Which is why I didn't post a link to the article when I found it three weeks ago. That, and Kevin's "where's your proof?" policy. :) The article confirmed that at least a few of the pictures were a few years old and that "accusations of fraternity hazing have not been presented to the Interfraternity Council". Sounds like SN HQ is acting accordingly by investigating the allegations but it seems like the school isn't doing much. To me, it seems like there's a whole lot of not much.:rolleyes:

Let's hope.

Statute of Limitations?
 

Maybe there is a statute of limitations I don't know about, but how is the fact that some of the pictures are a few years old used to effectively discredit the investigation? I mean I understand that if the pics are really old many of the brothers in those pics may be graduated, but if the pictures clearly depict sigma nu hazing (under the assumption that is the case, tho I have no idea what the pictures show) even if they are a little dated, wouldn't that at the least warrant an investigation to see if these events are still going on? Basically, what I'm saying is that old pictures of hazing are still pictures of hazing.

And how is the fact that IFC didn't hear of the allegations proof of anything? Whenever a chapter has internal issues they do everything in their power to make sure IFC knows nothing about it. Furthermore, when this guy reported the hazing to SN HQ I doubt his first instinct was 'ok, now time to contact the IFC board', which I'm pretty sure probably has at least a few sigma nu's on it, mathematically.

Who knows? It's all 100% speculation.

In reading the posters link, it sounds like alligations from a fbook that were outdated and only that.

The IFC stated no awareness of the situation. So, where is this and where did it end up?

Sounds like a witch hunt from a very unhappy person.

Editorial
 

This editorial on the sigma nu UCSD case and the facebook implications came out today. Check it out:

http://ucsdguardian.org/index.php?op...=9345&Itemid=3

Interesting article.

Unfortunately, the author forgets that as fraternities, we are businesses first.

Our chief concern, when it comes to hazing, is of course the safety and dignity of our own members. Not far behind that, however, is the cost of insurance which inches up every year, seemingly regardless of what we do.

While it is unlikely that a single incident of hazing is a threat to our organizations as a whole, the lack of available or affordable insurance most certainly is.

What the author does not understand is that pictures such as these, if not addressed by a headquarters could possibly give an insurance company pretty solid ground to deny coverage -- something which could be disastrous.

It's not a "PC" culture which has led most organizations to take such a seemingly absurd stance on hazing, it's just business.

I think the question is though...where does it end?

I have a pic in my scrapbook of a sister dying her hair (while the dye was taking). If you didn't know the context of it...it kind of looks like she has blood on her head. Someone who wanted to get my sorority in trouble could forward it to the school or nationals and say that's what's happening.

To lose insurance or a charter based on pictures ALONE (especially in this day of photoshop) is ridiculous.

That there's an investigation underway, at least, to me, indicates that no one is going to lose their charter or insurance based upon pictures alone.

I'm all of our governing councils have some sort of policy when it comes to making these sorts of determinations.

Remember -- insurance companies are not in the business of paying money out. If they think that they can deny coverage based on anything, they almost certainly will.

No new news but I found a UCSD SN serenade video on youtube! :) Makes me wish I was still in my early 20s and in school. ;) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyhrHnZciB4

Perhaps you can confirm whether part of their 'hazing' is to make them do those serenades drunk? I mean they are clearly intoxicated... tho you would know better than I would, that's for sure.

I watched some of the video. I don't think they were drunk at all. If you have no basis for accusing an organization of violating RM policies, please don't accuse them at all.

I mean the board forbids 'hearsay' evidence, but I've heard from some greek friends that <edited to clarify hearsay policy> Didn't mean to single out SN, I just thought it was a 'UCSD Greek tradition'. Hence why I asked SoCal for clarification...

I don't think drinking before serenades is exclusive to UCSD. Also, though not uncommon, I've never heard of it being forced on anyone. Guy or girl.

Two new articles came out today, one about the investigation, and the other an angry editorial blaming the greek adviser for conducting a poor investigation.

http://ucsdguardian.org/index.php?op...=9417&Itemid=2

http://ucsdguardian.org/index.php?op...=9410&Itemid=2