I've tried to e-mail KappaKittyCat through her profile, but apparently she's not set up to be e-mailed through GC. If anyone has her e-mail address, please be kind enough to PM it to me.

Thanks!
Christin

I don't think that it's flames or imposters they're as concerned about. There seem to be two main points to Kappa's argument. Here's the first one:
Ladies and Gentlemen, the only way we are going to stamp out hazing is for everyone, and I mean everyone, to stand firmly in line with his or her organizations policies and procedures against it. It doesn't help to have anybody swapping ideas "on the side" if those ideas are not in keeping with the values and mission of that organization. I can just see a HQ's response to a chapter hazing stunt that got out of hand: "What on earth made you think that this was a good, appropriate thing to do that would be in keeping with XYZ values?" The response: "Oh, I learned about it from a Q Chapter XYZ on GreekChat." Come to find out that Q Chapter is on probation for hazing issues of its own, or something like that. KKC said that Kappa is big on risk management. What we need to show them in order to be productive is that there is a way to manage the risk without preventing the wholesome exchange of ideas that can and does occur most of the time on GreekChat.

And here's the second one:
So no, Wptw, it seems that Kappas are not allowed to contribute regularly to any media without permission. This includes being interviewed about a philanthropy project or writing a letter to the editor. Example (from a Kappa):
Wptw, nobody is asking you to dash off to Columbus and sing Kumbaya with Kappa's Fraternity Council and HQ staff. What are we asking you to do? Here:
Let me return to my previous example of one of my favourite Alpha Chis, Dr. Condoleezza Rice. Most likely, Dr. Rice does not always agree 100% with the actions taken or statements made by her fellow White House types. But she does not go on CNN and say, "The President wants to bomb Afghanistan. We're going to do it, but I think it's a terrible idea." That would be preposterous (and probably the end of her career). Instead, she presents a united front to the outside world while working tirelessly behind the scenes to fix whatever needs fixing.

That, in essence, is what we as Greeks need to do. GLOs are the White House under fire for some bad decisions. In public we need to stand together. In private is where the changes can and must be made. We all need to remain positive here. There's such a thing as constructive criticism, and some of the criticism I've seen on this board since I went to bed last night has been anything but constructive.

And, as Honeychile said, please use spell check. Certainly all Greeks should know how to spell "sorority." We've had college educations. Let's show it.

Thanks,
Hermione

The community of GLO's and the White House are two COMPLETELY different things. We as individuals do represent our houses but I think for the purposes of this discussion and most others that we do not represent an official position taken by our respective organizations.

How specifically do we differ from your analogy of the White House?

Well one is a centralized command structure. It has a head and if all the parts don't work together it will be replaced. While you could make an argument for us being replaced if we don't work together I'd have to say that would have to entail a pretty extreme situation and CERTAINLY not one that arises on an internet based message board:D

The Greek Life Community on the other hand is composed of many heads. Since we are a community and the actions of one group will ultimately effect the other groups I think it is important that groups openly criticize the actions of others when we see something that disturbs us. They may or may not choose to act on it -- that's their perogative. At the end of the day KKG still has my respect regardless of their final decision in this matter.

Now, that being said I'm going to have to agree with Tom here. If KKG thinks its ladies are worthy of wearing their letters and knowing their ritual, etc... they should trust them to represent their organization appropriately on these or ANY message boards.

So let me get this straight, becuase the Kappas could be reading all of the hazing articles posted on GC, and could possibly getting ideas from these articles - and not the REAL message which is hazing is wrong and if you do it you will get in trouble - the HQ decided to stop them from posting. They can still read the articles or anything else on GC. Whats the point?

Constructive criticism gets people thinking, provides imput, and helps cause positive change I don't see how prohibiting your members from being involved in that echange of ideas would help...

and for me, if I could only post "positive messages that are reflective of my international organization's policies-- regardless of whether I agree with them" i wouldn't post at all. I don't agree with everything HQ does, and I'm positive no one does. Why would I post a message I don't agree with? Thats hypocritical.

I am ROFLMAO at this -- that is too funny! And I thought I was the only one with a Master's degree in Sarcasm :D


{quote from Lifesaver} To add to the above point I think that GLO's need to TRUST their members to represent their organizations on the internet as well as out in the world respectfully and responsibly.

As usual, agreed Lifesaver!!

I don't remember checking the box on my membership form that read "My checking this box means that I clearly understand I am trading my rights as an American citizen for the letters of Alpha Chi Omega"

Sometimes people disagree with me (occassionally it happens :)) and I disagree with some people -- if that gives them the belief that I represent all of AXO, then sorry for them. The same that I don't hold an organization responsible for people who continually post idiotic messages.....oops, that sarcasm just pops up on me without warning :)

Anyway -- I agree with you wptw in that I keep waiting to hear "November Fools" or something!!

Take care y'all......oops I used Southernese -- hope y'all don't take that to mean that all Alpha Chi's are Southern Belles -- because that is an honor and not a privilege :D

Hermione,

Criticism can be painful and still be characterized as constructive. If my comments are intended to ultimately help what I consider a fine organization, then harsh or not, they’re still constructive.

No need to educate me on how to represent the best interests of my GLO and the greek community. I’ve been doing it for a long time. Remember too that we’re supposed to be living these ideals all the time, not just when others are watching.

Your scenario involving sharing of hazing info on Greekchat misses the mark. You solve big systematic problems like hazing by talking MORE about it, not by stifling the debate. GLOs have had policies upon policies for years – hazing, alcohol abuse, risk management, badge disposition and so on. These policies existed in a vacuum for years and didn’t make the tiniest dent in the problems. We only start to see progress on these issues when the active members of the community gather for open debate. And like it or not, open debate sometimes means airing dirty laundry.

It’s easy to stifle debate and disagreement by urging a community to present a “united front”. That’s a trap. A community can disagree on methodology and policy, and still be united in purpose. Your comparison to the US government actually disproves your point. If ever there was a perfect example of a large community united in purpose but locked in fierce debate over methodology and policy, it is the United States post-9/11. At the other end of the spectrum, I point to the Iraqi voters and parliament who have recently shown us another kind of “united front”. 100% support of the current regime! A united front is not a good thing when unity is mandated.

wptw

Ok, ok, so we're not the White House. Sometimes I take my metaphor a little far. It all makes sense in my head!

I'm not saying that I don't agree with Tom in principle. If my org gives me letters, shares ritual, and calls me "Sister," then it'd damn well better trust me to behave myself.

My point is that sending KKG HQ an email that looks as if it were typed by a fourth grader is not going to make them think any differently of the internet community. It's not fun or easy to read, and it's not going to get any point across. They're an organization made up of educated women, and they should be treated as such.

Furthermore, if they look at this thread, they'll see lots of criticism that is in no way constructive. Certainly that's not going to improve their opinions of us either.

I don't think this frenzy is because Kappas could be reading hazing articles that say "hazing is bad" and somehow think, "Oh, this hazing stunt is a good idea!" It seems like their HQ just want to monitor the exchange of ideas between Kappa chapters.

Look, people, I'm not saying that Kappa's right in doing this. I think they're overreacting and they could instead take a lead from other orgs, like KD, that have effective internet policies.

That's why I'm hoping that this moratorium is only a temporary measure, in place while Kappa pauses to recover from the severe blow to the head it's been dealt by the harsh frying pan of reality.

So in the meantime, children, let's keep our criticism constructive and check our spelling and grammar before turning in our papers.

The reason I am involved with my organization as an alumna is to positively affect change from the inside. If I do not agree with something my International organization does, I don't think this is the place to air that laundry-- and I think most people who want to protect the image and integrity of their letters would agree with that.

KKG is protecting their trademark, their brand-- and its not that they don't trust their members. They aren't banning anything yet-- its a moratorium. As with all things 'new', it takes time to figure out the impact. Sometimes organizations make policies and until they live with them for a while, aren't sure what the impact will be. I think this is the case here-- and am confident that a resolution that allows their members to post on GC will be found.

Thanks
 

Thanks for everyone's support. Tom, thank you for the letter. I think if more positive letters (with proper spell check, etc.. hehe) get sent to Kappa, that maybe they'll realize how we've only done positive things for our chapter on GC.

I don't see how out of all the GLOs out there... we're being pulled aside for whatever reason. I've never written anything about ritual, or the sort.

I came across GC when I was going through recruitment. The advice and support that I received from the GC members is one of the reasons why I decided to continue through the recruitment process when I was having doubts about the whole Greek system.

After accepting the bid from Kappa, I have had nothing but positive experiences, and wonderful PMs from Kappas everywhere who are wishing me the best. If I ever have a question that someone in my chapter doesn't have the answer to, I know that I can ask someone on GC. Also, I've learned so much about other GLO's through this forum...something that I wouldn't have been able to do if I didn't participate in GC.

It's a shame that this is happening.... and I want to thank all of your for supporting the GC Kappas! Let's all stay positive and write positive (not negative!!) letters about their decision!

Thanks again :D

And as long as we're being "constructive" could we not call people 4th graders and not call them children?

As a university Greek Advisor, I think this is a poorly thought out action by the KKG governing board. The fact that so many university and alum advisors post on GC should show the educational value this site has. Of course though, my experience has shown that our insight is often not valued by the hierarchy of the NPC. Kappa Kappa Gamma has obviously failed to take into consideration the impact this could have for some chapters that are located on more "Liberal" campuses. I could honestly see some campuses withdrawing recognition because the organization does not allow free speech. Especially on campuses where student government controls the recognition process. I seriously question whether the KKG governing board sought legal counsel before issuing this blanket moratorium:(

I'm really worried about the first point you mentioned. The tendency at my alma mater, a small midwestern lib-arts college, is not so much hard-left as it is individualist, though on the whole I'd guess the campus leans left. The general attitude on campus tends strongly toward individualism. This policy has the potential to be very bad public relations for Kappa on that campus. That's not what Kappa needs on a campus where it has rather few members. That chapter, by the way, is KappaKittyCat's.

My college has deferred recruitment in January, so formal recruitment there has not yet begun. PNMs there who hear about this policy are likely to be dissuaded from exploring Kappa (and potentially the other two sororities there as well), because they are already protective of their individual liberties, and because they are wary of organizations that impose blanket restrictions on members. They are especially wary with respect to activities that encompass those sensitive liberties. Since they are already skeptical of Greek life, this will for some people be the event that makes their decision for them.

This is just another of the reasons I hope Kappa reverses this policy (which hasn't even been officially announced yet), and quickly.

If Kappa's decisionmakers sought legal counsel on this matter, their counsel probably told them that what they're doing is legal, because it is. It's still a bad idea. There are countless entirely legal bad ideas out there. This is one of them.

The policy off of which this is built (only certain officers may speak publicly on fraternity matters) was probably developed with legal counsel and is in some circumstances a legally desirable policy because it can help chapters avoid accidental legal liability. That is something that Kappa may have to consider as it tries to figure out how to develop a sane policy toward Internet communication.

My experience has often been that these policies are often created initially without the advice of legal counsel. Initiating such a policy as this could bring a potential lawsuit on non-Constitutional issues such as non-disclosure, breech of contract, etc. The real issue question? Is someone willing to challenge it. While constitutional issues may be moot to a private organization, do they really want to bear the expense of potential lawsuits (even just legal fees) for some other legal grievance? If you doubt this, look at the Boy Scouts. The courts have upheld their right to discriminate in membership, but it has cost them millions in legal fees and good will. (I know, I used to work for the Boy Scouts of America) The Boy Scouts are a much larger, much better funded organization, and it has had a significant impact on them.

PLEASE READ
 

Please view the thread I have pinned to the top of the KKG forum regarding this issue of KKG and Greek Chat.

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...threadid=26278

imsohappythatiama, Moderator of KKG Forum

Someone should tell KappaKittyCat that...

Seems as though she may have made herself unavailable.