[19939] in APO-L
Re: alumni & legislation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Buddha Buck)
Sat Jan 23 21:47:42 1999
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 21:43:10 -0500
Reply-To: Buddha Buck <bmbuck@ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU>
From: Buddha Buck <bmbuck@ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from Ellen d Kranzer <ccrazy@WORLD.STD.COM> of "Sat, 23
Jan 1999 03:26:13 EST." <199901230826.AA17064@world.std.com>
Ellen d Kranzer wrote:
> I'm going to do something I don't do often and put my two cents in on
> this subject.
>
> This year's convention packet had the lowest number of submissions
> from active brothers that I remember seeing since I've been a brother
> (that makes it since the 1982 convention).
In addition to this, I've heard comments/complaints that most of the
submissions came from a small number of people or groups of people.
I've seen a few suggestions about what we should do about this, such as
impose limits on submissions from alumni, or require active-member
co-sponsorship of legislation.
I have a few questions that I'd like to be answered before much more
discussion occurs...
1. Is this time critical, or do we have a while to work on it?
As far as I know, any proposal to limit submissions would have to be
made at the 2000 Convention, and would not have any effect until the
2002 Convention. I think that means that we can study the issue for a
while before making a recommendation. If it can be considered for the
rules for the 2000 Convention, then we have less time to work on it.
Either way, I think we have time to contemplate the issue in fullness.
2. Is this an ongoing issue, or is this convention a fluke?
This is the lowest number of active brother submissions that Brother
Ellen has seen since 1982. That isn't a lot of information to go on.
If the number has been decreasing, then it -may- be a sign of a long
term problem that the Fraternity needs to address. If it's been
randomly fluxuating, then this convention may just be a large, but
randomly expected, statistical outlier, then do we even need to do
anything about it?
3. Is this issue a even a -problem-?
By 2000, Alpha Phi Omega will have been around for 75 years. Given
that most students are active brothers for less than 5 years (and even
then, I think I'm being generous), it is not surprising that the number
of alumni in APO vastly outnumbers the number of actives. I don't know
the exact figures offhand, but it wouldn't surprise me if there were a
30:1 ratio of alumni to actives. Should it be surprising that the
number of submissions from alumni outnumber the number of submissions
from actives?
4. If it is a problem, then what -is- the problem? What's the reason?
First, is the problem that too many alumni are submitting legislation,
or that actives aren't?
If the former, why? Do they feel that the Fraternity isn't suiting
their
needs? That the way it is growing is pulling it away from how they want
it to be? That they see too much student apathy, and feel they have to
step into the void? Or something else?
If the latter, why? Do they feel distanced from the National
Organization,
that what the National Program has little to do with what they do? Or
do
they just don't care? Or are they intimidated by the idea of presenting
legislation at the national level? Or is there some other reason?
These different causes can't be solved the same way. They need to be
handled in different ways.
5. Now that the problem is identified... -THEN- we can worry about
solving it.
>
> Y.I.S.
> c.c.
--
Buddha Buck bmbuck@acsu.buffalo.edu
"Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our
liberty depends upon the chaos and cacaphony of the unfettered speech
the First Amendment protects." -- A.L.A. v. U.S. Dept. of Justice
