Delta Upsilon chapter suspended for 'inappropriate behavior'

unfortunately, not surprising given mit administration's recent actions against student life and culture

soon, mit will be just like any other college: ordinary

I'd say fratboys doing dumb things is pretty ordinary.

MIT's recent bout of oppressing student life, creativity, and culture makes me dread the remaining 3 years I have here.

#1, they were shut down by their international organization, not by MIT.

I don't see how Well's death is relevant in this case nor why it was mentioned here.

For those unaware, Well's fell from his adjacent window after he rolled out of it while sleeping. He had opened it earlier in the night because he was hot.

Tech, please don't try to turn opinion against these gentlemen more than I'm sure it already is after this new release due to ignorance of an aside.

yo dead Colombo can eat a dick. a real big dick.

These actions are a ridiculous over reaction to very similar "unsanctioned events" that happen in EVERY frat/sorority and many college dorms all over the country - and have for generations. What happened to warnings and temporary bans prior to this drastic measure? Where is their due process?? This is absurd.

#7 No, NOT in EVERY frat/sorority. Believe it or not, some chapters are actually trying to improve the image of Greek life on this campus. It's hard enough setting incredibly high standards for our members and actually holding them accountable for their actions, without being stuck in the same black box as dumb frat boys and slutty sorority girls. When making generalizations as most people do, try to remember which individuals are actually giving Greek life such a shady image.

Last time I checked, shutting down a fraternity for repeated hazing incidents does not count as "oppressing student life"...

In case anyone cares what actually happened:

Word on the street is that they were hazing their freshman by making them hold eachother's penises while they were peeing.

I heard they killed a chick.

Good thing everything on the internet is true.

Wrong, I heard they sodomized a goat.

I heard it was a sheep

#8 No need to ask what fraternity you're in.

When PBE was punished, it was clearly stated why in the releases they were being investigated (and then punished) by MIT ("HAZING" - the actual word was used). Here, MIT only states it was "inappropriate behavior."

I'm curious to hear the official reason for suspending this harshly (worse than PBE's punishment). Until then, I'll hold back any snap judgments - something I suggest you all to practice before bashing your fellow schoolmates under the pretense of rumors and hearsay.

8, I can name a few other MIT fraternities much more deserving of being labelled as a negative detractor for the MIT Greek system than this one.

I don't understand why everyone's mad at MIT -- it was their Nationals that pulled them out, not the school. All the school did was revoke their right as a student group, which is just going along with what their Nationals did.

The article has an ambiguous 'which' in the first sentence. It should be clear that MIT kicked DU out of their house, not the international organization. I hope the writers fix that.

Yes people should be mad at MIT because they are kicking DU's members out of their house when PBE still got to live in theirs. Their international just suspended them from acting like a fraternity.

Don't the Boston FSILGs own their own houses? How can MIT kick people out of property they don't own?

I thought that was how PBE was allowed to stay in their house - they owned it and the land it sat on.

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/02/the-dark-power-of-fraternities/357580/

17: I was under the impression that DU's Nationals was the organization that made the decision to pull MIT's chapter out, after the chapter's actions were brought to their attention. DU's Alumni Corporation owns the house, so they will continue to own the house but not provide housing to the current (but now alumni-status) brothers. This is basically what happened to Beta. All MIT is doing is following DU Nationals' lead and de-recognizing the chapter as FSILG. (Although if some of the rumors are true, DU would have gotten de-recognized by IFC regardless of what their Nationals did)

Choo choo! All aboard the "MIT hates MIT students" hate train of hate! Nevermind waiting for facts to emerge, we're on a nonstop trip to Haterville and Conspiracytown!

#4/16, when fraternities "self police" and suspend their own chapter, MIT tends to levy a much lighter punishment than if MIT itself has to take action. DU nationals was most likely reacting to potential rulings from the school.

#18, yes, FSILGs own their houses, but they are technically registered as MIT dormitories, and the school can regulate them as such. The DU alumni corporation will probably hold onto the property until they can recolonize in two years. The same thing happened with Beta not too long ago.

The people to feel bad for here are the DU freshmen who were "hazed" (god knows what that actually entails, but if this anything like PBE, it probably wasn't that bad). They are put on immediate alumni status and can't rejoin DU, and they didn't even get to do much their freshman year because of the Boston Brohibition.

Agree with commenter #5. The fact that the author thought it was in any way relevant to include Rob Wells' death in this article is absurd - shoddy journalism in my opinion.

No "hazing" occurred.

"inappropriate behavior" occurred. (And we all know so much inappropriate behavior goes on in ALL houses. )

If it was hazing, they would have said "hazing." Obviously, hazing was not found to have occurred by the investigations that happened.

Stop feeding the rumor mill 22.

The national organization, with the support of the university shut down this frat, premised upon the nebulous assertion that "inappropriate behavior" took place during the January interim period. There is no information regarding what constitutes this allegation of "inappropriate behavior." Moreover, without an opportunity to learn of the charges leveled against them, or access to a process by which they could either defend themselves or test the veracity of the nonspecific claims, much less the credibility of the party who asserted them, the shut down seems an arbitrary and capricious punishment. While it is true that fraternities do not always enjoy the best of reputations, whether or not those reputations are deserved, it is wrong to form a net opinion premised upon prejudice, and feed it with rumor and innuendo until it acquires credibility through repetition. The writer of this Tech article appears to be interested in feeding the pot of speculation, rather than undertaking responsible inquiry and reportage. It would be wise to consider an incident at a Duke University fraternity a few years ago, where a guest with a malicious personal agenda, aided and abetted by a politically ambitious prosecutor indifferent to his legal responsibility as an officer of the court, and the combined cowardice of a university and local press playing to the "Animal House" prejudices, destroyed the reputations of several innocent lacrosse players. Moreover, that the national chapter took the initiative to close the DU Tech chapter does not establish that anything wrongful took place, or even that there was an investigation or process to explore whatever facts attend to the allegations leveled against it, and it's no surprise that MIT would defer to the national chapter. As last month's article in the Atlantic magazine makes plain, fraternities' national organizations, with the complicity of universities, are all too happy to throw their undergraduate members under the bus in order to insulate themselves from any suggestion of malfeasance. Perhaps the Tech writer's inclusion of the 2008 tragic accident at DU in this article wasn't just a gratuitous concession to those in his gossip community, but also an unintended acknowledgement of how the DU national organization and MIT are complicit in an effort to mitigate a damage judgment in the pending lawsuit engendered by that accident?

Just because the headquarters of Delta Upsilon didn't choose to share with the public what "inappropriate behavior" means doesn't mean that they didn't share it with the undergraduates, MIT administration or the alumni. They're not obligated to disclose details to a campus newspaper.

No one would ever use the word "hazing," even if that's what is happening, since "hazing" is against the Massachusetts General Laws, so saying "hazing" could imply some criminal liability

#25, how do you know that DU was not informed of the "charges" or given an opportunity to respond? We only know what little information has been released publicly.

27, my guess is said poster is an individual involved. Again, just an assumption with no basis in fact - but I think, as with all accusations, deserves some investigation as to the validity of his/her claim.

28, I direct you to the article from Sept 24, 2010, titled "PBE suspended by IFC for hazing." Then IFC prez explicitly calls their actions "hazing." Until the specifics come out (which I have a feeling they will), im trying to take the higher ground and withhold any aggressively negative assumptions about what this "nebulous" term "inappropriate behavior" entails.

DU was closed by their national headquarters. The national office has forbidden DU to operate as a fraternity, which required the local DU alumni corporation to move the undergraduates out of the house. MIT's response is to provide dormitory housing for all of the students. The alumni corporation retains a Boston Dormitory License, and will certainly continue to operate the building as a residence for the benefit of other MIT students until some time after the chapter is recolonized beginning two years from now. MIT is not a villain here.

It was widely known that DU hazed, and did so fairly aggressively by MIT standards. I think it's fairly common knowledge that at the very least they had a huge party where they destroyed the house and then have the freshmen clean it up at the start of their initiation, and that other things went on during their initiation program.

I don't get the outrage or the fact that people are pretending it wasn't something "bad." Their Nationals, who has a high tolerance for these kinds of things, thought that it was disturbing enough that they closed down their high profile MIT chapter. Maybe it wasn't hazing they got in trouble for, but it is fair to say it was widely known they were doing things they could get in trouble for. You can't say just because The Tech didn't announce the charges that DU wasn't doing anything wrong.

#30 I would love to know where you get your information. Maybe they should put you in charge because neither MIT's or the International's investigation had any real evidence to them beyond rumors.

31 It's not like after people go through initiation they never talk about it ever again. Pledges talk to girlfriends, brothers drink and talk with friends and teammates. Some people deaffiliate, or don't care about secrets after they graduate.

Clearly MIT and DU National had more than rumors to kick a house off campus for three years. Clearly MIT is approaching this from a PR perspective, "inappropriate behavior" is purposely vague so this doesn't get picked up and make a big stink like previous fraternity stories.

#32 being a private institution, the international fraternity doesn't need evidence to do whatever they want to chapters. This goes for pretty much all fraternities. There is no evidence that I've seen that they had evidence at all.

National Fraternity organizations have the least tolerance to hazing, as they're the ones liable.

This might be TFM but it's spot on the money.

http://totalfratmove.com/nationals-doesnt-care-about-you/

This is the first time that a hazing case has come up since the MIT fraternities voted to amend the IFC Judicial Committee bylaws to give jurisdiction over any "hazing" cases straight to the school. MIT now gets to turn it over to the chapters nationals and let them be the bad guy.

MIT is supposed to defend its students. Instead it sold out this chapter and gets to wipe its hands clean. But the blood's still there.

#34 Blood? You have got to be kidding me.

I enjoy penis. Do you?

I enjoy penis. D U?

At least other houses now have a shot at some water polo kids.

Yes, I DU indeed.

Let's keep in mind that at the end of the day, these guys are all MIT students just like. Not some stupid frat boys, not a bunch of arrogant pricks, but just regular MIT students who have just lost their home, their support network, and just had their brotherhood splintered. Whether or not the allegations are true, this isn't about judging this guys. Most of the people saying what happened on this thread are mostly dead wrong about everything that has happened and are just relying on rumors, hearsay, and accounts very far removed from the source. I would like to think MIT students are better than that, and would try to avoid throwing out hurtful comments not based on fact.

Yesterday the Senior Director for Strategic Planning and Alumni Relations at MIT, Bob Ferrara, sent an e-mail to DU alums which stated in part:

"Here's what happened. MIT received allegations of inappropriate behavior during unsanctioned events over the January Independent Activities Period. MIT launched an internal investigation that included interviews with chapter leaders and brothers. The Institute also shared the allegations with DU's international headquarters, which temporarily suspended the chapter pending the findings of its own investigation.

Delta Upsilon headquarters then conducted its own investigation and issued a report, which was shared with the chapter leadership and the DU board. Based on its findings, DU's board voted to officially suspend the chapter until spring 2016, effective immediately. In a letter sent to the current chapter president, DU headquarters stated, "This suspension is due to the Technology Chapter's violation of the Fraternity's Loss Prevention Policies." MIT supports the DU board's decision to suspend the chapter."

The "Loss Prevention Policies" can be found on DU International's website.

http://www.deltau.org/nosecrets/lawsandprocedures/lossprevention

23 - Shoddy journalism, from The Tech? Impossible!

#33: "clearly?" Really? How is it you are so abundantly "clear" about what transpired in actual fact, given Mr. Lim's "reporting?" DU tell.

"Clearly" he or she is getting their information from someone more in the know.

MIT IS the villain - because the "investigation" was conducted by 2 individuals who work for MIT. Not DU international. MIT.

One of the MIT investigators" appears to have a vendetta against DU because he was called for inappropriate postings on Facebook - the postings were an attempt to smear DU.

The "investigation" was apparently initiated by an anonymous hotline tip. The need for anonymity should be clear. But, so should the possibility that the tip came from a jilted student looking to get even. Possibly even a student who, rather than being forced to consume alcohol, was denied it.

The two "investigators interviewed individual DU members and rushes without representation in an attempt to intimidate them. DU members did not corroborate the stories the "investigators" wanted to hear and where called "Liars" and threatened with police action.

In the end, the "investigators" were unable to gather actual proof. Yet, they pressed their case DU International anyway and apparently were able to convince them to take these insane actions.

It is the lack of evidence that is the reason for the "inappropriate behavior" wording. This has left the DU members feeling that MIT is against them in every way and they are powerless. The ruling was capricious and arbitrary.

Greek life is important at MIT and this ruling has a huge impact on the affected members. Rather than circling the wagons, President Reif should be protecting his students:

1) Allowing the DU members due process.

2) Taking a serious look at his own staff and how they perform their duties.

Hey everyone, it's Holy Week, so the question today is "What would Jesus do with DU?"

I have it on high authority it involved "alcohol and hazing". Details TBA. (Even we DU alumni don't know them yet.)

One thing that bothers me is that MIT itself "shared the allegations with DU's international headquarters" (per MIT).

- Mark Suchon '76 former MIT DU president and MIT IFC chairman

Mark Suchon,47, you are wrong and you of all people should be ashamed of yourself for spreading falsehoods about your own fraternity. If those allegations were true, then MIT and DU would have used them instead of the nebulous wording they distributed to all stakeholders and outlets. You should really think before you speak. Personally, I don't care who you used to be.

Having lived through the Fall of the House of SAE in 1999, I think it fair to say that none of MIT, the National fraternity, and the local alumni corporation ever close a local chapter without having conducted an investigation and having determined there is merit to the reports of misconduct. One may disagree with the appropriateness of the punishment imposed and/or question the motivation of the entity imposing it, but it is unlikely the action was taken without clear evidence of wrongdoing. Behavior that threatens the continued existence of either all FSILG housing in Boston or the entire FSILG community at MIT cannot and should not be tolerated by the FSILG community.

Hey Mark, instead of just using buzzwords, why don't you just go over and talk to the DU's seeing as your an alum so you can stop spreading rumors and hearsay.

"Anonymous" (why is that?)#48, I honestly provided all the info I know at this time. I have received info (as DU alum) perhaps not generally known publicly.. yet. I have not spoken any falsehoods, and it baffles me why someone would make that accusation.

I feel like the DU alum probably knows what he is talking about.

The key part of your comment "is all the info I know at this time". All that serves to do is increase rumors and hearsay.

46, Jesus would forgive DU and not give them such a ridiculous punishment for something they don't even have hard evidence for, just aligations. Also, Jesus also say that DU is the devil from hell. In addition, MIT has done absolutely nothing to help the DU fraternity guys advocate, it's absurd! Actually, MIT started this whole damn thing!

What happened to being nice to people? Everyone here is or was an MIT student. Have some basic respect.

To be fair, DU started this whole thing when they hazed their freshmen

Mark "...it baffles me why someone would make that accusation"

Now you know how the DU guys feel. Absolutely baffled.

Anyone can say anything else they like. What is needed is actual proof. Not some MIT "investigator" picking and choosing which stories to believe. I know some of the DUs and whenever I've joked with them in the past about anything that sounds even a little like hazing they all say the same thing: "We don't haze".

DU is not a hivemind.

Yeah, uhh... sounds a lot like good old-fashioned fraternity brainwashing. Nice job, 57.

59, or maybe they didn't haze? Ever think that could be the situation here?

Stop accusing these guys of things they have not been explicitly charged with.

You could at least stow away the pitchforks until it's been explained fully. If this follows the pattern of most other serious fraternity discipline issues, we'll know the details soon enough. Have some patience before judging everyone prematurely.

But they do...

61, And if that's the case, it will be said so surely when MIT has to answer what this "inappropriate behavior" is that occurred that apparently earned such a harsh punishment. And then I'm sure you'll go galavanting down your hall all righteous, basking in a million "I told you so's." My congrats on rushing to judgement surprisingly correctly if that ends up being the case. Sadly, even it ends up NOT being hazing, I'm sure you'll still be exalting the same rumors you're prepetuating now.

Regardless, until it's explained by facts/evidence (and not your unsubstantiated accusations), you should hold your tongue.

I'm the real Mark Suchon! The other Mark Suchon is a fake!

- Mark Suchon MIT '76

#62 - "Hold your tongue"? Do you think #61 is your servant or something?

Many people here have talked to DU brothers (former and current), and know that hazing happens there. We don't need MIT to make an official ruling on what we know first-hand.

64, interesting. I know and have talked to several alumni and current brothers as well and they say the opposite. So, who's right here?

Also, a minor correction: you can't know something "first-hand" by being told of something that may or may not have happened when you weren't there. First-hand knowledge comes directly from actually experiencing or seeing it.

Quoting the IFC president, we as a student body and community ought to "refrain from speculating about the possible causes of this action" until it's actually explained. Speculation spurs rumors and potential falsehoods. The fact is, we as outsiders won't know what is true or false until those involved in the punishment/investigations issue further explanations. Furthermore, what we believe and don't believe will be plucked from that speculation mill most likely based upon our own personal (albeit perhaps subconscious) biases.

What you are failing to comprehend that so many on this thread are advocating is to not rush to speculation and judgment until actual facts are released explaining what this "inappropriate behavior" was. Could you be right? Yes. BUT could you be wrong? Yes, and, in such a case, you only succeed at besmirching the name of (should you be wrong) an innocent chapter.

Anyone who thinks that MIT has some sort of animus towards the FSILG system is clearly blind to the facts. Consider

1. the millions of dollars MIT has poured into infrastructure improvements: professional installation of POE ethernet and WiFi in every house and more recently installing gigabit fiber to extend MITnet into every house in Boston

2. the thousands of dollars MIT is spending to help the FSILGs pay for professional assistance in obtaining new occupancy permits from the City of Boston after the City withdrew all of them.

In my experience with other universities as a volunteer representative of my own fraternity's National organization throughout the Northeast, I've not seen a single university, nor have I heard of one in other parts of the country, that comes even close to being as supportive of the Fraternity, Sorority, and Independent housing system as MIT.

Thank your lucky stars you are fortunate enough to be part of the MIT FSILG system.

The sentence has been passed; the crime may or may not be revealed, eventually.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?vxoTzLLZMrKc

There are plenty of instances of frats losing their status at other schools. We need to know what happened in more detail. It is also important to know that as these students transition into dorms, the 'inappropriate behavior' (done by whomever) is not repeated there. You have to have standards, so some who are posting here have to stop acting like spoiled children who do not like being disciplined.

Please read comment # 25. May DU National MIT re-consider for the benefit of all MIT students, alumni, families and The DU Tech brotherhood. Closure of 'The House', more importantly, 'Their Home' -- home to dozens of stellar young men -- is not the answer. When and if a mistake is made, you work your smartest and hardest to correct it. Do not kick the baby out with the bath water; do not ever participate in destroying a family! Brotherhood, sisterhood, supportive extended families and communities are critical to each of us and to civilization. Please do not be harsh or too quick to condemn especially when these are the best and brightest, disciplined, thoughtful, responsive young students in the developmental stage of life. Not one is yet 26 that I can see on-line. Isn't it age 26 when the brain is fully developed? GoogleUCSB Deltopia where 122 arrests were made, countless injuries occurred, taxpayers spent hundreds of thousands hiring add'l security in an effort to protect students from themsrlves and property. UCSB's reputation is horrific! Chancellor Wang repeatedly turns a blind eye to major criminal offenses plus minor one's by UCSB's weekend practices: Trash cans on public streets filled with margaritas, Mai-Tai's ... served to any young teen 13 for the taking. Criminal, yet no punishment except occasionally for one lone scapegoat. DU Tech is the good standard, a brotherhood of responsible, responsive men who reflect highly on MIT. Wasn't there recently an awards ceremony in Kresge Auditorium to honor DU Brothers for GPS motorcycle helmet design? What about the 2 new MIT records swim dive set by 2 DU brothers?! Bringing honor to DU, MIT, and to each of us associated with MIT is what students do .

Closure of their Home. Destroying a family. Inexcusable! Unnecessary. It's time for reconsideration and a directional change by those in authority with the power plus inner strength to acknowledge a mistake.

If your frat is built on hazing, it should not be preserved. Period.

Lose your home? your family? for perhaps an unproven not fully investigated, not adjudicated claim...

Can you, #71, imagine Restorative Justice. A process whereby after due process, students make amends? Outstanding students learn from mistakes. They Change their practices.

Would you advise expelling every student, or on this case removing students from their home and family, for whatever the alledged mistake, that may or may not have occurred? Thorough, thoughtful inquiry is requested; then may the punishment -- the discipline -- fit the crime. Closing down DUs House, their "home" is beyond reasonable.

No one deserves to lose their home family this way. Question #7-: Are you an American? Aware of due process? Facts. interpretation of facts. One person's version vs another's when both observed and experienced the same thing st the exact dame tome? Consider please learning curve of those in developmental stages of life. Shucks every student I know and Foster kids I've had make mistakes, but the Court take away stability, their home and 'borrowed' family. Rather some judges understand discipline first. At a a trial was it proven there was intentional, significant, permanent injury, or bodily harm.

BTW HazingPrevention.org INTENTIONAL harm, abuse ... Ignorance vs stupid. Under-informed, unproven allegations, unaware of vs knowingly, intentionally doing something stupid. I've done stupid things and you may have too. Life happens. Regrets, I've got some you may too. However, I don't lose my home or family; I learn from my mistakes. I make amends. Move forward. Again, if there was indeed a proven offense, which we don't know, may disciplinary action be restorative and not include dismantling a brotherhood and taking away the home of these MIT students. Think: it could be you next.

What confuses me is that if this was (as alleged by commenters) an issue of hazing the freshmen, and it was reported, why are these freshman being punished by having the fraternity closed down and being made "alumni" who are not allowed to rejoin their fraternity nor any other fraternity? Do you think that the next time there is hazing or questionable practice (if this was the case), that they will speak up? I doubt it. Seems like the victims are being victimized twice to me--a parent

#72, this is not the house's first offense.

Hazing "taking an action or creating any situation that produces in another person mental or physical discomfort, embarrassment, harassment or ridicule."

To me, it appears as if the interrogation process that the freshmen were submitted to by 2 MIT officials falls under this definition. Several have visited S3 due to these interrogations. All of them are far more devastated by the loss of their fraternitytheir support system.

Don't you think that if they felt truly "hazed" by their brothers they would have left DU rather than be traumatized by it's suspension.

74: Nor is any other house still existant free of any offenses.

Your point?

75 - That's a pretty twisted form of victim blaming.

If the fraternity system is systematically causing harm to people, it should go.

That said, I don't think every fraternity at MIT is this fucking dumb, and it's a pity that other houses get looked down upon for some houses that do have the stereotypical fratboy problem.

For those wondering if this is a case of a fraternity house's behavior spiraling out of control due to too few checks and balances, is it possible that the same could be said for the review process used to shut down the Tech Chapter of DU?

Why haven't any of the so-called victims of this situation stepped forward with confessions and descriptions now that "justice" has been served? How is it that - in this day and age of excessive media leaks - no details have leaked about events that happened 3 months ago?

How is it that these transgressions, worthy of shutting down a fraternity with 112 years of history, are not sufficient for any expulsions from MIT?

Is it possible that those who actually know anything - the brothers of the fraternity house - are hopeful there's still a chance of the decision being reversed and are afraid to offend the parties who hold them in jeopardy - MIT and DU International?

And, while everyone is afraid to come forward with the truth - both witnesses and the prosecuting authorities - more clouds continue to hang over the fraternity and reduce the chances for any possibility of correction... just in case... there's a small chance... the review case has been flawed or compromised.

Yes, am I am alum with some familiarity of the heritage of what has gone on at DU in the past. While there, we did some things that were embarrassing and immature, but I don't believe that's the exclusive purview of fraternity members. I am not a recent enough alum to know if the chapter's traditions have evolved into something harmful. If they have, that's a shame and appropriate punishments should be meted out, up to including shutting down the chapter. However, it's far from clear that that shutting down the chapter is appropriate for what happened, as what happened is not defined. Based on what I have been able to gather, I do not share the SAE alum's (comment above) confidence that a good process was followed by either MIT or DU International.

Ironically, DU's motto is, "Justice our foundation."

For reference, here is the Atlantic article referenced prior in these messages: http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/02/the-dark-power-of-fraternities/357580/

Seriously, what is it with the victim-blaming in this thread?

Maybe the victims don't want to speak out because their so-called "brothers" will shit all over them and potentially attack them (physically or socially) for the closure of the house instead of placing blame where it rightfully belongs.

Maybe the victims don't want to live in an abusive environment, and also don't want to become the center of any sort of media frenzy.

If you have issues with how DU's international deals with this, you can take it up with them. That said, I doubt they closed down the house due to normal immaturity; they'd have to close down a lot more houses if that were it.

#80 - I hope you're not suggesting it's wrong to even question the process.

I believe there's more process-blaming going on here than victim blaming. The process followed to shut down DU has been opaque and has left many in the community confused about what exactly happened, the severity of the punishment, as well as what specific lessons were to be learned. For example, where is the line between hazing and your "normal immaturity?" (or, better, "inappropriate behavior" and "normal immaturity?")

For your points, if there are victims of hazing and they have suffered enough that an entire house has to be shut down, then shouldn't a little more of the specifics of that be made clear to all - else, how are others to learn from this lesson? There are ways of making it clear what these infractions were without making the complainants known. For example, it's not clear that those who complained weren't upperclassmen. That said, it's likely that those who felt victimized are well known within the fraternity and the MIT community. Has any of your speculative abuse occurred? Also - do you believe anyone who felt so victimized by an event in January would continue to live in the house after that point, in spite of the clear fear and emotional duress that clearly would have caused? And, yet... did anyone move out of the house during that period?

Why are you so confident to doubt that it was more than just "normal immaturity" or that DU international was the guiding hand in this decision? Or, are you just speculating? Or, are you questioner-blaming?

#81 - I haven't heard any whining from current DU brothers. Frankly, for the rest of us, it's none of our business.

DU International shut them down via their process. Of course they were the guide here.

Please read up on, say, domestic abuse. Many things carry over here - like victims not feeling empowered to leave just because they were abused.

Recognition of domestic abuse is relatively new. Until recently it was rare for victims of spouse abuse to do anything but shut up and deal. Same with child abuse. Infants murdered by parents were labeled as having died of SIDS (Who'd hurt their own baby?). And those who suspected this was going on next door-mind your own business! Does it involve you? No? Then shut up! Times change. Some of you up in arms about the frat would also be the first to say that a high school should not simply accept bullying as a natural outcome of a social pecking order. You'd be outraged if your own child or your brother or sister, or you, were bullied in high school. You'd call on the school to do something. Same with abusive conduct in the work setting. Should an employee be allowed to be humiliated and abused to keep a job? You's say no. Nobody should have to accept purposely being humiliated and/harmed especially by those who claim to care about them. Within institutions we (the public) charge those who run the institutions to keep things safe and free of degrading experiences. If a student were killed or were so humiliated and debased that he/she took his/her own life due to shame, many would be quite quick to blame MIT. Suicides are less common in social contexts that provide ongoing supportive environments, by the way. Given the talents of MIT students, one would think they could conjure up some other way to bond that does not include humiliation and disgrace. Hazing is so 1980s. I'm not, by the way, assuming that whatever happened in this frat was due to hazing. Nor do I assume the public should be informed about the reasons behind the action-not so. I'm responding to the posts here. We don't know what happened with the frat. It's destructive to speculate and I'm not doing that-I'm responding only to these posts-many of which are ill informed about basic human behavior. It's also surprising how many posters have't read solid articles about frats and hazing (in reputable news venues) and bullying behavior. But for those of you suggesting that anyone who has been a victim would come forward or tell the public what happened obviously aren't course 9 majors and haven't read any behavioral research over the past decade. MIT has a long history of being ahead of the curve and, when they aren't, of correcting (and admitting) when they have erred. I'm disinclined to think that they have somehow lost their marbles when it comes to frats and/or upholding the MIT climate.

To add: Also, to those of you calling for release of details, I'd like to remind you of the need for MIT to be mindful of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and other laws that protect confidentiality. And while FERPA may not seem relevant here, court vary on how they interpret it and what falls under it-what are student records, for example. MIT is not required to satisfy the public's appetite for salacious details or to support finger pointing on the part of those who'd like to identify those involved. MIT is obligated to act in a way that is most likely to preserve the dignity and uphold the values of the institution and they should be thinking about the wellbeing of the broader community. Thus, they should be taking actions that preserve the climate for the long haul, even if it means imposing what some may feel is a harsh penalty, in order to ensure the continued viability of frats, sororities and living groups at MIT.

People call for the release of details to get a sense for whether a) the punishment matches the crime

b) was each party doing their part

One problem is that "hazing" is such an unclear term - it can be very subtle (or, of course terrible). A couple subtle examples: "Assigning demerits" or "Expecting certain items to always be in ones possession" (from http://www.stophazing.org/hazing-information/types/).

So...if there was hazing and that hazing was subtle, then:

a) The punishment seems pretty unreasonable

b) What programs has MIT put in place to ensure the frats know exactly what the boundaries are? This isn't a new issue.

The current brothers aren't making a stink about it, so they probably know they stepped over a line.

Regardless, it's not MIT's place to ensure that fraternities know what will get their international office to kick them out.

"In 2008, Robert M. Wells 08 died after falling five stories from a window of the house."

Unbelievable and completely unnecessary. You said it yourself in the next line that this is not relevant to the current issue at hand. Glad to see the Tech is still consistently going for the most sensational story with no respect for victims, witnesses, family, and friends. This habit of unprofessional behavior is unacceptable. I hope the author feels compelled to apologize to the Wells family.

86, You obviously do not know any brothers then.. all of them are absolutely devastated. This is their family, their home. And now after an - honestly questionable - investigative/judicial process, they've had it all snatched away.

Its not MIT's job to educate about Nationals - yes -, but it should be MITs job, their desire, to help protect the students at this school, instead of just tossing off the job to outside authorities without so much a glance or second thought as to whether it actually warrants external punishment. (Before you lambaste me, MIT already does this with trespassing violations (hacking), copyright infringement (torrenting), and more)

87, I second your feelings. I feel Wells' inclusion in this story is unbelievable and unnecessary. The Tech, in regards to that, is undoubtedly going for the most sensational story they can muster - and it's shameful.