I agree w/ you Dan, good discussion.
Definitely I agree with some of the principles you express, especially with regards to leadership and chapter business. However, I agree with them in the vein of James's model of leadership. He posted a leadership model in one of the forums a while back, it is a great model for chapter programming, one that hopefully my chapter will implement soon.
With regard to Tau - I can't speculate on whether things would have turned out differently had the process been altered, no one can, but I can say that I feel a deep sense of disappointment and disillusionment with how some of our brothers were treated, and that would not be there had process been upheld. I really cringe to think that my chapter might some day be in a similar situation, because any inconsistencies in SEC policy and action are frightening to me.
I'll agree that the chapter and especially the EC should be (cliche
their brothers' keepers, but should the SEC then be (theoretically) an institute of punishment? Do you think that the majority of actives view the SEC as more of: a.) a regulatory, policing force b.) an institution that reminds you when you're doing badly and helps out out, and commends you when doing well c.) a benign element in day-to-day fraternal life . . . etc. The viewpoints can vary, of course, but I'd guess from my interactions that most view 'national' as a policing element, and this is not without justification on a certain level, while I'd be more in favor of a 'b.)'-type leadership (of course, it is oversimplified in one line . . .). I disagree with the very premise of this sort of 'only serves to punish' SEC, and again I am disappointed that the SEC seems to foster this view.
I can't compare this SEC to any other, as I have only been active during this one, but I don't know that the 'getting stronger' bit is implicitly positive. Kevin Kaplan (one of your chapter's alumni, if I'm not mistaken, Dan?) hung out at our chapter for a weekend, and he's genuinely a good guy - very stand-up individual, has some good ideas, charismatic man, seems like a very good brother. I can imagine the rest of the SEC brothers to be the same, although I have not met them. However, this doesn't assure that I have the same views on what the fraternity is or where it should go, etc, and doesn't mean that they will serve me best. Personally, much like governmental policy, I'd like to see the SEC remain strong in terms of the brothers comprising it, but I take a more Republican view (if you will), thinking that perhaps more "control" (or oversight more likely) should be delegated to the chapters or districts. I am roundly opposed to an SEC that is "Strong" in terms of pulling charters, chartering new "pansy" chapters designed to win awards and churn out brothers with no real basis in the actual fraternity in general (this is probably very unclear; I can email a more detailed explaination if necessary. I'm only referring to the fact that there are chapters that are the least popular among rushees and the rest of the campus but win awards, and appear to have that as the only basis of their brotherhood; sometimes, it seems like some of our new charters come complete with an oversight panel attempting to guarantee this. I'd also like to have James's view on this, but I'll email you sometime about it), and contributing to a sort of 'police-state' (extreme term, but the only way i could think of it - i've been working w/ phenol all day, you'll have to excuse me) national rather than an organization set up for and by the brothers to help one another and further the order for all. That kind of strength is overrated, and will eventually lead to severe declination of the order overall. If the governing body is unresponsive to the needs of those governed, deterioration will ensue; I'm afraid that this may possibly be the next stage if the trend continues. Already, I feel uncomfortable in some ways about how the national organization works; hopefully, this can be righted with the new elections. Now, the "grandfathering" of positions in the SEC may contribute negatively to this, but that's another rant . . . semper, take care guys -
Rob
A~B