[19991] in APO-L
Re: convention review
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard Edward Vehlow)
Mon Jan 25 22:58:28 1999
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:58:18 -0500
Reply-To: Richard Edward Vehlow <vehlor@RPI.EDU>
From: Richard Edward Vehlow <vehlor@RPI.EDU>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
In-Reply-To: Stephen Merrill <smerrill@MINT.NET> "Re: convention review" (Jan
22, 6:09pm)
Wait a minute. I strongly object to the certain usage of a term in this
discussion. If you're going to say that this is a fraternity mainly of
actives, then say so. Don't use the U-word (undergraduates). There are plenty
of brothers in this fraternity who are GRADUATE students, of which i am one.
My chapter even PLEDGES graduate students every so often.
I also strongly object to limiting bylaw amendments based on the type or
status of person submitting them. You're eliminating some great minds, who
have been around to see what works and what doesn't.
I would also be afraid of a possible trend to then start limiting alumni and
staff representation on the convention floor.
Once a brother- always a brother.
I have two ideas to shorten convention a bit:
1. Curfew: close general session at midnight on day 3, regardless of what has
been done. Give delegates 8 hours to unwind, sleep, shower, have breakfast
and reconvene at 8am.
2. Move Regional Business to regional conventions. That includes Conference
voting and Region officer elections. It makes no damned sense to send less
than half a region's chapters 2000 miles or more at times to vote on region
business which can otherwise have taken place closer to home with more
chapters and affected brothers present at a conference in which such
legislative sessions can be EASILY factored in.
I am an especially big proponent of #2, especially in the past year, and will
push it hard for the next 2 years.
-REV
