Observations

[Lone Dog]

All of these are interesting points, and the following remain self-evident:

1) Like Doggy said, MIP isn't going anywhere. It's here to stay. So let's remember how it got to this point (lest we forget, and repeat the same mistakes) and let's look at where we go from here to make our organizations stronger.

2) When it comes to the topic of pledging/hazing: notice how the only folks who really bicker about how folks are made is the younger generation. My dad crossed Que in 1975. I crossed in 2000. And I have met dozens of bruhs with more than two decades of service. We both KNEW that I didn't go through what they went through for the exact same letters and membership. But there's no riff, there's no competition to see who is "more Que." But when I run up on someone made in the late nineties, they always ask about my process and whether I pledged grad or undergrad and assign immediate stereotypes. That, along with my record of service, activity, and lifestyle, will tell you whether I'm YOUR brother, regardless of whether my journey across the sands was harder, easier, or just different.

3) The very folks who were catching hell in the 60's, 70's, and 80's are the folks in office who made the decisison, no matter how unpopular it was, to implement MIP. We should respect the elders of the organization and their decision. Remember, it was us, those of you who are financial and actively participate in voting, etc, that put these folks into office in the first place. These folks went through REAL pledging and hazing, but they knew that for the organization's survival, they had to change. If our organizations aren't dynamic and adaptable, they will surely die. This isn't to say that our core principles and idelas should be compromised, because they shouldn't. The beliefs should live on regardless of the environment in which they are to be fostered.

4) Some of the people who were hazed or pledged the most are now inactive. Some of the people who skated in are inactive. And you have people from both categories who are active. So the process of coming into the frat/sorority isn't the determining factor of your service in the org. So why the bickering? There should be much more of a discussion between those active and those not active within the organization. Folks, we ALL took an oath on our journey across those sands. Are you living your creed? Probably.

In my opinion, this is what it boils down to: we, as members, need to be a better judge of the character of the people we let into our organizations. The problems we have don't necessarily stem from prospectives, but from members. So if we train our folks to look for the right qualities as evidenced by the ACTIVITIES and LIFESTYLE of the prospectives, we fix alot of problems that occur internally by letting the wrong element in our organizations. Everybody isn't cut out for Que, Delta, SGRho, etc. We should seek members with a discerning spirit. That's what gives each of us our uniqueness, though our ultimate goals are quite similar. We should be the Talented Tenth that the Alpha WEB DuBois spoke of. I believe that was our orginal commission. And we should seek others who want to be in that sort of company. Undoubtedly, a few bad seeds may slip through the crack, but they SHOULD quickly find that they are the exception, and their ambiguous attitude should quickly be changed by the fraternal company they keep.

If we elect the proper people to membership, then the process becomes less of a factor. And it's because we have shown the light to those who truly seek it and have a burning desire to live it, and not to those who want Que because the ladies love us, we hop the best, or have a tendency to show quite a bit of enthusiasm.

ROOOO