False Hopes in Daily Cal Moratorium Piece
It appears we have all been misled. Trust the Daily Cal once, shame on you. Trust them twice…
Apparently the moratorium is not going to be partially lifted single-handedly by Dean Kenney, as the Daily Cal alluded to in yesterday’s issue. When I spoke to student leaders about the article, they all viewed it with much shock and some skepticism. This might say something about the role of the “Task Force On Greek Life” in the administration, the role of students in the committee, or a combination of the two.
From one member of the task force, somewhat paraphrased: “It never happened. Dean Kenney has been discussing this since the meetings started. It’s probably being used as a ploy to get us to ‘behave’.”
Additionally, this does not even begin to consider the fact that allowing off-site drinking with third party vendors would seemingly create a situation where more drunk driving would be encouraged. Isn’t that why the moratorium was created in the first place? To stop DUIs and promote student safety?
In conclusion, all you fellow alcoholics, don’t get your hopes up just yet.
every once in a while, about every year or so, theres a great groaning and creaking, and a monstrous bureaucracy stirs in a dark cave somewhere beneath sproul plaza, and the earth shudders and the raspy voice of Dean Karen Kenney is heard just over the soapy gurgle of sproul fountain, reminding us, as our senses are overwhelmed with the foul, puke-inducing fallout of yet another OSL brain fart, that yes, virginia, she does exist, and this is what we pay her (and her entire office) many hundreds of thousands of dollars for… a mandatory online alcohol quiz for incoming freshmen.
Comment by can you say budget crisis? good, i knew you could. — July 29, 2005 @ 1:02 pm
so ben, if andy is gonna correct my english…ill help yall out a bit too.
‘facilitated’ isnt the word yer looking for. facilitated is like: “freed from difficulty or impediment”. the word youre looking for is like: “creating difficulty or impediment that pushes someone to seek a less desirable alternative”. i dont know what that word is, but i do know it aint ‘facilitated’.
WIENER.
Comment by mano... facilitating improvement of ben's writing since 2005 — July 29, 2005 @ 1:10 pm
If you agree with the word “encourage”, I’ll change it.
Or maybe “douchebag”.
Comment by Ben N. — July 29, 2005 @ 2:52 pm
ecourage is perfect. very nice work, ben.
in honor of your personal development, and in honor of the OSL’s doomed-to-fail anti-alcohol initiatives, you are invited to join me for a lunchtime whiskey on sproul. my treat.
Comment by mano... facilitating... stuff. — July 29, 2005 @ 3:15 pm
I’m sorry, I only drink on days that end in “y”.
How does Tuesday sound?
Comment by Ben N. — July 29, 2005 @ 3:29 pm
Bad News for Cal-colholics
KRON 4 and virutally every other MSM operation in the Bay Area has covered the problems with the fraternities on the Berkeley campus. Everyone reported the University’s decision to impose a moratorium on alcohol on campus for the frats. No…
Trackback by The Bay Area Is Talking — July 29, 2005 @ 5:18 pm
Benjamin [insert headshake],
you and I both know that off-site events don’t encourage drunk driving. Chapter-hosted off-site events provide buses to and from. Most chapters have a policy of keeping the location secret from its membership and guests until they arrive to further eliminate the possibility of drunk driving. The DUI that you’re referring to occurred after an on-site…well, not event…just casual drinking at a fraternity.
Be good now.
Mano, you never buy me drinks.
Comment by Lauren Karasek — July 29, 2005 @ 6:58 pm
Yes that is correct almost all off-site events are busing events (those that aren’t are events people walk to) but quite to the contrary Lauren, the Social Update clearly specifies where events are held. Although it is not sent to every Greek, it can hardly be called a secret document, I know for a fact many chapter presidents/social chairs forward it to their members.
Regardless, in the entire year that I was VPRM I was never made aware of an event related DUI, and I doubt that Greeks are going to move to drunk driving as an alternative.
“Be Good Now?”
No need to be condescending.
Comment by Ian Richardson — July 30, 2005 @ 12:30 am
The more events with alcohol that are involved, the more opportunities there are for bad things to happen like women being sexually assaulted by gross men.
Comment by Anonymous — July 30, 2005 @ 12:39 am
Then again, that could be said for all things. Like, “the more events that occur in the universe, the more opportunities there are for bad things to happen in the universe.” Still, that’s no argument for bringing the universe to a standstill.
Comment by Beetle — July 30, 2005 @ 1:10 am
well, i think there is only one solution that is going to work. Absolute prohibition of alcohol in America. I propose a constituitional amendment!!!
Comment by anonymous — July 30, 2005 @ 2:06 am
Ian- Ben and I are tight like that. No need to worry yourself over whether he finds me “condescending.”
And yeah, locations are available on social up-dates. However, many chapters (”most” may have been over stating it a bit), particularly sororities (who are more known for their off-site events), keep the locations as secret as possible from their membership for the purpose of curtailing drunk driving. It’s not that you couldn’t get the info if you really wanted to, it’s just that the President, social chair, and risk management chair are unlikely to tell you unless you can present a compelling reason.
Comment by Lauren Karasek — July 30, 2005 @ 2:09 am
Lauren -
The reality of the matter is that you are assuming that this phantom policy, had it existed, would have conformed to a Greek Social Code that was, for all intensive purposes, under negotiations and practically non-existant. Nowhere does it say these have to be invitationals, and not all fraternities and sororities might have forked over for expensive busing to all their events. In this instance, it is easily possible that a poorly designed loophole in a poorly designed moratorium policy was just going to encourage high-risk behavior by groups looking to push the envelope.
Comment by Ben N. — July 30, 2005 @ 2:24 am
lauren and ben, you two can discuss this further over whiskey on tuesday afternoon.
Comment by mano — July 30, 2005 @ 11:05 am
Sweet! Mano invited me to tuesday whiskey! I’ll take that as a nice way of saying “Lauren, Ben, shut up, I’m bored,” so we can debate the implications of the policy-that-never-was later. Ben, when was the last time I directed a wink in your direction?
Comment by Lauren Karasek — July 30, 2005 @ 2:05 pm
230 sound good? I have work in the mornings…
Comment by Ben N. — July 30, 2005 @ 6:13 pm
Lauren: aren’t we a little underage to be drinking, Ms. Greek community leader?
Comment by Anonymous — July 30, 2005 @ 10:33 pm
You too, Ben, Mr. Greek leader and student government representative?
Comment by Anonymous — July 30, 2005 @ 10:34 pm
Civil disobedience?
Comment by Ben N. — July 31, 2005 @ 2:34 am
haha, ok, lauren and ben, 2:30 sounds great… for us to enjoy a glass of “apple juice”.
Comment by mano — July 31, 2005 @ 3:43 am
We need a marijuana moratorium. The lines at La Burrita are getting absurd.
Comment by John — August 1, 2005 @ 2:45 am
It’s “for all intents and purposes”, not “for all intensive purposes” (cringe).
Comment by anon — August 2, 2005 @ 3:51 pm
No, intensive seems about right.
Comment by Beetle — August 2, 2005 @ 5:09 pm