Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Brandon Adams Passes Away
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RonJohn" data-source="post: 559663" data-attributes="member: 2426"><p>The article pretty much says: On Sunday, the national chair of the fraternity sent out a notice that pretty much cancelled all recruitment activities. That the rules for the fraternity require an older supervisor for all recruitment activities. That the article's author received information that there were fraternity "candidates" and other fraternity members at a meeting without the older supervisor on Saturday evening. That meeting violated the rules of the fraternity.</p><p></p><p>The article does not say that anyone was subjected to hazing or was harmed by hazing. I can certainly be inferred. The articles author received information about unusual activity by the national organization. He then received information that around the time of the incident that the local chapter was violating fraternity rules. I have no issue with him reporting such facts. I do have a problem if some people take a few facts and make a hard conclusion based on them. I don't think the author did that. He did say that the actions by the fraternity, national and local, look suspicious, but he didn't accuse them of any actual wrongdoing. The actions of the fraternity do indeed look suspicious, but that of itself doesn't mean that they are responsible for what transpired.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RonJohn, post: 559663, member: 2426"] The article pretty much says: On Sunday, the national chair of the fraternity sent out a notice that pretty much cancelled all recruitment activities. That the rules for the fraternity require an older supervisor for all recruitment activities. That the article's author received information that there were fraternity "candidates" and other fraternity members at a meeting without the older supervisor on Saturday evening. That meeting violated the rules of the fraternity. The article does not say that anyone was subjected to hazing or was harmed by hazing. I can certainly be inferred. The articles author received information about unusual activity by the national organization. He then received information that around the time of the incident that the local chapter was violating fraternity rules. I have no issue with him reporting such facts. I do have a problem if some people take a few facts and make a hard conclusion based on them. I don't think the author did that. He did say that the actions by the fraternity, national and local, look suspicious, but he didn't accuse them of any actual wrongdoing. The actions of the fraternity do indeed look suspicious, but that of itself doesn't mean that they are responsible for what transpired. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What's the good word?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Brandon Adams Passes Away
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top