discovered. That is a key point since it speaks to impracticability of such an approach and also to the fact that enforcement will be reactive and cannot take into account the reasons for a chapter being turned in.

This does not create a better brotherhood. It instead creates mistrust and secretive behavior. My own GLO has a chapter with this very issue- and they are constantly being hammered even though they are about the most saintly and sin-free bunch of guys you can imagine.

JMHO.

I'm actually more familar with UVa and the break there had significant, maybe majority, alumni support. The situation is cloudier at Vandy, but the Nu is keeping a lot of alumni with them. AD had a similar thing happen when we had the coed split. We have some alumni who support both, and some who only support one or the other.