[23852] in APO-L
Re: [APO-L] APO House rule
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Packy Anderson)
Thu Aug 28 09:08:25 2003
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 09:07:47 -0400
Reply-To: Packy Anderson <packy@dardan.com>
From: Packy Anderson <packy@dardan.com>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <20030828125327.34966.qmail@web13406.mail.yahoo.com>
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Rachel wrote:
> So, packy, are you thus saying that maintaining chapter property in
> general is not service to the fraternity? Think of it this way. Some
> chapters have offices. (shortened for brevity)
Trust me, maintaining an office pales in comparison to maintaining a house.
The minimal effort involved in maintaining an office is worth the benefits
it provides to the fraternity. However, when you scale that up to a HOUSE,
the benefits to the fraternity don't increase. The added benefits of a
house over an office primarily serve the membership, not the fraternity.
In addition, chapters do not OWN their offices: they are issued them by
their educational institutions. If the roof leaks, they call maintenance,
and it's dealt with without their involvement. If my house's roof leaks, I
either have to climb up there and fix it, or I have to dig out the cash to
hire someone else to do so. THAT's what maintenance means; it's not just
keeping a place tidy, it's fixing it when it breaks, doing all of the
necessary grounds work, paying the taxes, etc.
Given that a house is orders of magnitude more work than maintaining an
office, it's a bad investment of fraternity time and resources. And that's
something that was realized long before any of the other arguments against
it (partying, co-ed living arrangements, risk management) were even
imagined.
YiLFS,
-packy
--
Packy Anderson packy@dardan.com
Q) How would you describe yourself in three words?
A) I mean well. -- Tom Baker, Dr. Who #4
