kappa sigma at fgcu?

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by FSUZeta

that there are rules and procedures that apply to everyone/every organization, and those rules and procedures should be followed , that KSigAdvisor has not furthered his cause nor his case and that he has been extremely insulting and derogatory to many gc members and has been especially insensitive toward women.

Are any of the NPC chapters doing anything with Kappa Sigma?

[33girl]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Are any of the NPC chapters doing anything with Kappa Sigma?

I think that's another one of the colony's complaints - that the sororities are being instructed not to have mixers, etc with them. (Jennyj correct me if I got this wrong) But you, I, and the whole free world know that if these guys were awesome enough, if a new fraternity was needed enough, and if the sororities dug them enough, there would be plenty of non-official "socializing" at parties and such.

[jennyj87]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Are any of the NPC chapters doing anything with Kappa Sigma?

No

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

Knight Rider- I said we'd help, not that you "need our blessing." (See why it's hard not to make derogatory comments?) If we have a Chapter at a university, our undergrads are instructed to vote in favor of expansion, always.

And the fact that you actually think that only members of NIC are deserving of equal protection of the laws is sad.

Welcome to the discussion Southern Belle. No one said you have to fix something that you don't think is broken, and no one said you have a small brain. Calm down... if your small brain will allow.... "I'm just sayin...."

So your undergrads are sheep?

And I think that only NIC members should be able to use NIC policies.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

Welcome to the discussion Southern Belle. No one said you have to fix something that you don't think is broken, and no one said you have a small brain. Calm down... if your small brain will allow.... "I'm just sayin...."

It's SWTXBelle - not southern. There is a Southern Belle here, but it is not me.

You stated "Lastly, before I forget, I don't expect any of the sorority members on here to really understand this argument." It was that which I was commenting on in terms of sorority members and their brain size - and while you may try to interpret that as NOT saying we have small brains (lack of intelligence) , the fact is, you then went and said the very thing you said you had not said, undoubtly for comic effect, but I submit you failed. The fact that so many others have interpreted it the same way indicates that.

As to "no one said you had to fix something that you don't think is broken" - you wrote "Your views are skewed by the fact that you have voluntarily created an unnecessary organization that you named Panhellenic, which you give the authority to provide strict oversight of your groups. Believe it or not, you could actually operate without it." Your representation of the NPC as "unnecessary" and your "Believe it or not, you could actually operate without it" indicated that you hold our 100+ year old organization in contempt, and think that it is indeed "broken" and we should operate without it.

AND as for referencing a post which I took down, please note that when I perceived I was being unnecessarily insulting (although funny), I took it down. You should try it.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

Knight Rider- I said we'd help, not that you "need our blessing." (See why it's hard not to make derogatory comments?) If we have a Chapter at a university, our undergrads are instructed to vote in favor of expansion, always.

And the fact that you actually think that only members of NIC are deserving of equal protection of the laws is sad.

Welcome to the discussion Southern Belle. No one said you have to fix something that you don't think is broken, and no one said you have a small brain. Calm down... if your small brain will allow.... "I'm just sayin...."

QFP

[jennyj87]

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

Jenny, I didn't call you or other females small minded, I said you were "close minded." Before you can "get something," you have to be willing to listen. Thus, calling you closed minded isn't the same as small minded. Also, I'm sure you have insulted someone before that has forgiven you. So, although you were directly and harshly critical of me, I'd ask that you don't hold a grudge and if our guys are deserving and you like them, then judge them as individuals and make your own call. Your executive offices should be contacting you, I hope. They can't "make" you do anything, but they can inform you that this "embargo" against us is silly and unnecessary. Hopefully we gain official recognition soon, and then it will be a moot point.
.

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

Welcome to the discussion Southern Belle. No one said you have to fix something that you don't think is broken, and no one said you have a small brain. Calm down... if your small brain will allow.... "I'm just sayin...."

I don't care if it was sarcasm. I'm not holding grudges against "these guys" but how am I suppose to judge them as individuals when what I have seen them as a GROUP try to do on campus and what their fraternity is trying to do on this campus.

"i'm"'going""to""quote""everything""cause""its""co ol!!"

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

MysticCat, since you are legally educated, can you please drop the bias for one second and help progress this discussion along? Yes, I'm asking for a neutral statement from you since all of you who have been on this Greek Chat thing for years seem to stick together. Please describe the difference to your cronies between disagreeing with a message and disagreeing with the right to present the message.

Seriously?! You think we're the ones who haven't been moving the discussion along?

You talk to us like we're children:

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

. . . and since none of you have any real life experience, please listen for a moment before you form your retorts.

When informed that we actually do have some real life experience -- more than you, perhaps -- you throw out perjoratives at anyone who does anything other than accept every single thing you say. Just a few examples:

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

Lastly, before I forget, I don't expect any of the sorority members on here to really understand this argument.

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

I'm embarrassed by the example you set for the undergraduates.

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

Contrary to Princess' statements, you wouldn't make anyone I know proud. . . . You should be ashamed of yourself as a United States American.

If you go back and read my original post, yes I did challenge what you said and noted that "From what I can see, you are grossly overstating an equal protection analysis." I asked questions to understand your position further.

But your responses to everyone have been so loaded with your attitude that any actual points you may have had in there that were worth considering were completely lost. Like I've said before, I don't have a dog in this fight, except that I have a thing about wanting to see some accuracy in legal arguments. I didn't have a bias until gave me reason to have one.

And yet we're the ones who won't move the discussion forward? Unbelievable.

But since you asked:

My cronies here at GC, everyone has a right to convey whatever message he or she wants, and we must all respect that. I think we typically do respect that.

But that right does not mean we have to agree with the message. I, for example, have tried to parse through the legal arguments presented, and I don't find them persuasive at all. Others' mileage may vary.

KSigAdvisor, it's been asked a number of times in this thread: Are you an undergrad? I'll add to the question: Do you have a legal education?

[LaneSig]

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

LaneSig,

Choice #2 isn't "Eff you!" on our part. Do you label everyone protecting their 1st Amendment Rights this way? We were told "Eff you!" by the school. It's hard trading points with you because of your lack of understanding for what is going on here. If a group is protesting on a public sidewalk, and the police tell them "No" or "Eff you get out of here," and the group persists, then who is right? You may not like what we have to say, but you have to accept the fact that we have the right to say it. See the difference there? We never said "Eff you" we respectfully said this is the United States of America and under the laws of this country, you can't deny us the right to freely associate, and thus we support the young men on campus who want to be a part of our organization. We are sticking up for our rights, what do you not see about this? If your local city government put a gag order on your First Amendment rights, what would you say? Why on earth would you stick up for the government violating the rights that for centuries we have fought so hard to protect. Contrary to Princess' statements, you wouldn't make anyone I know proud. All you are doing is condemning these kids for standing up for themselves. Challenging the system is difficult, and there are many naysayers along the way. We did choose our own path, but like I said before, we aren't afraid of the struggle. You should be ashamed of yourself as a United States American.

MysticCat, since you are legally educated, can you please drop the bias for one second and help progress this discussion along? Yes, I'm asking for a neutral statement from you since all of you who have been on this Greek Chat thing for years seem to stick together. Please describe the difference to your cronies between disagreeing with a message and disagreeing with the right to present the message.

Rambler, it's nearly impossible to conduct intelligent and constructive discourse on this thing. All anyone wants to focus on is the negative. Not one person will stand up and say "Although I disagree with your stance, I acknowledge you have the right to say it." LaneSig's example #2 from above is the perfect example. He describes our actions in defending our right to equal protection as saying "Eff You." You can't get anywhere in a conversation when these people fail to understand the basics of our Bill of Rights.

What I'm noticing is that you are tending to focus on little parts and ignoring the big picture. There were several aspects of my post that begged for responses. Examples: Reasons for not waiting. The acknowledgment that Kappa Sigma created the issue. Your own actions in your 2nd post. The discussion of why shouldn't the Administration believe that you will follow campus rules and policies, when from the beginning of the colony you didn't wish to follow their policies of expansion.

Where have I ever said that I am against freedom of speech or association? I'm not.

Again, when you decided to go with Choice #2, you effectively did tell FGCU that you did not need to follow their wishes or policies. The "F--- you" is metaphorical.

But, again, it's all about the Constitution and not about Kappa Sigma's actions. Because, of course, Kappa Sigma is completely blameless in this situation.

[Rambler1869]

Originally Posted by LaneSig

Again, when you decided to go with Choice #2, you effectively did tell FGCU that you did not need to follow their wishes or policies. ..

There is no policy at FGCU that says a fraternity cannot colonize without being approved. There is a punishment policy that involves initiating members; but that's it. In that regard, to date Kappa Sigma has not violated any policies of FGCU.

In terms of their wishes, the school also cannot prohibit any group from forming (freedom to assemble).

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by Rambler1869

In terms of their wishes, the school also cannot prohibit any group from forming (freedom to assemble).

The school did not prohibit the group from forming.

If KS wants to be recognized, it needs to follow the FGCU's rules.

[Rambler1869]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

The school did not prohibit the group from forming.

If KS wants to be recognized, it needs to follow the FGCU's rules.

It has every single posted policy, rule and guideline. Earlier I posted the link to the IFC bylaws and expansion guidelines. I could probably find links for the other offices involved. But check it out; if you can find an actual policy these men broke, I would like to see it; as I am genuinely unaware of any broken policies.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by KSigAdvisor

BLAH BLAH BLAH

You sit here and type out these novels while failing to answer the questions that have been asked several times.

You're trying to break the rules BEFORE colonizing, yet you claim you'll follow the rules once you're recognized. Bullshit.

[Rambler1869]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

You're trying to break the rules BEFORE colonizing, yet you claim you'll follow the rules once you're recognized. Bullshit.

They are colonized; there arent any policies that prohibit colonizing. What rules have been broken? Regardless of how anyone feels how it should or should not have been handled; what actual rule(s) were broken?

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by Rambler1869

They are colonized; there arent any policies that prohibit colonizing. What rules have been broken? Regardless of how anyone feels how it should or should not have been handled; what actual rule(s) were broken?

If everything was handled properly, why are you all here complaining?