IFC postpones final decision on punishments

After several days of silence, the Interfraternity Council revealed that it will wait at least until its Oct. 16 meeting to determine the penalties for violating its ban on the open distribution of alcohol, which the council discussed during its Thursday, Sept. 25 meeting. Members remain committed, however, to the eventual establishment of punishments that will enforce the policy.

IFC had initially planned to approve the penalties at its Sept. 25 meeting and put them into effect after Homecoming weekend. Its members have postponed their vote on the definitive punishments for three weeks, however, in order to discuss the specifics of the new policy in more detail during the next two weeks.

Trinity senior Tom Sowers, president of IFC, could not be reached for comment.

Prior to Oct. 16, violators of the ban on open distribution will be subject to the older, more lenient IFC punishments, said Trinity senior Matt Ferraguto, president of the Psi Upsilon fraternity.

The interim period will serve as a trial for IFC, Ferraguto explained. The presidents of each fraternity have committed themselves to adhering to the ban on open distribution, he continued, and IFC is relying on them to maintain their word.

IFC members established the interim period before taking a definite vote Thursday in order to alleviate concerns that the punishments were too severe and to address the worry of a few that fraternity members had not discussed the measures thoroughly enough to approve them.

Ferraguto said IFC members just needed more time to "think."

"Some people just got really scared by the [new policy and punishments], so we thought we should get some more input from everyone to make sure that that was the one we really wanted," he explained. "The goal here is just to create penalties for violations which would make it so no fraternity would ever want to violate the policy, and we just want to implement a policy that would do just that."

A letter to the editor of The Chronicle, co-signed by all of the fraternity presidents, indicated that IFC has already installed new sanctions; however, individual signatories of the letter indicated otherwise in interviews with The Chronicle.

Trinity senior Rick Woods, president of the Kappa Alpha order, said IFC has not etched anything in stone yet. Rather, he said, sanctions are "still being worked on."

"It is going to be something that's fair but that makes it a serious issue," Woods said. "Most people see the need for change, but exactly what type of ramifications will be worked out over the next three weeks."

Despite their decision to postpone the vote, presidents of the various campus fraternities said they have vowed to enact punishments equally as severe as those that had been discussed. The current policy calls for the following punishments:

¥ A fraternity's first violation would lead to the loss of its spring pledge class-a penalty that could lead to the loss of University housing privileges if its membership consequently falls below the 80-percent occupancy limit required by the University;

¥ The second violation would lead to a fraternity's loss of both IFC and University recognition.

Fraternity presidents also wrote that they hope the student body will begin to focus on the entertainment and interaction provided by fraternity events, rather than the alcohol.

And unless students stop attending parties because of the lack of alcohol, fraternity presidents predict that the social atmosphere will remain relatively the same. Woods said that celebrations similar to KA's "Frottage on the Beach" party two weeks ago will be the prototype for future fraternity events.

"That's what we're going to see now: Instead of someone turning on a speaker in a commons room and putting on a dance mix and calling it a party, we're going to concentrate on having themes that will draw people," Woods predicted. "It will be the same parties, same DJs, same bands and same decorations. It shouldn't affect the social life on Duke's campus at all."

Discussion

Share and discuss “IFC postpones final decision on punishments” on social media.