Uh Oh

[PiLambda1]

Originally Posted by GammaZeta

A back story from 1984???

Seriously, if every chapter was held responsibile for what happened 20 years ago, every chapter would be on probation or disbanded.

What happened 20 years ago is irrelevant.

Let the chapter be responsible for their actions. If someone from outside acts up, let the chapter suffer the consequences. These aren't little babies.

CALM DOWN! Is your familial little Brother in that Zeta? You are
really putting up a fight for them.

If John says there's a back story that's not being written about,
there is one. Me saying it's from 1984 is a silly assumption and likely
irrelevant. Point blank: there's a story there because John doesn't
lie, and he wouldn't make a vague post like that unless there really was
more to the story.

Of course I don't expect them to pay for things done 20 years ago.
What I do expect of them is to be aware of what happened 20 years
ago. I expect them to realize what they got away with 20 years ago
might land their asses in prison today. It might cost them more than
their "Active" Status. People don't just go after the chapter anymore
when something goes awry, they go after you, your parents, and
anything else you have....

I'm not trying to be my Brother's keeper here. I'm trying to be my
Brother's Brother and call them out when I think a bad decision was
made.

[GammaZeta]

I don't think it was a bad decision. It's clearly not against Fraternity policy, unless I'm mistaken.

It's their chapter, who are you or any of us to criticize their decision making? They're grown men. Unless those specific men were involved in an "incident", then I don't really care what the background or story is. It simply doesn't matter.

I really don't like the fact that a current chapter and brotherhood is limited in any capacity because of something some brothers did in the past. So the chapter had an incident 10 or 20 years ago. Tell me exactly how that should effect the brothers of present?

I'm a very outspoken member, but I would never come on here and criticize another chapter for making a legal decision within the boundaries of our international fraternity law. It's called autonomy.

[HONKY660]

The chapter doesn't even have a chapter house. The story says they have a lodge in a hall, and alcohol is still not allowed there. So whats the big deal if they aren't dry anymore? I bet they changed from being dry because it was affecting their rush, I remember meeting some of their guys at GA and they had a small chapter of about 25 guys on a campus that had anverage size of 60. Just my thought.

[Tom Earp]

While it might be ideal if ALL Fraternities were dry, they are not.

Also while LXA would like to be dry housed for R M situations, it is still not against Our National rules/regulations.

It is a fine line about what to do in a case to case situation. It would be a moot point if the Zeta was not there. Again, while what happened at a Zeta before has now dwelling or point in a re-colonization. It is a fine line such as when in Rome, do as the Romans do. Competing is part of the level playing field.

Now, it is how the Zeta uses the rules or non rules. It is unbeleiveable how people at the age of 16-18 are considered adults, when they are restricted by the same laws and are not of age to consume alcohol.

Ideal situations never exist do they?

[john1082]

First, I visited Wake Forest a couple of weeks ago. I was in the Greensboro area and paid brief social calls on NC A&T, Wake Forest, and Elon. Great guys all, folks that I am quite proud to call my Brothers . . .

Wake Forest occupies a university owned building as do several of the other fraternities. Our Brothers DO live upstairs, it just isn't our 'house' but effectively it is.

In the mid-ninties LXA had a push to require ALL chapters chartered or rechartered to be dry. That lasted about 18 months or so. LXA was offering money to chapters to 'take the pledge'. Apparently the Wake Forest recharter came along at that time. Their charter suspension in the eighties apparently involved alcohol . . .

As a condition of their re-chartering a deal seems to have been cut with the University to stay totally dry for five years after getting their charter - or at least that is my understanding of the deal. What that means is no alcohol in the lodge, no alcohol at a formal, no alcohol on the ski trip, no beer with the pizza downtown after the chapter meeting, no Nyquil, NADA! As a practical matter think about the financial impact on a formal: Add $500 for the bar minimum because you don't have a bar.

We are the only only house on campus with this deal. It has become increasingly onerous and recruitment has taken a major hit. Four of us sat in the living room and did the stubby pencil work and determined that the available pool of potential rushees interested in a dry house at Wake Forest hovered at around 100 men, give or take. Heavy on the take side. That's it!

I did not instigate this, this change was in the works for some time. There are some other dynamics involved but I think you can draw the picture now.

[john1082]

Originally Posted by PiLambda1

If John says there's a back story that's not being written about,
there is one. Me saying it's from 1984 is a silly assumption and likely
irrelevant. Point blank: there's a story there because John doesn't
lie, and he wouldn't make a vague post like that unless there really was
more to the story.

Thanks for the kind words

[PiLambda1]

So, in essence this is a push to recruit with alcohol?

Bah, regardless, I'm not going to argue about it anymore. As was said
ear;ier, if a 21-year old Brother wants a beer fine...If we are changing
the rules to look cool to the 18 year old Freshman, that's not really
fine in my book. He's not legal to drink anyway.

[john1082]

BTW, that number of 100 was basically everyone, from all classes, living in the substance free dorm!

[GammaZeta]

PiLambda, they aren't changing any fraternity rules except their own chapters. They are not violating any of HQ's rules.

Is your chapter completely dry and what is the policy of other fraternities on your campus?

[Tom Earp]

John G, thanks for the local information. I find it interesting to say the Least.

Brandon, it should come by a Chapter by Chapter decission only. While it may work for yours, it may not work for others. Correct?

I know while my Chapter is not totaly dry, there are strict rules set in place and if they are violated, it will be come fully dry.

But as I said in comparing in sports jargon, if a team is much bigger than yours what do you do? You have to compete or have no team at all. I am sure IHQ is well aware of this as they too are Brothers and have gone through everything that each of us have in our College days. They are not stupid or foolish but have to do a balancing act. They try to impart this to all Chapters through our ELCs. Remember also, these things have been voted on by Members of each Chapter at G A's.

[john1082]

Having been a High Pi a couple of times may I add that I would much rather have activity going on in the open where it can be managed than going on in secret where standards and rules cannot be enforced. Alcohol is far easier to control when leadership knows what is going on, and when and where rather than in secret, hidden places.

I suspect that at Wake Forest alcohol use was forced far underground and kept hidden. Why play that game?

And the rules at Wake Forest took on the appearance of a game. If the four of us had decided to go out and get a pizza, all of us over 21, I could have a beer and they could not. We are all members of Lambda Chi Alpha but their Zeta has the no alcohol policy.

If one of them was flying home to mom for Christmas, he could have a beer on the flight home to Austin. If he were flying off to the Council of Presidents meeting in Austin the next month, he couldn't.

A single guy living in his own apartment could probably have alcohol in his apartment under the rules. Two guys sharing could not.

I'm standing in line at the airport and see a kid with letters. I speak to the agent and cash in some miles, and the kid gets an upgrade to first (I'm fly alot!). He sits down and orders a drink. Flight attendant brings it. I walk back and introduce myself. He sees the polo shirt that I'm wearing from the '05 Leadership Seminar. Two Lambda Chis. He has a drink. BUSTED.

See how silly this could become?

Rules need to be relevant, easy to understand and interpret, and easy to apply, but there is no substitute for good judgment.

If Wake Forest chooses to change their by-laws to permit alcohol possession and use by chapter members then that could serve a god purpose indeed by bringing some of the drinking out into the open where it can be monitored and control in accordance with Fraternity policies and procedures. It will certainly cut down on the potential for some sort of a technical, "gotcha" violation that some university administrators go looking for.


PS: I really have done the first class upgrade thing for a couple of kids! Their eyes get as big as saucers!

[GammaZeta]

Exactly John.

Using your pizza scenario. If I go out with 4 brothers from 4 different chapters, get pizza and order some beer, and I'm the only brother from a totally dry chapter...guess what? If I'm over 21, I'm ordering a beer.

Seems to me that the total ban was probably unenforceable. What happens when people over 21 start violating it in scenarios that John brought forth? It's better to draw a much more reasonable, enforceable line.

And by the way, I think I am the only blue blooded American college student to ever say this. I love pizza. I really love beer. But for some reason I hate pizza and beer together! Weird huh?