Let me say a couple things - if any Brother got "bitchslapped" for posting his personal opinions on the listserve; either publicly or privately, then the brother doing the slapping needs to be confronted. I know I personally confronted some much older, much more tenured brothers during this discussion. BUT - some of the posters to this thread have indicated some pretty harsh intolerance for these brothers' mistakes. Did you contact them privately and explain your concerns? If you didn't, you're no better than they are. As we all know, email isn't exactly a good communication device for emotional content.
I respect your concerns about charter pulling. As an undergrad, my chapter had ours suspended for a year - and I will tell you we deserved it. The Tau thing is NOT about 2 or 3 guys - the whole "spin" from some is that the "reindeer liberation" was the cause. Just not true. I have been in ALOT of show cause hearings with numerous SEC's and ONE THING HAS BEEN VERY CONSISTENT - if a chapter walks in, under KAPPA SIGMA's due process rules (sorry, legal proceeding it is not), I have rarely seen a chapter that represented itself as accepting responsibility, apologetic and sincere have their charter pulled. I have seen only a few show up combatant, denying doing anything wrong, and just damn arrogant - they go home without charters. In this case, after having already threatened lawsuits, the chapter GM shows up with 3 attorneys. Again, there is nothing in the CBR that provides that right or privilige. If you want that right/privilige - then put together a CBR ammendment. The bottom line, when your caught red handed (and trust me, there is LOTS of concrete evidence on Tau, incuding personal testimony of pledges, web site pictures, etc) take the damn heat! Be a man and accept responsibility. I can assure you, charters have been pulled throughout our history. Gamma? Come on, the Banyard Party was a disgrace. Beta? How about beating up a guy in your backyard (a house that slept 100+ with an 8 man chapter, GPA well below 2.0) and then stealing his credit card and using it!
My first week as a ADGM years ago, we had a charter pulled at Theta-Omega - I was very dissapointed because I thought I could make a difference. I protested, and got shot down. I personally went to the chapter and informed the brothers whom I had met just the week prior. I truly believed it was an opportunity missed. Well, guess what - the next night, the chapter house was completely vandalized by the membership. TRASHED! Two weeks later it was torched by an arsonist. In hindsight, I think the decision may have been best - 3 other major chapters have since been removed form the campus.
I trust that Mu-Psi won't face such issues because of the brothers I've met from that chapter. They are indeed outstanding, but like me, probably not without flaw. I can assure you, that this year, there are not "pansy chapters" that don't lead their campus with the rushees - winning face awards. That may very well have happened in the past, but I personally held the committee accountable for ensuring that we've got healthy, size competitive or dominant chapters being awarded with the highest awards. Look at the top 5 from last year - Xi, Nu-Omicron, Lambda-Tau, Theta-Zeta - these chapters are top 2 in pledge classes every year. You will find the same to be true this year when the awards are given.
Finally - I understand frustrations of undergrads with alumni leadership. Please, discuss it here, come up with solutions and then act on those solutions. Hold us alumni accountable too - but PLEASE have the facts first. We indeed are a social organization, but we also are made up of Brothers who share an oath and friendships that require SO much more than that. So when things get tough, and look bad - don't bail, jump in with both feet as I know you do in your own chapters! I for one will support your right to your voice WITHOUT YOUR being lashed out at. Your ideas will need to stand up to scrutiny, but you should not be bombed for sharing them! Call me on, it. I am,
Semper,
Brad Bracken
Quote:
Originally posted by KSig RC:
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
|