[15560] in APO-L
Re: 2 questions for those at all-male chapter
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lee Correll)
Wed Nov 13 15:02:48 1996
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 14:59:41 -0500
Reply-To: Lee Correll <rec700z@MAIL.ODU.EDU>
From: Lee Correll <rec700z@MAIL.ODU.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <199611131909.OAA15223@tahiti.cc.odu.edu>
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996, John Grossi wrote:
> (just some comments in no particular order)
> The gross majority of the chapters are not reprsented on
> APO-L. One person in my section is on APO-L (and he's from a
> petitioning group). (so there goes two of your all-males). I'd be
> surprised if a third of the chapters were represented... possibly it's
> time for another of Lisa's census's... but it's not really germain to
> what we are discussing
I concur. However, a look at the list of people on APO-L shows that it
would be difficult to determine if this was a real cross-section of the
Fraternity as a whole. This is the best medium we have available to
discuss items before the Convention itself.
> I would also note that most of the people speaking on this
> issue are alumni of either the staff stripe (myself, Lee, Bill Rugh,
> etc...) or Alumni who are still active (Jodie, Bill Macke...). We
> really have not heard the Undergraduates discussion, and nor do I
> suspect we will until Phoenix.
It began that way - but has been shifting. I note several posts both pro
and con from Michigan State, Georgia Tech, Auburn, Drexel, etc.
> I would also note that a large portion of the people fighting
> for the affirmative are from (or associated with) Alpha Beta Omega
> Chapter (yourself, Lee, Derek Cashman, Mike Leahy, emy).
This is a generalization and in no way correct. I'll let the other
individuals on this list make themselves known, but if you check previous
posts, you'll even note that Larry Labell, the former Section Chair from
your area before it split, commented on this - and, I believe, "applauded"
my staff on the motions.
> But to use the summation technique that several people have used...
>
> there are two threads in the bylaws;
>
> Open Membership
>
> and
>
> Chapter right of selection
>
> You the undergraduate active members (not us the staff who've
> had our chance) need to make a decision between the two based on the
> facts. Don't be impressed by the titles of the people fighting about
> this. Make the decision based on the facts... and the people with the
> titles will implement the decision as is our jobs.
nor should you be impressed with what they have been; the fact that they
were there is moot beyond their ability to inform you of what has taken
place. I'd like to note that we aren't "fighting" - at least, I would
hope not. If we wanted a fight, we would have only proposed a single
motion; remember, the idea is to discuss.
