Alums and alcohol in chapter houses

[DeltAlum]

Originally Posted by lake

When the powers-that-be from that local chapter found out, I guess they gave SA a very stern scolding for breaking a pretty big rule. SA disagreed, the two sides went round and round, and ultimately SA played the "to hell with you guys" card and refuses to have anything more to do with this chapter.

So, the question to me is, was a "very stern scolding" necessary and appropriate as oppossed to maybe a letter explaining the problem with some degree of diplomacy? This isn't an undergraduate being dressed down, but someone who had been important to the chapter and might have been again sometime in the future.

I'm not sure it's been established whether the rules were explained, given that the circumstances and situation were different from normal chapter/house operations. Perhaps and explaination and a mild rebuke might have been more in order.

For that matter, did anyone in the chapter or house corporation contact Nationals for guidance on whether this is really a problem given that it was an alumni function and all the participants were alumni and of drinking age? It doesn't appear that any law was broken and rules, even "big" ones can sometimes be relaxed in special circumstances.

I'm big on obeying the rules, but there is an exception to everything. In this case, it appears to me that the sorority has lost two potentially important alumni over an infraction that would prove pretty minor in the overall scope of things.

It seems possible to me that there was an over-reaction that may cost the chapter much more than it anticipated.

[Kevin]

Rules such as this should be enforced only with the organization's best interests at heart. It seems to methat keeping loyal and active alums sometimes supercedes rules -- especially when the breaking of htem does no harm.

[honeychile]

Originally Posted by DeltAlum

I'm big on obeying the rules, but there is an exception to everything. In this case, it appears to me that the sorority has lost two potentially important alumni over an infraction that would prove pretty minor in the overall scope of things.

It seems possible to me that there was an over-reaction that may cost the chapter much more than it anticipated.

Agreeing whole-heartedly with his whole post, but especially this part. As I said, a round of "I'm sorry, but we need to reprimand you as an example," and "I'm sorry, I shouldn't have" would have gone a long way towards keeping peace in the GLO.