Delta Zeta Reportedly Sues DePauw

[ASUADPi]

Okay confused, shouldn't re-organization and recolonization be two different things? I ask because it seems like people are saying they are one in the same. Recolonization, to me, signifies that the chapter left the campus and came back.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

Okay confused, shouldn't re-organization and recolonization be two different things? I ask because it seems like people are saying they are one in the same. Recolonization, to me, signifies that the chapter left the campus and came back.

It confuses me too.

Unless you can see when a chapter left and see a break of more than four years, which would clearly be a re-colonization, then I think it's going to be hard to tell the difference between the times a GLO has ALL current actives go alum and then starts with a new group vs. telling some actives to go alum and starts with a new group, which both might be re-organizations.

I think part of what causes the problem it that no or few groups really openly talk about doing these things at all. It always seem to be presented as if the old actives are long gone.

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

Recolonization, to me, signifies that the chapter left the campus and came back.

And that's what it is. They are different in the sense that recolonizing means the chapter officially closed and came back.

When chapters re-organize they don't leave campus. I know that HQs have different procedures when handling re-orgs, but from what I've seen -- the collegians are granted alumnae status and HQ decides when would be the best time to hold a special recruitment.

I was kinda wondering why people were talking about successful recolonizations when clearly they are different.

[UGAalum94]

So, even when it's a totally new batch of members with no initiated members in the re-formed group, it's a re-organization?

I'm not challenging your knowledge. I know that I don't know anything about it. But for some reason I was thinking that having the old members as part of the new group made it a re-organization.

How could an outsider know when the group officially closed and re-colonized nearly immediately ( as DZ at DePauw apparently originally intended to do) as opposed to a re-organization in which all the old members went alum but the chapter didn't close?

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

So, even when it's a totally new batch of members with no initiated members in the re-formed group, it's a re-organization?

I'm not challenging your knowledge. I know that I don't know anything about it. But for some reason I was thinking that having the old members as part of the new group made it a re-organization.

How could an outsider know when the group officially closed and re-colonized nearly immediately ( as DZ at DePauw apparently originally intended to do) as opposed to a re-organization in which all the old members went alum but the chapter didn't close?

I'm no expert either, but I see the chapter as just being dormant. In this post, AXOBuckeye provided some info about AGD at Ohio State. To be honest, I didn't even know about Ohio State being re-established until it was posted on the IHQ website and I know many were surprised because they didn't know of Alpha Lambda's situation.

As far as your last question is concerned, I have no clue. To an outsider, I wouldn't think that it would matter too much as the terms are more internal based.

I don't know, I may be presumptious in saying this -- but as far as re-orgs and re-cols go, maybe things really do work out better when efforts are kept quiet?

[I've been up for almost 30 hrs with little to no sleep so my apologies if I'm not making sense at the moment]

[UGAalum94]

Your post makes sense, and I think you're right.

I'm afraid that the only differences between the right way to do reorganization and the wrong way are that in the right way, you give everyone alum status and while you try to make sure the alums are treated well, you try to keep them out of the media and the university president's office. Focus on the future and the new girls.

Generally, I'm not sure that I like policies whose success depends on keeping them quiet.

[AchtungBaby80]

I'm not quite sure where the distinction between "recolonization" and "reorganization" is, either. I was under the impression that it was a recolonization if everyone was given alum status and then a new batch were chosen, and I have always thought of reorganization as an interchangeable term. However, I guess a reorganization happens if only some members go alum. I'm only familiar with the scenario in which everybody goes alum and then new ladies are recruited, though--before this DePauw incident, I had never heard of some members going alum while others stayed active during any kind of reorganization/recolonization attempt. We always referred to what my chapter did as a recolonization, but the chapter didn't stay away for years and years before it came back...I'm pretty sure that recruitment for new members started the year after the previous members were granted alum status.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by OTW

And that's what it is. They are different in the sense that recolonizing means the chapter officially closed and came back.

When chapters re-organize they don't leave campus. I know that HQs have different procedures when handling re-orgs, but from what I've seen -- the collegians are granted alumnae status and HQ decides when would be the best time to hold a special recruitment.

I was kinda wondering why people were talking about successful recolonizations when clearly they are different.

I look at it the other way - a recolonization is when there is a whole new group of members and all the old members become alums, whether the chapter went dormant for a time or not. Reorganization is when you keep some of the old girls, or merge with a local group and give them all status on the same level of the old girls or something.