A Brother recently sent me an e-mail and we lightly caught up on the latest in our lives since the days we were in the same local alumni chapter.
His e-mail included something about the NupeNet being a virtual chapter and it dawned on me about a potential reason the NupeNet has received less than lukewarm affection from the highest levels of the organization.
The NupeNet does not and will not as far as I can see have a Polemarch since the entire group for the most part governs itself.
Even if there was a front runner for such an office, it would be more of a moniker without any real authority and responsibility since the opportunity for leadership is the same for all Brothers regardless of age, years of membership, financial status, etc.
The NupeNet is the closest thing that the Fraternity has to fulfill the Kappa poem "Kappa of My Dreams" and now it is understandable why it gets left outside at the table where the majority of the decisions are being made.
If there was room for a "Mr. Kappa" of the NupeNet, I wonder if the coalition would be all over it;D)
We would probably have to pay more dues or be "assessed" to subsidize the NupeNet at that point;)
Thursday, June 30, 2005
What Sense Does Anger and Bitterness Make?
I received an e-mail from a Brother who wondered if and why my e-mails and messages seem to have a tinge of anger and bitterness to them.
Here is the response that I sent him.
There is no anger or bitterness in my comments. It is just an effect
of having taken "the red pill" regarding our beloved Fraternity and
having the balls to press for constructive change by any means
necessary versus preferring the golden silence and "go along to get
along" that permeates the Bond.
If I were angry or bitter as others are and have been, I would
probably sit on the sidelines somewhere away from the potential
responses.
Running away from problems does not solve them. But I do take it easy
in voicing my opinion due to higher priority items.
The vibe of the NupeNet, and overall Bond offline and online requires
a little more than just the same old Kappa conversation these days.
It is my purpose to get Brothers to think and become more aware of why
our retention rate is so low.
I firmly believe that we have systemic problems that further reinforce
the movement away from our stated objectives.
I have placed and will continue to place the bulk of my thoughts,
comments, and recommendations on my blog
(http://yoursinthebond.blogspot.com) regarding the NupeNet and other
changes involving Kappa that would get us back on track at every level
versus the formal levels of organization (local chapter, province, and
Grand Chapter overall) currently in existence.
Kappa is more than just the 3 levels of organization that most
normally consider.
Feel free to leave any comments or thoughts you have on my blog or ask
me anything else that makes you wonder.
Thanks for the feedback and I hope that I have answered your question
fully. If not, please ask for the clarification on any point that I
have missed.
Here is the response that I sent him.
There is no anger or bitterness in my comments. It is just an effect
of having taken "the red pill" regarding our beloved Fraternity and
having the balls to press for constructive change by any means
necessary versus preferring the golden silence and "go along to get
along" that permeates the Bond.
If I were angry or bitter as others are and have been, I would
probably sit on the sidelines somewhere away from the potential
responses.
Running away from problems does not solve them. But I do take it easy
in voicing my opinion due to higher priority items.
The vibe of the NupeNet, and overall Bond offline and online requires
a little more than just the same old Kappa conversation these days.
It is my purpose to get Brothers to think and become more aware of why
our retention rate is so low.
I firmly believe that we have systemic problems that further reinforce
the movement away from our stated objectives.
I have placed and will continue to place the bulk of my thoughts,
comments, and recommendations on my blog
(http://yoursinthebond.blogspot.com) regarding the NupeNet and other
changes involving Kappa that would get us back on track at every level
versus the formal levels of organization (local chapter, province, and
Grand Chapter overall) currently in existence.
Kappa is more than just the 3 levels of organization that most
normally consider.
Feel free to leave any comments or thoughts you have on my blog or ask
me anything else that makes you wonder.
Thanks for the feedback and I hope that I have answered your question
fully. If not, please ask for the clarification on any point that I
have missed.
Thursday, June 16, 2005
Self-Destruction and Self-Criticism At Its Best
Although online Kappas are not supposed to hint or beat around the bush regarding esoteric information, there is a pretty good flame war going on the NupeNet regarding the Christian beliefs that Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Inc. was clearly founded upon.
As much as I would like to join the fray, I have to stay on the sidelines as much as possible for a multitude of reasons.
1. The debate around our Founders' beliefs and the opposing modern-day beliefs of society and our diverse membership has been raised like Lazarus on more than one occasion and the recent debate seems like a return of the season to bring up the dead horse again.
2. If the collective of members cannot utilize the power of the internet to create positive change and achievement externally, then internal fighting to change the wording of various documents to appease nonbelievers or nonpracticing Christians further erodes the spirit and hope of Fraternity.
3. Being a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, my expectations are that everyone already knows where I stand on the issue.
Here I am feeling victorious on taking the red pill previously as this blog should represents and seeing where our systemic cracks and flaws are and being courageous enough to push the envelope to create momentum and a desire to create positive change, there are forces that rather enjoy and see as our primary focus as wine, women, and song or just throw the gates open for any type of belief or faith just for the sake of not possibly offending anyone.
I will not cease or limit my efforts nevertheless for just as a wind blew the debate in, another one will usher it elsewhere to return another season.
I do not know what or how long I will stay on the sideline this time around, since there appears to be a small contingent that are expressing a strong fight. I hope that they stay courageous for other battles internally and externally.
There are signs of too many being on the down low in body and spirit and practicing other lifestyles in direct opposition of where the Founders intended our organization to exist and go.
Heaven help us all!
As much as I would like to join the fray, I have to stay on the sidelines as much as possible for a multitude of reasons.
1. The debate around our Founders' beliefs and the opposing modern-day beliefs of society and our diverse membership has been raised like Lazarus on more than one occasion and the recent debate seems like a return of the season to bring up the dead horse again.
2. If the collective of members cannot utilize the power of the internet to create positive change and achievement externally, then internal fighting to change the wording of various documents to appease nonbelievers or nonpracticing Christians further erodes the spirit and hope of Fraternity.
3. Being a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, my expectations are that everyone already knows where I stand on the issue.
Here I am feeling victorious on taking the red pill previously as this blog should represents and seeing where our systemic cracks and flaws are and being courageous enough to push the envelope to create momentum and a desire to create positive change, there are forces that rather enjoy and see as our primary focus as wine, women, and song or just throw the gates open for any type of belief or faith just for the sake of not possibly offending anyone.
I will not cease or limit my efforts nevertheless for just as a wind blew the debate in, another one will usher it elsewhere to return another season.
I do not know what or how long I will stay on the sideline this time around, since there appears to be a small contingent that are expressing a strong fight. I hope that they stay courageous for other battles internally and externally.
There are signs of too many being on the down low in body and spirit and practicing other lifestyles in direct opposition of where the Founders intended our organization to exist and go.
Heaven help us all!
Wednesday, June 08, 2005
Present Tense Crazy Notions, Get Your Present Tense Crazy Notions!
I believe that there must be something in the water lately. This morning a full swarm of present tense crazy notions for Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Inc. came to mind.
During a recent phone conversation with a Sands of mine (someone with whom we were both initiated into fraternity membership at the same time), I mentioned something about several realizations and effects of turning 40 has had on me.
One of them is realizing that I tend to look at things primarily from a systemic perspective versus looking at certain events as if they are isolated.
If there is a problem with the system of anything, my line of eyesight, understanding, and experiences will pick up on it faster than anything else. My value for the endeavor becomes more enlightened or disillusioned as a result. Typically I will desire to change or see a change occur at that point.
Bottom line is that I recognize where we can construct positive change versus getting bogged down in the traditions and values that are deconstructive.
From the various literature, sermons heard, and perspective changing television and multimedia recently experienced, I have been able to somewhat create a perfect storm in finding jedi-like leverage and precision to come up with multiple present-tense crazy notions.
All of the present-tense crazy notions cannot be posted within this blog entry and some will require revisitation to fully go deeper for the real golden opportunities buried beneath the surface.
So let's get started with Present Tense Crazy Notion #4 while realizing that there is not a hierarchy or stronger priority or greater weight given to any of these. The number just reflects the order in which they were received in my mind.
The recent rash of crazy notions to be posted here will have a tremendous, positive financial impact upon the Fraternity as well as for any other organization that implements such ideas and concepts that would be considered heresy today or any other time period without a significant paradigm shift within its leadership and membership.
I do know without a doubt that this blog has appeared on the radar of my Fraternity at its current highest level and I must continue onward without regard to risk, sacrifice, or lack of possible reward or recognition.
On some level, it does serve a purpose even if it is to be used externally to my Fraternity.
Present Tense Crazy Notion #4 is a proposal that there should be both Micro and Super Chapters within Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Inc.
Although there have been multiple meetings and sessions of Grand Conclaves, Grand Board of Directors, provincial, and local chapter (and various boards) meetings that have yielded either proposals and/or direct amendments to the constitutions and statutes of the Fraternity, most of them that I have witnessed within my 21 years of membership have not had as their direct intent to synergistically combine legislation with internal revenue growth and fundraising simultaneously.
Sure the proposed and implemented amendments have served us on various levels, but there have not been any paradigm-shifts other than the avoidance of lawsuits involving hazing for the most part.
Let's crack open the safe of what we thought was holy and move some things around (even if within a trial period or limited experiment within a province or certain span of the International Headquarters(IHQ)).
For heaven's sake, even this deserves its own number as a Present Tense Crazy Notion and I will number it here.
Present Tense Crazy Notion #5 created immediately and spontaneously is to allow trial periods or limited experiments within a various province or certain span of International Headquarters (IHQ).
I will come back to Present Tense Crazy Notion #4 before I lose this current train of thought. Present Tense Crazy Notions will become the acronym PTCN as well.
Most of the decisions inacted have been on a permanent basis and never temporary or for a known trial period. We have typically required that heaven and earth must move as well as the current phrase "boil the ocean" in order to get anything passed or rescinded. It has been an all-or-none proposition in most cases altogether.
Why not state up front that a certain decision may be revoked, amended, or revisited at a later date? Why not allow certain decisions to be put into effect within various provinces, chapters, or even individual members as a limited trial test as done by every pharmaceutical company known to man (as well as within the alleys or street corners mind you)?
Can an organization of human beings really ever consider itself as having made permanent decisions? Democracy evolves whereas a theocracy is infinite and permanent (it does not have to change for it is already perfect).
By not having this flexibility without requiring 2/3 of members present at a Grand Chapter for a sufficient quorum, we have limited the effectiveness of an entire organization based upon how many Brothers were typically physically present every two years within a city on a revolving chart--known as Grand Chapter Grand Conclaves.
Even when the Grand Board of Directors have had to make constitutional and statutes amendments, the decisions were supposedly on a permanent basis until the next Grand Conclave and never on a trial basis.
As you might can tell, the geographical and time-based restraints upon organizations is becoming (or has become) a huge pet peeve of mine within this or any organization that is supposedly global in nature.
By having such trial periods or experiments, we can obtain the best of both worlds in working out any organizational or single individual behavioral kinks, idiosyncracies, and unforeseen effects of potentially bad legislation while expanding to the entire Bond only those changes that will be truly (and proven) beneficial.
We should not have the mindset at any time that any legislation enacted will stay in place forever when living in a changing world and/or shield a party or individual(s) or idea or concept until the next Grand Conclave takes place.
Now let's revisit PTCN #4.
PTCN #4 is an attempt to 'play with' (for the lack of a better phrase at this moment) or better yet 'experiment' with the notion of the constitutional membership requirements of our organization.
Where has it been recorded of the rationale and proven minimum required load of membership? What is the dollar cost of administration upon IHQ for having a chapter of 7 undergraduate members and 10 alumni members?
What is the significance of such a constitutional requirement? I just realized that the 10 alumni members might be a historical reference to our 10 Founders, but even this has to be placed on the table as we know that only 9 returned to the yard the following semester due the family needs of one, and the inner workings were mostly created by 3 to 5 Founders altogether.
Most of these PTCNs that are coming down the pipe will tie my favorite leadership principle of M&M together. One M is money and the other M is for members although they can be reversed at any time on demand as needed.
Micro chapters would be allowed to exist without having the current 7 undergraduate and 10 alumni members requirement.
Is it not possible that some campuses, small towns, and/or cities could benefit from having a chapter of two or three in order to get the ball of achievement rolling initially and lay the foundation for future success, keep the local chapter alive or for rebuilding purposes 3 to 5 years later after a membership violation incident had taken place?
Sure, there would be inherent restrictions upon the amount of activity on some micro chapters but there would also be some micro chapters that would either outperform and/or outgrow larger chapters currently in place.
The whole overarching goal of these PTCNs is to fully release growth and achievement by any means necessary and by any measureable criteria currently in place or could be created.
A micro chapter status would definitely not hurt the esteem of members who are suddenly left as the chapter of 2 members as it is currently possible. It would just change the game and flip the script for new strategies, perspectives, and activities to be implemented.
Is it also impossible to currently believe that there could be 4 to 7 members within a chapter that are right now nothing less than dead wood for no other reason that they can be?;)
If the current membership requirements were expressed as being with the intent that out of the 7 or 10 there would basically exist a core of 2 or 3 who would essentially keep the chapter on top of its paperwork, financially viable, or out of trouble with the campus administration, then I would say "Ok, leave it alone";)
But as anyone knows that there will be those individuals that will rub someone of significance (such a college or university president or administrator) or some governing council the wrong way and put everyone on their bad side.
Removing and/or adjusting the current membership requirement would serve as a way to get and/or stay on the yard while allowing room and opportunity for future growth.
Another rationale is that the current route of expanding membership to a new campus or city is full of potential opportunities for hazing or misinterpretation of the expectations of what "Good Kappas are supposed to be about".
Why allow someone or some group the opportunity to plant weeds instead of seeds?
Why put the weight of a burden on the shoulders of someone (new or inexperienced members) incapable or unable to know how to remove it?
Peer pressure has done more to kill our organization than to motivate it.
But peer pressure can be turned around if one cares enough to use it as a medium.
Micro chapters could work (please note that I said could) well for both the undergraduate and alumni levels of membership.
They also could fail miserably and possibly no worse than what was experienced in Florida recently. It was a situation that screamed out for micro chapters if I have ever heard of one.
But even in the case of failure, the failure and damage would be minimized (with a few members) while the potential upside is limitless.
Dynamic micro chapters would indeed grow and attract quality members. In fact, there would clearly be a need for micro chapters to keep an internal journal or blog (viewable by worldwide Fraternity members only--various access issues could be determined later) of some type to discuss ways of dealing with growth and decay (although this could be a PTCN, I'll fry other fish first).
There is already a paid, officially-sanctioned role regarding undergraduates within our Fraternity to handle such activity and information.
If there is a consideration that micro chapters would not be conducive environments for Brotherhood, just ask anyone that was in such an environment like a line of 2 or any other scenario imaginable.
The focus is that micro chapters would not be expected to remain micro chapters for long.
On the other end of the spectrum, super chapters would be able to extend their reach and depth all at once.
The military model for organizational structure would be used for super chapters especially and expanded throughout the Bond.
Super Chapters theoretically might cooperate, compete with, or replace provinces as they are currently called and known as. Or better yet, why not allow provinces the responsibilities and authority that I am about to suggest for super chapters?
Super Chapters would be able to organize and deploy themselves anywhere worldwide based upon actual and perceived need without requiring prior permission from Grand Chapter.
One central theme surrounding the recent PTCNs is that successful chapters and individual members should be given incentives and additional rights and privileges for positive performance and achievement than what they are used to now.
Numerical size alone would be only one criteria in determining what is a super chapter (although it is the first within this proposal).
There are several provinces that are more than capable enough already and should be encouraged to branch out beyond their current geographical boundaries.
Maybe it is the case that the boundaries are not fully enforced or even exist but that the provinces have essentially believed that they exist based upon their actions.
But a super chapter would be able to have a meeting, event, or service program comparable to a provincial meeting now within any city it desires at anytime it desires.
Such events would be open to current members regardless of their current residence or membership or chapter affiliation.
Currently, provinces are simply bloated and overweight without any incentives to improve other than the number of Grand Chapter officers and appointments they have in comparison to other provinces as well as coverage within The Journal.
Super Chapters would be able to go anywhere and do anything to elevate the status and welfare of the Fraternity.
One criteria for such a status as super chapters would be the financial contributions to Grand Chapter (versus provincial dues currently paid).
Create a license for a super chapter based upon the number of members and/or affiliated chapters as well as their payment of a super chapter fee (or license) and let them demonstrate their worth worldwide.
The super chapter would be able to receive or assess a membership fee from its individual or chapter members as well.
For example, a super chapter from Michigan would be able to hold a regional meeting in Atlanta, New York, Los Angeles, or even within the Caribbean for members to attend workshops, award ceremonies, things normally done by provinces now, and donations to charities (regardless of charity presence locally, regionally, or nationally).
Such an event would stimulate the Fraternity worldwide and offer the opportunity for more diverse opinion, strategies, and oversight of activities than current provinces would have the capability and capacity for now.
There is more to come on PTCN #4 and other PTCNs already known.
I personally like to release each blog entry as soon it reaches a point of fatigue on my part and/or potential usefulness;)
Please share your thoughts and feedback!
Yours in the Bond!
During a recent phone conversation with a Sands of mine (someone with whom we were both initiated into fraternity membership at the same time), I mentioned something about several realizations and effects of turning 40 has had on me.
One of them is realizing that I tend to look at things primarily from a systemic perspective versus looking at certain events as if they are isolated.
If there is a problem with the system of anything, my line of eyesight, understanding, and experiences will pick up on it faster than anything else. My value for the endeavor becomes more enlightened or disillusioned as a result. Typically I will desire to change or see a change occur at that point.
Bottom line is that I recognize where we can construct positive change versus getting bogged down in the traditions and values that are deconstructive.
From the various literature, sermons heard, and perspective changing television and multimedia recently experienced, I have been able to somewhat create a perfect storm in finding jedi-like leverage and precision to come up with multiple present-tense crazy notions.
All of the present-tense crazy notions cannot be posted within this blog entry and some will require revisitation to fully go deeper for the real golden opportunities buried beneath the surface.
So let's get started with Present Tense Crazy Notion #4 while realizing that there is not a hierarchy or stronger priority or greater weight given to any of these. The number just reflects the order in which they were received in my mind.
The recent rash of crazy notions to be posted here will have a tremendous, positive financial impact upon the Fraternity as well as for any other organization that implements such ideas and concepts that would be considered heresy today or any other time period without a significant paradigm shift within its leadership and membership.
I do know without a doubt that this blog has appeared on the radar of my Fraternity at its current highest level and I must continue onward without regard to risk, sacrifice, or lack of possible reward or recognition.
On some level, it does serve a purpose even if it is to be used externally to my Fraternity.
Present Tense Crazy Notion #4 is a proposal that there should be both Micro and Super Chapters within Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Inc.
Although there have been multiple meetings and sessions of Grand Conclaves, Grand Board of Directors, provincial, and local chapter (and various boards) meetings that have yielded either proposals and/or direct amendments to the constitutions and statutes of the Fraternity, most of them that I have witnessed within my 21 years of membership have not had as their direct intent to synergistically combine legislation with internal revenue growth and fundraising simultaneously.
Sure the proposed and implemented amendments have served us on various levels, but there have not been any paradigm-shifts other than the avoidance of lawsuits involving hazing for the most part.
Let's crack open the safe of what we thought was holy and move some things around (even if within a trial period or limited experiment within a province or certain span of the International Headquarters(IHQ)).
For heaven's sake, even this deserves its own number as a Present Tense Crazy Notion and I will number it here.
Present Tense Crazy Notion #5 created immediately and spontaneously is to allow trial periods or limited experiments within a various province or certain span of International Headquarters (IHQ).
I will come back to Present Tense Crazy Notion #4 before I lose this current train of thought. Present Tense Crazy Notions will become the acronym PTCN as well.
Most of the decisions inacted have been on a permanent basis and never temporary or for a known trial period. We have typically required that heaven and earth must move as well as the current phrase "boil the ocean" in order to get anything passed or rescinded. It has been an all-or-none proposition in most cases altogether.
Why not state up front that a certain decision may be revoked, amended, or revisited at a later date? Why not allow certain decisions to be put into effect within various provinces, chapters, or even individual members as a limited trial test as done by every pharmaceutical company known to man (as well as within the alleys or street corners mind you)?
Can an organization of human beings really ever consider itself as having made permanent decisions? Democracy evolves whereas a theocracy is infinite and permanent (it does not have to change for it is already perfect).
By not having this flexibility without requiring 2/3 of members present at a Grand Chapter for a sufficient quorum, we have limited the effectiveness of an entire organization based upon how many Brothers were typically physically present every two years within a city on a revolving chart--known as Grand Chapter Grand Conclaves.
Even when the Grand Board of Directors have had to make constitutional and statutes amendments, the decisions were supposedly on a permanent basis until the next Grand Conclave and never on a trial basis.
As you might can tell, the geographical and time-based restraints upon organizations is becoming (or has become) a huge pet peeve of mine within this or any organization that is supposedly global in nature.
By having such trial periods or experiments, we can obtain the best of both worlds in working out any organizational or single individual behavioral kinks, idiosyncracies, and unforeseen effects of potentially bad legislation while expanding to the entire Bond only those changes that will be truly (and proven) beneficial.
We should not have the mindset at any time that any legislation enacted will stay in place forever when living in a changing world and/or shield a party or individual(s) or idea or concept until the next Grand Conclave takes place.
Now let's revisit PTCN #4.
PTCN #4 is an attempt to 'play with' (for the lack of a better phrase at this moment) or better yet 'experiment' with the notion of the constitutional membership requirements of our organization.
Where has it been recorded of the rationale and proven minimum required load of membership? What is the dollar cost of administration upon IHQ for having a chapter of 7 undergraduate members and 10 alumni members?
What is the significance of such a constitutional requirement? I just realized that the 10 alumni members might be a historical reference to our 10 Founders, but even this has to be placed on the table as we know that only 9 returned to the yard the following semester due the family needs of one, and the inner workings were mostly created by 3 to 5 Founders altogether.
Most of these PTCNs that are coming down the pipe will tie my favorite leadership principle of M&M together. One M is money and the other M is for members although they can be reversed at any time on demand as needed.
Micro chapters would be allowed to exist without having the current 7 undergraduate and 10 alumni members requirement.
Is it not possible that some campuses, small towns, and/or cities could benefit from having a chapter of two or three in order to get the ball of achievement rolling initially and lay the foundation for future success, keep the local chapter alive or for rebuilding purposes 3 to 5 years later after a membership violation incident had taken place?
Sure, there would be inherent restrictions upon the amount of activity on some micro chapters but there would also be some micro chapters that would either outperform and/or outgrow larger chapters currently in place.
The whole overarching goal of these PTCNs is to fully release growth and achievement by any means necessary and by any measureable criteria currently in place or could be created.
A micro chapter status would definitely not hurt the esteem of members who are suddenly left as the chapter of 2 members as it is currently possible. It would just change the game and flip the script for new strategies, perspectives, and activities to be implemented.
Is it also impossible to currently believe that there could be 4 to 7 members within a chapter that are right now nothing less than dead wood for no other reason that they can be?;)
If the current membership requirements were expressed as being with the intent that out of the 7 or 10 there would basically exist a core of 2 or 3 who would essentially keep the chapter on top of its paperwork, financially viable, or out of trouble with the campus administration, then I would say "Ok, leave it alone";)
But as anyone knows that there will be those individuals that will rub someone of significance (such a college or university president or administrator) or some governing council the wrong way and put everyone on their bad side.
Removing and/or adjusting the current membership requirement would serve as a way to get and/or stay on the yard while allowing room and opportunity for future growth.
Another rationale is that the current route of expanding membership to a new campus or city is full of potential opportunities for hazing or misinterpretation of the expectations of what "Good Kappas are supposed to be about".
Why allow someone or some group the opportunity to plant weeds instead of seeds?
Why put the weight of a burden on the shoulders of someone (new or inexperienced members) incapable or unable to know how to remove it?
Peer pressure has done more to kill our organization than to motivate it.
But peer pressure can be turned around if one cares enough to use it as a medium.
Micro chapters could work (please note that I said could) well for both the undergraduate and alumni levels of membership.
They also could fail miserably and possibly no worse than what was experienced in Florida recently. It was a situation that screamed out for micro chapters if I have ever heard of one.
But even in the case of failure, the failure and damage would be minimized (with a few members) while the potential upside is limitless.
Dynamic micro chapters would indeed grow and attract quality members. In fact, there would clearly be a need for micro chapters to keep an internal journal or blog (viewable by worldwide Fraternity members only--various access issues could be determined later) of some type to discuss ways of dealing with growth and decay (although this could be a PTCN, I'll fry other fish first).
There is already a paid, officially-sanctioned role regarding undergraduates within our Fraternity to handle such activity and information.
If there is a consideration that micro chapters would not be conducive environments for Brotherhood, just ask anyone that was in such an environment like a line of 2 or any other scenario imaginable.
The focus is that micro chapters would not be expected to remain micro chapters for long.
On the other end of the spectrum, super chapters would be able to extend their reach and depth all at once.
The military model for organizational structure would be used for super chapters especially and expanded throughout the Bond.
Super Chapters theoretically might cooperate, compete with, or replace provinces as they are currently called and known as. Or better yet, why not allow provinces the responsibilities and authority that I am about to suggest for super chapters?
Super Chapters would be able to organize and deploy themselves anywhere worldwide based upon actual and perceived need without requiring prior permission from Grand Chapter.
One central theme surrounding the recent PTCNs is that successful chapters and individual members should be given incentives and additional rights and privileges for positive performance and achievement than what they are used to now.
Numerical size alone would be only one criteria in determining what is a super chapter (although it is the first within this proposal).
There are several provinces that are more than capable enough already and should be encouraged to branch out beyond their current geographical boundaries.
Maybe it is the case that the boundaries are not fully enforced or even exist but that the provinces have essentially believed that they exist based upon their actions.
But a super chapter would be able to have a meeting, event, or service program comparable to a provincial meeting now within any city it desires at anytime it desires.
Such events would be open to current members regardless of their current residence or membership or chapter affiliation.
Currently, provinces are simply bloated and overweight without any incentives to improve other than the number of Grand Chapter officers and appointments they have in comparison to other provinces as well as coverage within The Journal.
Super Chapters would be able to go anywhere and do anything to elevate the status and welfare of the Fraternity.
One criteria for such a status as super chapters would be the financial contributions to Grand Chapter (versus provincial dues currently paid).
Create a license for a super chapter based upon the number of members and/or affiliated chapters as well as their payment of a super chapter fee (or license) and let them demonstrate their worth worldwide.
The super chapter would be able to receive or assess a membership fee from its individual or chapter members as well.
For example, a super chapter from Michigan would be able to hold a regional meeting in Atlanta, New York, Los Angeles, or even within the Caribbean for members to attend workshops, award ceremonies, things normally done by provinces now, and donations to charities (regardless of charity presence locally, regionally, or nationally).
Such an event would stimulate the Fraternity worldwide and offer the opportunity for more diverse opinion, strategies, and oversight of activities than current provinces would have the capability and capacity for now.
There is more to come on PTCN #4 and other PTCNs already known.
I personally like to release each blog entry as soon it reaches a point of fatigue on my part and/or potential usefulness;)
Please share your thoughts and feedback!
Yours in the Bond!
Monday, June 06, 2005
Present Tense Crazy Notion #3, But Somebody Already Beat Me To The Punch;)
During or near the end of my last post (Present Tense Crazy Notion #2), the follow up crazy idea popped into my head but I did not have the strength to go on.
Lo and behold while it was still within my spirit, I saw a couple of websites this past weekend that informed me that it had already happened and is still going on to a certain degree.
There are more than a few dirty secrets not just within Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Inc. but within all fraternities period. Then again, we must add the full slate of sororities to the accused mix as well.
There are more than a few episodes of directly and indirectly colluding together to maintain interorganizational harmony. Within such episodes, the mentality is that if we stay away from certain areas, then others who might become our competition would stay away from ours. It is truly, "Don't touch ours and we will leave yours alone".
I must admit that I never considered this idea until recently realizing that we are living within an age that nothing about our present sense of being organized human beings is untouchable.
Therefore what was accepted as the norm is now being placed on the table for discussion for possible change, rearranging, and further development.
When I saw the websites, I saw another one regarding an identical situation with Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Inc. that mentioned that the Interfraternity Council (IFC) legal counsel had advised its member organizations that "little sister organizations" should be immediately disbanded due to placing the organizations at risk of legal liability.
It says specifically:
"According to the IFC (The InterFraternity Council, governing body for white fraternities), auxiliary groups posed a threat to the single-sex status of Greek organizations which, under the U.S. Civil Rights Act, are allowed to discriminate against members of the opposite sex. But that status may be whittled away in the courts if Greeks maintain organizations of the opposite sex that perform many of the activities of a full member, such as paying dues and helping with pledging, while not enjoying full membership. This fear is underscored by a Nebraska court case in which a little sister (for a white fraternity) sued for, and won, membership in her fraternity because she was engaged in the same activities as the brothers."
Legal liability is the greatest fear of all modern-day Greek-letter organizations. Just mention to an officer the possibility of the group being sued, and the Red Sea that appears within the organization will suddenly open.
Organizational behavior, mindsets, and previous internal doctrine will suddenly rearrange themselves in efforts combining both disciplined order and suicidal chaos to stay alive and unfortunately, remain within the same terrible shape that the organizations currently exist.
Let me end the building suspense and confirm the idea within some minds by simply showing the link that have photos to visually express Present Tense Crazy Notion #3:
http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Vines/8490/kappkitt.html
Here is a link that revealed to me the extent at which young ladies have organized themselves within the aftermath of being left alone until the next fundraiser, social event, or service program is undertaken.
I have saved the images to my hard drive just for future reference in case the website suddenly disappears.
The impact of this Present Tense Crazy Notion #3 is that there are fraternity brothers who will say to themselves "If this is going to be the case, I might as well go to church and avoid having to pay dues".
My Brothers, this is the direction that you as an individual are clearly going in by force or by choice.
The gates of maintaining secret and separate organizations are going to fall by choice or by force.
My thoughts on this later. This is not a proposal at all, but just an identification of an idea that I myself would have never considered before. The rationale and pros and cons must be very interesting though.
Yours in the Bond!
Lo and behold while it was still within my spirit, I saw a couple of websites this past weekend that informed me that it had already happened and is still going on to a certain degree.
There are more than a few dirty secrets not just within Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Inc. but within all fraternities period. Then again, we must add the full slate of sororities to the accused mix as well.
There are more than a few episodes of directly and indirectly colluding together to maintain interorganizational harmony. Within such episodes, the mentality is that if we stay away from certain areas, then others who might become our competition would stay away from ours. It is truly, "Don't touch ours and we will leave yours alone".
I must admit that I never considered this idea until recently realizing that we are living within an age that nothing about our present sense of being organized human beings is untouchable.
Therefore what was accepted as the norm is now being placed on the table for discussion for possible change, rearranging, and further development.
When I saw the websites, I saw another one regarding an identical situation with Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Inc. that mentioned that the Interfraternity Council (IFC) legal counsel had advised its member organizations that "little sister organizations" should be immediately disbanded due to placing the organizations at risk of legal liability.
It says specifically:
"According to the IFC (The InterFraternity Council, governing body for white fraternities), auxiliary groups posed a threat to the single-sex status of Greek organizations which, under the U.S. Civil Rights Act, are allowed to discriminate against members of the opposite sex. But that status may be whittled away in the courts if Greeks maintain organizations of the opposite sex that perform many of the activities of a full member, such as paying dues and helping with pledging, while not enjoying full membership. This fear is underscored by a Nebraska court case in which a little sister (for a white fraternity) sued for, and won, membership in her fraternity because she was engaged in the same activities as the brothers."
Legal liability is the greatest fear of all modern-day Greek-letter organizations. Just mention to an officer the possibility of the group being sued, and the Red Sea that appears within the organization will suddenly open.
Organizational behavior, mindsets, and previous internal doctrine will suddenly rearrange themselves in efforts combining both disciplined order and suicidal chaos to stay alive and unfortunately, remain within the same terrible shape that the organizations currently exist.
Let me end the building suspense and confirm the idea within some minds by simply showing the link that have photos to visually express Present Tense Crazy Notion #3:
http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Vines/8490/kappkitt.html
Here is a link that revealed to me the extent at which young ladies have organized themselves within the aftermath of being left alone until the next fundraiser, social event, or service program is undertaken.
I have saved the images to my hard drive just for future reference in case the website suddenly disappears.
The impact of this Present Tense Crazy Notion #3 is that there are fraternity brothers who will say to themselves "If this is going to be the case, I might as well go to church and avoid having to pay dues".
My Brothers, this is the direction that you as an individual are clearly going in by force or by choice.
The gates of maintaining secret and separate organizations are going to fall by choice or by force.
My thoughts on this later. This is not a proposal at all, but just an identification of an idea that I myself would have never considered before. The rationale and pros and cons must be very interesting though.
Yours in the Bond!
New Entity with Kappa: Key Brothers!!!
I just saw an e-mail regarding the distribution of proposed changes to the Constitution and Statutes.
It mentioned:
"1. Distributed via email to any and all addresses on file of those
listed above.
2. Distributed through the next edition (Special Conclave Edition) of
the Confidential Bulletin.
3. Posted on the Grand Chapter Website.
4. Distributed via email to our current list serve and key Brothers to
distribute as appropriate."
Number 4 mentioned "Key Brothers" as if there is a current or potential need to restrict or guarantee the publication of potential changes affecting the entire Body to a critical few members.
This is clearly a Freudian slip that indicates the real need for the concept of "One Man One Vote".
If it is remotely considered that the masses may not fully be informed through the current means of internal news distribution, then we shall keep the core informed by those who have been preselected or judged to be efficient to inform the financial and active core.
What is not said is speaking too loud that we cannot hear what is said.
Where is the statement of the need to inform everybody?
Have we advanced to a state of financial strength to have effectively and agreeably write off an untold number to wine, women, and song? Have we thrown in the towel to say that they are unworthy, unlikely, and unnecessary?
Yours in the Bond!
It mentioned:
"1. Distributed via email to any and all addresses on file of those
listed above.
2. Distributed through the next edition (Special Conclave Edition) of
the Confidential Bulletin.
3. Posted on the Grand Chapter Website.
4. Distributed via email to our current list serve and key Brothers to
distribute as appropriate."
Number 4 mentioned "Key Brothers" as if there is a current or potential need to restrict or guarantee the publication of potential changes affecting the entire Body to a critical few members.
This is clearly a Freudian slip that indicates the real need for the concept of "One Man One Vote".
If it is remotely considered that the masses may not fully be informed through the current means of internal news distribution, then we shall keep the core informed by those who have been preselected or judged to be efficient to inform the financial and active core.
What is not said is speaking too loud that we cannot hear what is said.
Where is the statement of the need to inform everybody?
Have we advanced to a state of financial strength to have effectively and agreeably write off an untold number to wine, women, and song? Have we thrown in the towel to say that they are unworthy, unlikely, and unnecessary?
Yours in the Bond!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)