menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events Topic
Topic: Jenny Hall Jones suspends all fraternity activity indefinitely
Page: 9 of 11
mail
person
Ohio69
10/17/2019 8:45 AM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
Here is the rest of the story. As the alumni band stood silent and at attention, there was a visable uneasy silence. I was standing directly across from Jenny Hall Jones and Nellis. Both were very uncomfortable and Nellis looked straight ahead and not at the band member who would be speaking. A marching alumni band member who was to the right of the side door of the old Baker Center turned slightly to his right and addressed the crowd standing on the west side of College Street. We all thought it was some sort of protest but as soon as the band passed and the parade ended, I headed across the street and talked with those who were closest to the "event." As it turned out, the alumni band member gave a tribute to the two young men who had been killed in a tragic car wreck 20 years ago and to whom Saturday's halftime show was dedicated.
I was standing right there on the curb arm distance from the drum line when the alumni band member gave the tribute. It was very well done. I wish he had a microphone so everyone could hear it. People were wiping away tears when he finished. I didn't see any protest at all.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/17/2019 12:14 PM
As the hits keep coming and the suspension keep mounting, anyone other than me believe these allegations had better be something serious besides drinking games and the things that many college kids do on their own in a given weekend?
mail
person
Robert Fox
10/17/2019 12:51 PM
You're not alone.
mail
The Optimist
10/17/2019 1:00 PM
Wait, the Rugby team was suspended???

Is that limited to Rugby or is this a systematic issue in club sports???

Seems to me following the precedent set by Jenny Hall Jones in suspending fraternities we should suspend all club sports teams as a precaution.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/17/2019 1:11 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
As the hits keep coming and the suspension keep mounting, anyone other than me believe these allegations had better be something serious besides drinking games and the things that many college kids do on their own in a given weekend?
Still notably absent from this thread: anybody willing to argue that the fraternities aren't hazing people, or to defend the behavior we all witnessed at OU.

Seems sort of notable, no?
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/17/2019 1:29 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
As the hits keep coming and the suspension keep mounting, anyone other than me believe these allegations had better be something serious besides drinking games and the things that many college kids do on their own in a given weekend?
Still notably absent from this thread: anybody willing to argue that the fraternities aren't hazing people, or to defend the behavior we all witnessed at OU.

Seems sort of notable, no?
I never witnessed any of this type of behavior. I did not need such groups and could make my own decisions. However, if you saw such blatant behavior over and over (that you describe on another post), what did you do to stop it? Was your inaction in fact a validation? Did you find this behavior so deplorable that you reported this hazing?


And as far as your question, no one knows what the hazing is, so unlike a couple, others are not willing to go rouge and suspend every organization on campus.
Last Edited: 10/17/2019 1:30:44 PM by BillyTheCat
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/17/2019 1:49 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
As the hits keep coming and the suspension keep mounting, anyone other than me believe these allegations had better be something serious besides drinking games and the things that many college kids do on their own in a given weekend?
Still notably absent from this thread: anybody willing to argue that the fraternities aren't hazing people, or to defend the behavior we all witnessed at OU.

Seems sort of notable, no?
I never witnessed any of this type of behavior. I did not need such groups and could make my own decisions. However, if you saw such blatant behavior over and over (that you describe on another post), what did you do to stop it? Was your inaction in fact a validation? Did you find this behavior so deplorable that you reported this hazing?


And as far as your question, no one knows what the hazing is, so unlike a couple, others are not willing to go rouge and suspend every organization on campus.
I addressed your first questions in the other thread. As I mentioned there, if you want to try and make this a referendum on my not doing enough to stop this, you're welcome to. But that feels like exactly the tract somebody would take who is trying to avoid addressing the question they were asked.

So I'll be more direct: is anybody here willing to make the argument that these organizations aren't hazing their members?

Because it actually feels a lot more like people are willing to accept that behavior and feel it's not that bad. Which is fine, I guess. But an odd stance to take without any knowledge of the actual accusations 11 months removed from the death of a student.

As for your second point, I agree -- nobody knows the specifics of the allegations. Aside from the people who have made the decision to "go rogue" and suspend all of these organizations.

I mean, for somebody who doesn't know what the accusations entail, you sure do feel comfortable making judgments about the validity of the suspensions.
Last Edited: 10/17/2019 1:53:35 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
person
Alan Swank
10/17/2019 2:01 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
As the hits keep coming and the suspension keep mounting, anyone other than me believe these allegations had better be something serious besides drinking games and the things that many college kids do on their own in a given weekend?
Still notably absent from this thread: anybody willing to argue that the fraternities aren't hazing people, or to defend the behavior we all witnessed at OU.

Seems sort of notable, no?
I never witnessed any of this type of behavior. I did not need such groups and could make my own decisions. However, if you saw such blatant behavior over and over (that you describe on another post), what did you do to stop it? Was your inaction in fact a validation? Did you find this behavior so deplorable that you reported this hazing?


And as far as your question, no one knows what the hazing is, so unlike a couple, others are not willing to go rouge and suspend every organization on campus.
I addressed your first questions in the other thread. As I mentioned there, if you want to try and make this a referendum on my not doing enough to stop this, you're welcome to. But that feels like exactly the tract somebody would take who is trying to avoid addressing the question they were asked.

So I'll be more direct: is anybody here willing to make the argument that these organizations aren't hazing their members?

Because it actually feels a lot more like people are willing to accept that behavior and feel it's not that bad. Which is fine, I guess. But an odd stance to take without any knowledge of the actual accusations 11 months removed from the death of a student.

As for your second point, I agree -- nobody knows the specifics of the allegations. Aside from the people who have made the decision to "go rogue" and suspend all of these organizations.

I mean, for somebody who doesn't know what the accusations entail, you sure do feel comfortable making judgments about the validity of the suspensions.
That's because depending on what they did, some of us may not consider if hazing. That's why the administration should say - "frat X, you have been accused of one of the six categories of hazing and list it" such as alcohol related violations. Giving someone a public wedgy might very well be all that happened and most of us would chuckle at that.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/17/2019 2:15 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
As the hits keep coming and the suspension keep mounting, anyone other than me believe these allegations had better be something serious besides drinking games and the things that many college kids do on their own in a given weekend?
Still notably absent from this thread: anybody willing to argue that the fraternities aren't hazing people, or to defend the behavior we all witnessed at OU.

Seems sort of notable, no?
I never witnessed any of this type of behavior. I did not need such groups and could make my own decisions. However, if you saw such blatant behavior over and over (that you describe on another post), what did you do to stop it? Was your inaction in fact a validation? Did you find this behavior so deplorable that you reported this hazing?


And as far as your question, no one knows what the hazing is, so unlike a couple, others are not willing to go rouge and suspend every organization on campus.
I addressed your first questions in the other thread. As I mentioned there, if you want to try and make this a referendum on my not doing enough to stop this, you're welcome to. But that feels like exactly the tract somebody would take who is trying to avoid addressing the question they were asked.

So I'll be more direct: is anybody here willing to make the argument that these organizations aren't hazing their members?

Because it actually feels a lot more like people are willing to accept that behavior and feel it's not that bad. Which is fine, I guess. But an odd stance to take without any knowledge of the actual accusations 11 months removed from the death of a student.

As for your second point, I agree -- nobody knows the specifics of the allegations. Aside from the people who have made the decision to "go rogue" and suspend all of these organizations.

I mean, for somebody who doesn't know what the accusations entail, you sure do feel comfortable making judgments about the validity of the suspensions.
That's because depending on what they did, some of us may not consider if hazing. That's why the administration should say - "frat X, you have been accused of one of the six categories of hazing and list it" such as alcohol related violations. Giving someone a public wedgy might very well be all that happened and most of us would chuckle at that.
Yeah, I'm well aware by now that people want to know about these allegations. But I don't actually buy that anybody claiming that would be satisfied were the University to name which section (s) of the Code of Conduct each organization violated.

I mean, you really think that minor step changes the mind of people who were, a few pages ago, positing an anti frat conspiracy?

In actuality, what would happen is exactly what happened in your post. If the University said that Organization A was accused of physical hazing, you'd go "well, that could be a wedgie, no big deal." And we'd be back to exactly where we are now.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/17/2019 2:20 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
As the hits keep coming and the suspension keep mounting, anyone other than me believe these allegations had better be something serious besides drinking games and the things that many college kids do on their own in a given weekend?
Still notably absent from this thread: anybody willing to argue that the fraternities aren't hazing people, or to defend the behavior we all witnessed at OU.

Seems sort of notable, no?
I never witnessed any of this type of behavior. I did not need such groups and could make my own decisions. However, if you saw such blatant behavior over and over (that you describe on another post), what did you do to stop it? Was your inaction in fact a validation? Did you find this behavior so deplorable that you reported this hazing?


And as far as your question, no one knows what the hazing is, so unlike a couple, others are not willing to go rouge and suspend every organization on campus.
I addressed your first questions in the other thread. As I mentioned there, if you want to try and make this a referendum on my not doing enough to stop this, you're welcome to. But that feels like exactly the tract somebody would take who is trying to avoid addressing the question they were asked.

So I'll be more direct: is anybody here willing to make the argument that these organizations aren't hazing their members?

Because it actually feels a lot more like people are willing to accept that behavior and feel it's not that bad. Which is fine, I guess. But an odd stance to take without any knowledge of the actual accusations 11 months removed from the death of a student.

As for your second point, I agree -- nobody knows the specifics of the allegations. Aside from the people who have made the decision to "go rogue" and suspend all of these organizations.

I mean, for somebody who doesn't know what the accusations entail, you sure do feel comfortable making judgments about the validity of the suspensions.
That's because depending on what they did, some of us may not consider if hazing. That's why the administration should say - "frat X, you have been accused of one of the six categories of hazing and list it" such as alcohol related violations. Giving someone a public wedgy might very well be all that happened and most of us would chuckle at that.
Yeah, I'm well aware by now that people want to know about these allegations. But I don't actually buy that anybody claiming that would be satisfied were the University to name which section (s) of the Code of Conduct each organization violated.

I mean, you really think that minor step changes the mind of people who were, a few pages ago, positing an anti frat conspiracy?

In actuality, what would happen is exactly what happened in your post. If the University said that Organization A was accused of physical hazing, you'd go "well, that could be a wedgie, no big deal." And we'd be back to exactly where we are now.
Let’s just ban all organizations! Ban all teams, get back to morality that this campus was founded on. Do away with Co-ed dorms and bring back curfews. This higher education stuff is degrading America enough.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/17/2019 2:23 PM
Should we cancel Halloween this year? I am worried their may be peer pressure among groups, some alcohol abuse and maybe even some nudity.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/17/2019 2:28 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
As the hits keep coming and the suspension keep mounting, anyone other than me believe these allegations had better be something serious besides drinking games and the things that many college kids do on their own in a given weekend?
Still notably absent from this thread: anybody willing to argue that the fraternities aren't hazing people, or to defend the behavior we all witnessed at OU.

Seems sort of notable, no?
I never witnessed any of this type of behavior. I did not need such groups and could make my own decisions. However, if you saw such blatant behavior over and over (that you describe on another post), what did you do to stop it? Was your inaction in fact a validation? Did you find this behavior so deplorable that you reported this hazing?


And as far as your question, no one knows what the hazing is, so unlike a couple, others are not willing to go rouge and suspend every organization on campus.
I addressed your first questions in the other thread. As I mentioned there, if you want to try and make this a referendum on my not doing enough to stop this, you're welcome to. But that feels like exactly the tract somebody would take who is trying to avoid addressing the question they were asked.

So I'll be more direct: is anybody here willing to make the argument that these organizations aren't hazing their members?

Because it actually feels a lot more like people are willing to accept that behavior and feel it's not that bad. Which is fine, I guess. But an odd stance to take without any knowledge of the actual accusations 11 months removed from the death of a student.

As for your second point, I agree -- nobody knows the specifics of the allegations. Aside from the people who have made the decision to "go rogue" and suspend all of these organizations.

I mean, for somebody who doesn't know what the accusations entail, you sure do feel comfortable making judgments about the validity of the suspensions.
That's because depending on what they did, some of us may not consider if hazing. That's why the administration should say - "frat X, you have been accused of one of the six categories of hazing and list it" such as alcohol related violations. Giving someone a public wedgy might very well be all that happened and most of us would chuckle at that.
Yeah, I'm well aware by now that people want to know about these allegations. But I don't actually buy that anybody claiming that would be satisfied were the University to name which section (s) of the Code of Conduct each organization violated.

I mean, you really think that minor step changes the mind of people who were, a few pages ago, positing an anti frat conspiracy?

In actuality, what would happen is exactly what happened in your post. If the University said that Organization A was accused of physical hazing, you'd go "well, that could be a wedgie, no big deal." And we'd be back to exactly where we are now.
Let’s just ban all organizations! Ban all teams, get back to morality that this campus was founded on. Do away with Co-ed dorms and bring back curfews. This higher education stuff is degrading America enough.
Looking at it objectively, do you think that trying to reframe my argument as akin to that hyperbolic garbage reflects well on you? Because from my vantage point, it's pretty clear you're incapable of supporting your views on their own merits, and are trying really hard -- in two separate threads -- to find completely unrelated points to argue against.

My point here all along is a very simple one. After last year's death, the University has no choice but to take a zero tolerance stance against hazing. Hazing can take place provided the University has plausible deniability, and that's how it's lasted for decades. But now that the plausible deniability is gone, the University has no choice from a liability standpoint but to take drastic action.

My argument isn't even a moral one. It's simply that this is the rational decision, regardless of what you think of it. It is far and away the least risky of the paths. Unpopular? Sure. Likely to lead to a bunch of old grads whining publicly? Sure. But that doesn't make it the wrong path.

You, on the other hand, are the one falling down over and over again trying to make this a moral argument. And failing pretty poorly in the process, I might add. And now, for whatever reason, are arguing that this is somehow a slippery slope towards banning co-ed dorms and higher education altogether.
Last Edited: 10/17/2019 2:33:37 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/17/2019 2:32 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
As the hits keep coming and the suspension keep mounting, anyone other than me believe these allegations had better be something serious besides drinking games and the things that many college kids do on their own in a given weekend?
Still notably absent from this thread: anybody willing to argue that the fraternities aren't hazing people, or to defend the behavior we all witnessed at OU.

Seems sort of notable, no?
I never witnessed any of this type of behavior. I did not need such groups and could make my own decisions. However, if you saw such blatant behavior over and over (that you describe on another post), what did you do to stop it? Was your inaction in fact a validation? Did you find this behavior so deplorable that you reported this hazing?


And as far as your question, no one knows what the hazing is, so unlike a couple, others are not willing to go rouge and suspend every organization on campus.
I addressed your first questions in the other thread. As I mentioned there, if you want to try and make this a referendum on my not doing enough to stop this, you're welcome to. But that feels like exactly the tract somebody would take who is trying to avoid addressing the question they were asked.

So I'll be more direct: is anybody here willing to make the argument that these organizations aren't hazing their members?

Because it actually feels a lot more like people are willing to accept that behavior and feel it's not that bad. Which is fine, I guess. But an odd stance to take without any knowledge of the actual accusations 11 months removed from the death of a student.

As for your second point, I agree -- nobody knows the specifics of the allegations. Aside from the people who have made the decision to "go rogue" and suspend all of these organizations.

I mean, for somebody who doesn't know what the accusations entail, you sure do feel comfortable making judgments about the validity of the suspensions.
That's because depending on what they did, some of us may not consider if hazing. That's why the administration should say - "frat X, you have been accused of one of the six categories of hazing and list it" such as alcohol related violations. Giving someone a public wedgy might very well be all that happened and most of us would chuckle at that.
Yeah, I'm well aware by now that people want to know about these allegations. But I don't actually buy that anybody claiming that would be satisfied were the University to name which section (s) of the Code of Conduct each organization violated.

I mean, you really think that minor step changes the mind of people who were, a few pages ago, positing an anti frat conspiracy?

In actuality, what would happen is exactly what happened in your post. If the University said that Organization A was accused of physical hazing, you'd go "well, that could be a wedgie, no big deal." And we'd be back to exactly where we are now.
Let’s just ban all organizations! Ban all teams, get back to morality that this campus was founded on. Do away with Co-ed dorms and bring back curfews. This higher education stuff is degrading America enough.
Looking at it objectively, do you think that trying to reframe my argument as akin to that hyperbolic garbage reflects well on you? Because from my vantage point, it's pretty clear you're incapable of supporting your views on their own merits, and are trying really hard -- in two separate threads -- to find completely unrelated points to argue against.

My point here all along is a very simple one. After last year's death, the University has no choice but to take a zero tolerance stance against hazing. Hazing can take place provided the University has plausible deniability, and that's how it's lasted for decades. But now that the plausible deniability is gone, the University has no choice from a liability standpoint but to take drastic action.

My argument isn't even a moral one. It's simply that this is the rational decision, regardless of what you think of it.

You, on the other hand, are the one falling down over and over again trying to make this a moral argument. And failing pretty poorly in the process, I might add. And now, for whatever reason, are arguing that this is somehow a slippery slope towards banning co-ed dorms and higher education altogether.
So it took 11 months to reach a zero tolerance stance? That’s exactly some people’s problem with this, and why with the known facts, this thing stinks to some.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/17/2019 2:36 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
As the hits keep coming and the suspension keep mounting, anyone other than me believe these allegations had better be something serious besides drinking games and the things that many college kids do on their own in a given weekend?
Still notably absent from this thread: anybody willing to argue that the fraternities aren't hazing people, or to defend the behavior we all witnessed at OU.

Seems sort of notable, no?
I never witnessed any of this type of behavior. I did not need such groups and could make my own decisions. However, if you saw such blatant behavior over and over (that you describe on another post), what did you do to stop it? Was your inaction in fact a validation? Did you find this behavior so deplorable that you reported this hazing?


And as far as your question, no one knows what the hazing is, so unlike a couple, others are not willing to go rouge and suspend every organization on campus.
I addressed your first questions in the other thread. As I mentioned there, if you want to try and make this a referendum on my not doing enough to stop this, you're welcome to. But that feels like exactly the tract somebody would take who is trying to avoid addressing the question they were asked.

So I'll be more direct: is anybody here willing to make the argument that these organizations aren't hazing their members?

Because it actually feels a lot more like people are willing to accept that behavior and feel it's not that bad. Which is fine, I guess. But an odd stance to take without any knowledge of the actual accusations 11 months removed from the death of a student.

As for your second point, I agree -- nobody knows the specifics of the allegations. Aside from the people who have made the decision to "go rogue" and suspend all of these organizations.

I mean, for somebody who doesn't know what the accusations entail, you sure do feel comfortable making judgments about the validity of the suspensions.
That's because depending on what they did, some of us may not consider if hazing. That's why the administration should say - "frat X, you have been accused of one of the six categories of hazing and list it" such as alcohol related violations. Giving someone a public wedgy might very well be all that happened and most of us would chuckle at that.
Yeah, I'm well aware by now that people want to know about these allegations. But I don't actually buy that anybody claiming that would be satisfied were the University to name which section (s) of the Code of Conduct each organization violated.

I mean, you really think that minor step changes the mind of people who were, a few pages ago, positing an anti frat conspiracy?

In actuality, what would happen is exactly what happened in your post. If the University said that Organization A was accused of physical hazing, you'd go "well, that could be a wedgie, no big deal." And we'd be back to exactly where we are now.
Let’s just ban all organizations! Ban all teams, get back to morality that this campus was founded on. Do away with Co-ed dorms and bring back curfews. This higher education stuff is degrading America enough.
Looking at it objectively, do you think that trying to reframe my argument as akin to that hyperbolic garbage reflects well on you? Because from my vantage point, it's pretty clear you're incapable of supporting your views on their own merits, and are trying really hard -- in two separate threads -- to find completely unrelated points to argue against.

My point here all along is a very simple one. After last year's death, the University has no choice but to take a zero tolerance stance against hazing. Hazing can take place provided the University has plausible deniability, and that's how it's lasted for decades. But now that the plausible deniability is gone, the University has no choice from a liability standpoint but to take drastic action.

My argument isn't even a moral one. It's simply that this is the rational decision, regardless of what you think of it.

You, on the other hand, are the one falling down over and over again trying to make this a moral argument. And failing pretty poorly in the process, I might add. And now, for whatever reason, are arguing that this is somehow a slippery slope towards banning co-ed dorms and higher education altogether.
So it took 11 months to reach a zero tolerance stance? That’s exactly some people’s problem with this, and why with the known facts, this thing stinks to some.
This isn't complicated, man. There was a death. It was investigated for 5 months. Then in the very first rush since the conclusion of the investigation into that death, the University received many complaints and took these steps.

It makes perfectly logical sense, as rush is the time where hazing's likely to be most severe and prevalent.

Is there a similarly logical explanation for your theory that this is a grand conspiracy against fraternities?
Last Edited: 10/17/2019 2:45:28 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
person
Alan Swank
10/17/2019 2:57 PM
Three more:

https://www.thepostathens.com/article/2019/10/suspension-...
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/17/2019 3:51 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
According to that article, the suspensions are applicable for any violation of the Student Code of Conduct, including Hazing. That could literally be anything.
mail
person
rpbobcat
10/17/2019 7:23 PM
Last weekend Six Flags Great Adventure held a 30 hour coffin challenge.

Google it.

You'll see that,with the exception of alcohol,within the 30 hours, they violated pretty much every one of O.U.'s hazing policies,and then some.

Yet,4000 people signed up for for the abuse.
Must have been the prize.
$600.00 and 2 Season Passes.
Guess not.

Was Six Flags condemned for the mistreatment of the 6 contestants ?

Nah,the media and the public ate it up.

If you read The Post article I put up, anything that can cause embarrassment is hazing.

So if the Chi O's made their pledges wear Store Brand make up.
Or the business frat made pledges wear brown shoes with a black suit,that
meets the definition of "hazing".

As I posted before,this is all 100% voluntary.
If you don't want to participate ,don't pledge.
If you don't like how you're being treated,quit.

We're talking about adults,not children.
Would love to see how some of these people would handle basic training.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/17/2019 8:06 PM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
Last weekend Six Flags Great Adventure held a 30 hour coffin challenge.

Google it.

You'll see that,with the exception of alcohol,within the 30 hours, they violated pretty much every one of O.U.'s hazing policies,and then some.

Yet,4000 people signed up for for the abuse.
Must have been the prize.
$600.00 and 2 Season Passes.
Guess not.

Was Six Flags condemned for the mistreatment of the 6 contestants ?

Nah,the media and the public ate it up.

If you read The Post article I put up, anything that can cause embarrassment is hazing.

So if the Chi O's made their pledges wear Store Brand make up.
Or the business frat made pledges wear brown shoes with a black suit,that
meets the definition of "hazing".

As I posted before,this is all 100% voluntary.
If you don't want to participate ,don't pledge.
If you don't like how you're being treated,quit.

We're talking about adults,not children.
Would love to see how some of these people would handle basic training.
BINGO was his name o. This is what’s wrong here! That would be against the student code of conductance it’ is so broad it’s BS. In 1 month how many groups have fallen into this. Give me a break.

A kid dies, a parents whose nightmare, thoughts and prayers, but we wait 11 months? That’s reactive, and it is now national news.
Last Edited: 10/17/2019 8:16:38 PM by BillyTheCat
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/17/2019 11:09 PM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
Last weekend Six Flags Great Adventure held a 30 hour coffin challenge.

Google it.

You'll see that,with the exception of alcohol,within the 30 hours, they violated pretty much every one of O.U.'s hazing policies,and then some.

Yet,4000 people signed up for for the abuse.
Must have been the prize.
$600.00 and 2 Season Passes.
Guess not.

Was Six Flags condemned for the mistreatment of the 6 contestants ?

Nah,the media and the public ate it up.

If you read The Post article I put up, anything that can cause embarrassment is hazing.

So if the Chi O's made their pledges wear Store Brand make up.
Or the business frat made pledges wear brown shoes with a black suit,that
meets the definition of "hazing".

As I posted before,this is all 100% voluntary.
If you don't want to participate ,don't pledge.
If you don't like how you're being treated,quit.

We're talking about adults,not children.
Would love to see how some of these people would handle basic training.
I mean, you just made up some minor things and then somehow concluded that they must be representative of what's happening here.

You all keep going on and on about how the most frustrating thing is how we don't know anything. So stop acting like we know anything.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/18/2019 3:17 AM
In 1985 they had concerts in the Convocation Center, and a Chess Club Member cut in line while I was waiting for Richard Marx.
mail
person
rpbobcat
10/18/2019 6:47 AM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Last weekend Six Flags Great Adventure held a 30 hour coffin challenge.

Google it.

You'll see that,with the exception of alcohol,within the 30 hours, they violated pretty much every one of O.U.'s hazing policies,and then some.

Yet,4000 people signed up for for the abuse.
Must have been the prize.
$600.00 and 2 Season Passes.
Guess not.

Was Six Flags condemned for the mistreatment of the 6 contestants ?

Nah,the media and the public ate it up.

If you read The Post article I put up, anything that can cause embarrassment is hazing.

So if the Chi O's made their pledges wear Store Brand make up.
Or the business frat made pledges wear brown shoes with a black suit,that
meets the definition of "hazing".

As I posted before,this is all 100% voluntary.
If you don't want to participate ,don't pledge.
If you don't like how you're being treated,quit.

We're talking about adults,not children.
Would love to see how some of these people would handle basic training.
I mean, you just made up some minor things and then somehow concluded that they must be representative of what's happening here.

You all keep going on and on about how the most frustrating thing is how we don't know anything. So stop acting like we know anything.
If you read my post,I didn't say anything about my comments being representative of what happened.

What I did say was that these could be considered violations of O.U.'s hazing policy.

Another example of what O.U. would consider hazing :

When I was a Boy Scout we had an initiation on our first overnight camping trip.
After it got dark,we were blindfolded and led into the woods with a cloth bag to catch the mythical "snipes".
We were pushed and prodded till a "snipe" went into our bag.

Then, at the camp fire, all the newbies had to go in front of the troop,and Scout leaders,get on our hands and knees,and chant,while bowing up and down :

"O Wa Tan As Iwas " until you understood "O Wa's" message.

When you got the message (oh what an ass I was) you whispered it to the Scoutmaster and got to open your bag to see the "snipe" (a rock).

I was the last one of my group to get it.
I'm still traumatized by the embarrassment. :-)

Want to see another example of what O.U. would consider hazing:
Google "Order of The Arrow" initiation,one of the Boy Scouts highest honors.
Last Edited: 10/18/2019 6:53:09 AM by rpbobcat
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/18/2019 8:25 AM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
Last weekend Six Flags Great Adventure held a 30 hour coffin challenge.

Google it.

You'll see that,with the exception of alcohol,within the 30 hours, they violated pretty much every one of O.U.'s hazing policies,and then some.

Yet,4000 people signed up for for the abuse.
Must have been the prize.
$600.00 and 2 Season Passes.
Guess not.

Was Six Flags condemned for the mistreatment of the 6 contestants ?

Nah,the media and the public ate it up.

If you read The Post article I put up, anything that can cause embarrassment is hazing.

So if the Chi O's made their pledges wear Store Brand make up.
Or the business frat made pledges wear brown shoes with a black suit,that
meets the definition of "hazing".

As I posted before,this is all 100% voluntary.
If you don't want to participate ,don't pledge.
If you don't like how you're being treated,quit.

We're talking about adults,not children.
Would love to see how some of these people would handle basic training.
I mean, you just made up some minor things and then somehow concluded that they must be representative of what's happening here.

You all keep going on and on about how the most frustrating thing is how we don't know anything. So stop acting like we know anything.
If you read my post,I didn't say anything about my comments being representative of what happened.

What I did say was that these could be considered violations of O.U.'s hazing policy.

Another example of what O.U. would consider hazing :

When I was a Boy Scout we had an initiation on our first overnight camping trip.
After it got dark,we were blindfolded and led into the woods with a cloth bag to catch the mythical "snipes".
We were pushed and prodded till a "snipe" went into our bag.

Then, at the camp fire, all the newbies had to go in front of the troop,and Scout leaders,get on our hands and knees,and chant,while bowing up and down :

"O Wa Tan As Iwas " until you understood "O Wa's" message.

When you got the message (oh what an ass I was) you whispered it to the Scoutmaster and got to open your bag to see the "snipe" (a rock).

I was the last one of my group to get it.
I'm still traumatized by the embarrassment. :-)

Want to see another example of what O.U. would consider hazing:
Google "Order of The Arrow" initiation,one of the Boy Scouts highest honors.
Exactly!!
mail
person
Alan Swank
10/18/2019 9:06 AM
Time to start singing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-Cs1qFAzkU
mail
person
rpbobcat
10/18/2019 10:03 AM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
Nope,no good.

The song makes multiple references to "Lord" and praying.

Could be considered offensive to Agnostics and Atheists. :-)
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/18/2019 3:05 PM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
If you read my post,I didn't say anything about my comments being representative of what happened.
Ah yes, you didn't say anything about your comments being representative. You just went on to wonder how "these people would handle basic training."

So you didn't conclude anything, aside from conclusions about the character of the people making the complaints.
Showing Messages: 201 - 225 of 265
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)