kappa sigma at fgcu?

[Rambler1869]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

That's another issue that's irking me. All of the chapters are contradicting their respective I/HQs by voting against KS? Doesn't sound right.

I agree. And yet there is written documentation from them... (like I said, not 100% about in writing or not from Sigma Chi, but I know there is written support from each of the others). In fact, it was a letter sent from KA to the IFC president (a KA) that led to us having the meeting with the IFC, saying that KA does support Kappa Sigma and open expansion and in which the undergrad was told directly "it is time to right what been wronged."

All voted against, except 1. One did vote in favor (was secret ballot, so cant so who it was)

[LaneSig]

Originally Posted by Rambler1869

I think that one should be obvious by now... We do not feel the school's position is correct. Kappa Sigma absolutely does want to be part of the FGCU greek system; and it is having its place there; as requested by the students.

Kappa Sigma made a decision to support the students who wanted this fraternities presence at FGCU, despite the uphill battle they knew it would be.

In terms of the NIC; each of the members at FGCU have given their support nationally to Kappa Sigma; even knowing that Kappa Sigma is not a member of NIC. I believe it shows that giving this support to a non-member; is evident that open expansion is the wish of all nationals. I believe that almost all, if not all actually gave this support in writing. The only one I am not 100% sure if we have a written letter from is Sigma Chi - however I know that they at least did provide a verbal pledge of support for Kappa Sigma at FGCU.
So, no Kappa Sigma is not part of NIC; but every member still supports Kappa Sigma.

Rambler -

I understand the position that Kappa Sigma took. I really, truly do (despite your advisor calling me unAmerican and a person no one should be proud of).

The point I was trying to make in the post where I listed the choices is that even if you didn't agree with FGCU, Kappa Sigma still had choices. Can you see from an outsiders perspective that even if Choice #1 wasn't the Sunshine and Ponies choice, it would have gotten y'all where you wanted eventually. Even if the time frame wasn't clear. My point was, why was waiting such a bad choice? That's one of the questions I wanted answered.

Choice #2 is what many from an outside perspective are seeing. That you refused to wait (asked and denied in November, colonized in December) and in doing so, made it look you were not respectful to the Administration's wishes. I was trying to get your advisor to see how actions on your part might be looked at by the Administration and others.

The whole NIC thing. When advisor first came on, he blasted me and a couple of others with how we were not following NIC resolutions of open expansion. The point that I and Knight_Shadow have been trying to make to him is that it looks hyprocritical for a group that left the NIC to ask for NIC support and quote NIC resolutions, when you are not wanting to be in the NIC (not IFC).

No one here is against expansions or for colonies being treated unfairly. No one here is rooting for Kappa Sigma colony at FGCU to fail. But, your fellow KS brother is not winning your cause any fans.

[Rambler1869]

Originally Posted by LaneSig

The point I was trying to make in the post where I listed the choices is that even if you didn't agree with FGCU, Kappa Sigma still had choices. Can you see from an outsiders perspective that even if Choice #1 wasn't the Sunshine and Ponies choice, it would have gotten y'all where you wanted eventually. Even if the time frame wasn't clear. My point was, why was waiting such a bad choice? That's one of the questions I wanted answered.

Simply put; because Kappa Sigma was supporting the interest of the students who wanted to form as Kappa Sigma at FGCU.

Kappa Sigma didnt look at FGCU and wonder why there wasnt a chapter there; the students unhappy with the choices at FGCU contacted Kappa Sigma.

I dont think its an understatement to say that since college students are only students for a certain number of years; for Kappa Sigma to truly support these men, waiting an unknown amount of time was not the option they felt (and still feel) was best.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by Rambler1869

Simply put; because Kappa Sigma was supporting the interest of the students who wanted to form as Kappa Sigma at FGCU.

Kappa Sigma didnt look at FGCU and wonder why there wasnt a chapter there; the students unhappy with the choices at FGCU contacted Kappa Sigma.

I dont think its an understatement to say that since college students are only students for a certain number of years; for Kappa Sigma to truly support these men, waiting an unknown amount of time was not the option they felt (and still feel) was best.

I would hope that Kappa Sigma's expansion chair/committee looked at more than "OMG, this group of students that we don't know won't get the chance to be Greek!" when making the decision to expand to FGCU.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

Still curious as to why you would support universities being able to deny meeting rooms on campus? In essence, you support fraternities being kicked to the curb all over the U.S. With no recourse. And by "curb" I mean all a fraternity could do is meet outside on the patio, but could still "assemble" there.

And I'm curious why you think that just because I find your legal arguments unpersuasive, I support fraternities being kicked to the curb with no recourse. One position does not equal the other. And just because a policy is bad or stupid doesn't mean it's unconstitutional.

I'm also curious why you studiously avoid answering simple questions put to you over and over again.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

And I'm curious why you think that just because I find your legal arguments unpersuasive, I support fraternities being kicked to the curb with no recourse. One position does not equal the other. And just because a policy is bad or stupid doesn't mean it's unconstitutional.

I'm also curious why you studiously avoid answering simple questions put to you over and over again.

Oh, MysticCat - pick your favorite fallacy!

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

[Rambler1869]

MysticCat - did you see this part?

Originally Posted by Rambler1869

Put aside where they can or cannot be for meetings... what are your thoughts on equal access to even attempt to apply for any recognition (either by school or IFC)

I am curious your thoughts on this part

[33girl]

If I got it right, you did apply for recognition by the IFC and were denied, right? Since you all keep talking about a vote in which (allegedly) the chapter reps did not vote how they were told to by their national HQs, I'm guessing yes. So I don't understand where "equal access to even attempt to apply for recognition" is coming from. You already had that.

[Rambler1869]

Originally Posted by 33girl

If I got it right, you did apply for recognition by the IFC and were denied, right? Since you all keep talking about a vote in which (allegedly) the chapter reps did not vote how they were told to by their national HQs, I'm guessing yes. So I don't understand where "equal access to even attempt to apply for recognition" is coming from. You already had that.

Not exactly. The school claims that Kappa Sigma has not applied; which is why they are not being allowed to use school facilities. However, the truth of the matter is; until the news story aired, the school refused to provide the necessary form to even become an RSO.

Being a student organization, and being a part of IFC (another student organization) are seperate issues.

In fact, no application has been accepted from either the school or the IFC. The vote discussed, was a vote called by the members of Kappa Sigma during the IFC meeting. No actual written application has been granted (prior to the news story).

Post news story, there is a current debate regarding whether or not a fraternity can keep its single gender status. On the RSO form, there is a check box on the form for fraternities/sororities (with no further explaination about gender status - except an email from the Greek Life Coordinator stating they would have to surrender single-sex status). We believe being denied that status, is a violation of Title 9 protetction.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Oh, MysticCat - pick your favorite fallacy!

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

I'll take inductive fallacies for $500, Alex.

Originally Posted by Rambler1869

MysticCat - did you see this part?

I am curious your thoughts on this part

My thoughts are that I'm not sure how it matches up with the story as it's been told in this thread. And given what we've seen in this thread, I'd be curious to hear the school's version.

Beyond that, like I said, you can have your own lawyers (or law students maybe?) do research for you. I'm done.