[9699] in APO-L
Re: ...Pledge Standards...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Shawn BB Hillis)
Fri Oct 7 19:05:44 1994
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 1994 19:03:30 -0400
Reply-To: Shawn BB Hillis <ind00471@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu>
From: Shawn BB Hillis <ind00471@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L%PURCCVM.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <9410070830.AA06285@mail2.sas.upenn.edu>
> No, the chapters elected these "officials" to do their jobs and one of their
> jobs is to enforce policies of the fraternity that YOU, the active members
> decided on. We don't run a dictatorship here, it's a democracy.
Umm, no. I don't think so. I believe their jobs are to oversee
the chapters and investigate potential or actual violations of National
Policy along with providing other support to the chapters, etc.... NOT to
dictate to the Chapters what the "correct" interpretations of purposely
vague National Policies are. THAT's when it/they become dictorial. It's
not a problem when the policy is pretty cut and dry or a chapter
stretches the bounds of a policy beyond any possible rationale.
And excuse me, perhaps I DO lack knowledge on this part, but what
actual authority do SC's and RD's have to enforce? I'm under the
impression that the only bodies that can impose policy on a chapter are
the National Board, the National Convention, the school, or any local,
state, or federal governmental body. Clarification, if it's needed, on
this might help.
> If you don't like how something is done, it is in your power to vote on a
> change either at the National Convention or to vote in someone new as Sectiona
l
> Chairman or Regional Director. To chose to disregard a policy or
> interpretation because "you don't like it" is both immature and dangerous.
Change what? I don't want to change the policies as they are
written! They are open to interpretation and I LIKE them that way. They
are meant to give chapters flexibility in implementing their programs.
AND I NEVER said to "disregard policy", just someone else's
interpretation of it, which is NOT *official* interpretation.
> SCs and RDs are volunteers, not frustrated politicians on a power trip.
> They often serve at great expense both financial and timewise to
> themselves and their families. They serve for the betterment of the
> fraternity, not personal gain.
Yes, I know. I think we all know what the very few paid
positions are in the fraternity. And I know very few officers that don't
sacrifice their own time and financail resourses to the detriment of
other obligations...like school and food. So your point was...?
> This is a very scary notion. Why do you think we have chapters that get
> suspended for hazing violations? Could it be because they took this attitude
> and even after they were told by a SC or RD that they were in violation of
> some policy, they persisted in their actions?
Scary notion? That chapters actually try to think for
themselves? Again, I never said to ignore what a SC or RD says.
Anything they say SHOULD be taken into serious consideration. But it IS
NOT the Gospel according to ________. And WHO suspended those chapters?
Could it have been the National Convention? Or was it a Regional
Director? And you're right, that's what will happen when a chapter ignores
or disregards such _*advise*_ WHEN they ARE in violation of a policy and
NOT just in violation of what a FEW consider policy. And yes, the issues
I am ...debating?arguing?...over are NOT concensus items. I received
many differing opinions on them, even from *officials*.
> Being part of a national fraternity means just that. It doesn't mean that one
> can disregard or ignore certain policies when the individual decides that
> they don't care for such policy. "Sacrifice of one for the good of many"
> is how the story goes I think. We are often forced to look beyond our
> individual desires to try and do what is best for the entire fraternity.
Yes, try to do what is best for the fraternity as decided BY the
fraternity, not by individuals.
> It does little good to be a part of a whole if each part decides to
> follow their own path regardless of the harm to the whole. If you don't
> want to be bound by this set of common ideals, you are free to form your
> own organization , set of rules or guidelines, and go by some name other
> than Alpha Phi Omega. Your choice. But by choosing to use the name, you are
> also agreeing to be bound to the rules. (re: reaffirmation of membership
> policies and chapter affiliation...submitted every fall by November 15th)
That's what I've been trying to say! In these instances I think
we ARE following the rules. It's just that there might be disagreement
in interpretation between the chapter and their RD/SC. As above, not all
RD's or SC's are in agreement...so I don't consider any one of their
opinions to be Gospel. If several or all agree, ooppps, I'll bet the
rest of the board and probably the convention will too, but I haven't seen
that on [this] issue.
> I am not saying that actives aren't free to question the decisions of a SC
> or RD but do it in the right way. If you don't think a SC is right, ask
> the RD. If you believe the RD is wrong, ask a National Board member or the
> National President. But let's not buy into this "do whatever you want
> regardlessly and damn the consequences" type attitude.
Isn't that last quote very similar to "make a decision and be
responsible for the consequences?" Which is what every chapter has to do
anyway? And in this asking (which is what I've been trying to do and NOT
getting any kind of concensus on), how far do we stop? When do we KNOW
that we have reached a definitive answer? WHO has the last say? Gee, I
think that's the National Convention again, isn't it? And isn't it a
little inconvient that we only meet once every two years. AND I've seen
a National President try very hard to pass something past the convention
and fail. So what do we do in the mean time? Well, the Board has the
power to act in-between conventions...but I haven't seen an answer from
them. But beyond that it's been ONLY FROM individuals. ONE person's (who
happens to be a RD at the time) interpretation versus ... how many are
in a chapter?
Now, if you'd like, we could put aside any of my personal views on
the roles of our elected officials and discuss the actual issue that I
have a problem with.
Riz, as you can see, this issue seems to strike an emotional chord
in a few of us, or at least in me. None of my opinions are meant to be
taken personally and I hope to be able to continue the discussions
congenially (even though I may not be doing a very good job at that).
Still your Brother in LF&S,
-----------------------------------------
--Shawn M. Hillis |If you love someone, set them free. |
University of |If they don't come back, hunt them down|
Central Flordia |and kill them. |
Psi Omega Chapter -----------------------------------------
