Sigma Pi kicked off campus at Lynchburg College

Xylochick216 · #1 03-04-2006, 03:42 PM

I just saw this on the news. These guys were given quite a few chances. Too bad they screwed it up.

Lynchburg, VA - There's a new vacancy on Fraternity Row at Lynchburg College. The school will no longer recognize the Sigma Pi fraternity. The Sig-Pis admit they broke the rules. And now they have until the end of the semester to get out.

It happened while the 16 members were under suspension last year. The fraternity was not supposed to have any parties. But a Greek advisor found pictures of the students drinking on Facebook.com, and then he reported it. As a result, their national headquarters pulled the fraternity charter.

Rest of the story here

alum · #2 03-04-2006, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Xylochick216
I just saw this on the news. These guys were given quite a few chances. Too bad they screwed it up.

Lynchburg, VA - There's a new vacancy on Fraternity Row at Lynchburg College. The school will no longer recognize the Sigma Pi fraternity. The Sig-Pis admit they broke the rules. And now they have until the end of the semester to get out.

It happened while the 16 members were under suspension last year. The fraternity was not supposed to have any parties. But a Greek advisor found pictures of the students drinking on Facebook.com, and then he reported it. As a result, their national headquarters pulled the fraternity charter.

Rest of the story here

Aren't a lot of college admins. looking at Facebook and MySpace for miscreants? To me it just seems so stupid to post illegal activities for the whole world to see.

Tom Earp · #3 03-04-2006, 06:22 PM

Upon reading the article, My conclusion is,

"They Just Dont Get It Do They?

Wow, a whole 250 Alums. I dont think the College is going to be to worried about that as opposed to the damage that they did to themselves.

VandalSquirrel · #4 03-04-2006, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by alum
Aren't a lot of college admins. looking at Facebook and MySpace for miscreants? To me it just seems so stupid to post illegal activities for the whole world to see.

It isn't always administrators and advisors looking at Facebook or MySpace pictures. If one puts the pictures out there, anyone who doesn't like you can easily turn you in as well. I think it is an extremely poor choice in judgment to post pictures that can make your life very difficult. Why give people ammunition in the first place? Even if the picture can be explained away, the hassle could have been avoided.

alum · #5 03-04-2006, 07:54 PM

Aren't a lot of GLOs looking at these sites as well to ensure the PNMs haven't done anything publically embarrassing (let alone illegal)? Don't air your dirty laundry.

Tom Earp · #6 03-04-2006, 09:52 PM

Da, so right.

I know of at least 4 National Officers of different GLOs who check GC and some even post on here, The Friendly Greek Web Site.

It is also not the New Associate Members, but The Actives who do this and cant figure out why they were dug out!

If it is against The National Rules then if and When and they will get caught are so astounded.

I was once accused on GC about bad mouthing other GLOs and not My own about RM items.

Someone did not read My post. I do not like any GLO that gets kicked off of a Campus or their Charter taken and hate it even more when it is mine.

But, if it is true, then there has to be action taken and the sooner the better. It makes Us all look bad.

Kevin · #7 03-05-2006, 02:23 PM

Not sure how I feel about this one.. To tell a bunch of college kids that they can't get together and have a few beers, then to act surprised when they do is stupidity. My guess is that these kids' understanding of a party was different than that of the administration. It's too bad that the Sigma Pi HQ wasn't willing to call BS on this administration.

alum · #8 03-05-2006, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ktsnake
Not sure how I feel about this one.. To tell a bunch of college kids that they can't get together and have a few beers, then to act surprised when they do is stupidity. My guess is that these kids' understanding of a party was different than that of the administration. It's too bad that the Sigma Pi HQ wasn't willing to call BS on this administration.

The problem is when it is posted online for everyone w/ interne access (including admins.) to see. It's just too "inyourface" for the college to ignore.

Kevin · #9 03-05-2006, 03:45 PM

I understand alum, but that does not change what it is. That a few friends get together and have some beers is no cause for severe consequences though regardless of whether there are pictures.

Of course, I haven't seen the pictures, so it could be worse than it sounds. I'm picturing a few kids getting together for a game of beer pong.

alum · #10 03-05-2006, 03:56 PM

Whether we agree or not that it is "harmless" (and I am inclined to agree that it is) a chapter that is on probationary status should NOT be posting pictures of misdoings on the web. Then it becomes public domain instead of hearsay, giving more ammunition, if you will, to both the college admin and the national HQ of the GLO.

Kevin · #11 03-05-2006, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by alum
Whether we agree or not that it is "harmless" (and I am inclined to agree that it is) a chapter that is on probationary status should NOT be posting pictures of misdoings on the web. Then it becomes public domain instead of hearsay.

Hearsay is something we talk about in the introduction of testimony in a court of law. This is not a court case and won't be. Sure they were potentially doing something illegal, and could face prosecution (fines from the city) for what they potentially did if anyone was underage.

I think that right now facebook, myspace, etc. are new phenomena and society has had a predictable, but in many cases an unjustifiable response. In the past, we knew that they'd be doing these things, we knew as much with nearly absolute certainty, yet we did nothing. Now, when confronted with pictures which do no more than confirm something that we were certain about, we must act? I find the reasoning there to be questionable.

I suppose the question as to when we would ever act if it is suggested that we do not act without proof of certain events. I would suggest that we don't make stupid and arbitrary rules to begin with -- especially if we make them with the full expectation that no one will comply with them.

Tom Earp · #12 03-05-2006, 04:32 PM

While that may be true, but to flaunt it, is shear Stupidity.

Whether it was The Chapter or a few still reflects on the total entitity such as The Chapter.

I do not agree if a few did it then teh Total get punished but that is the way it is. Via Association isnt it?

They Were and They Did, So all must have done it?

alum · #13 03-05-2006, 04:36 PM

We ourselves in GC have recommended to rushees (girls especially) to delete any controversial stuff on their myspace and facebook sites especially if they are in spring (deferred recruitment). If you don't think the chapters are examining these pages , you are kidding yourself. This extends for grad school and undergrad applications as well.

Kevin · #14 03-05-2006, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tom Earp
While that may be true, but to flaunt it, is shear Stupidity.

Whether it was The Chapter or a few still reflects on the total entitity such as The Chapter.

I do not agree if a few did it then teh Total get punished but that is the way it is. Via Association isnt it?

They Were and They Did, So all must have done it?

Tom, my point is not that they weren't stupid for doing it, or shouldn't have expected what happened. My objective here is to highlight the denial of reality which has in the past surrounded dealings between administrations and chapters.

A suspension with a provision that the chapter shall have no alcohol related activities in the past was an agreement that occured almost automatically and without thought. In the past, it was rare that even a report of a supposed party to the administration would ever see any follow-up punishment. These types of agreements are typically little more than symbollic as both parties know that the chapter members (college kids) are going to drink anyhow.

So now that we have confirmation that these kids are breaking the rules of an agreement that should have never been proposed in the first place, why are we having different consequences? I figure that denial is a premise that is part of the agreement. The very idea that a bunch of college kids would agree to not drink -- and then follow through is ludicrous to me and anyone who has ever been there.

How many of us came from dry campuses? Those of us that did -- did you and three of your buddies from your chapter ever get together for a beer? I don't see why proof (a facebook posting) is so important here -- it's something that everyone generally accepts happens anyway, what does proof of this thing occuring change?

The results here seem to highlight to me that Greek Life advisors, administrators, and headquarters in general need to stop making agreements where denial of reality is an accepted premise. I'd be far more comfortable with rules such as not having police incidents, reports of hazing or alcohol related injuries being reported, etc. as part of these types of suspensions. For the suspension terms to have centered around an entire chapter not drinking alcohol for a specified period of time is just for the lack of a better word, idiotic.