Thread: Local-bashing
View Single Post
  #7  
Old 11-30-2003, 06:55 PM
PhiPsiRuss PhiPsiRuss is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Listening to a Mariachi band on the N train
Posts: 5,707
Send a message via ICQ to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via AIM to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via Yahoo to PhiPsiRuss
Quote:
Originally posted by decadence
I agree with the fact that stupidity can attempt to rear its ugly head in any organisation. I think an important point though, is that many see local orgs as less monitored than national ones?
A national org on a campus is monitored by its own e-board of course, by the university through advisors, local alumni, and (inter)nationals. If it 'acts up' then it can have its charter pulled. That is generally a fatal blow to the group. In non-locals there is always lot of emphasis on important issues such as hazing (which is not to say locals don't emphasis anti-hazing, just that is not a "given"). IHQ can pull their charter and continually stress the importance of risk management because they don't want tragedies to occur.

With a local, a governing body isn't in the picture in the same way. The onus is on the individual local org to act responsibly. Many of them do, but in some cases some do not. Effectively, people often view locals as somehow a greater risk as they (locals) are seen as monitoring themselves?
Are there any more ancient threads that you want to bump today?
Reply With Quote