Return-Path: <scs@eskimo.com>
Received: from fort-point-station.mit.edu by po11.mit.edu (8.9.2/4.7) id MAA07388; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 12:52:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mail.eskimo.com (mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4])
	by fort-point-station.mit.edu (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id MAA01499
	for <pikans@mit.edu>; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 12:46:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eskimo.com (scs@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13])
	by mail.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA10624;
	Mon, 19 Aug 2002 09:46:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: Steve Summit <scs@eskimo.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 12:46:40 -0400
Received: manually from box16 by eskimo.com; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 09:15:02 -0800
X-Original-Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 23:18:56 -0400
Message-Id: <2002Aug18.2318.scs.004@box16.scs.ndip.eskimo.net>
To: pikans@mit.edu
Subject: AILG alcohol sub-committee proposal
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020816120411.0254b190@po10.mit.edu>
Reply-To: nutso-flaming-pikans@MIT.EDU
Cc: scs@eskimo.com

It seems that in spite of all the new policies and risk
management programs and general paranoia in the FSILG system
about alcohol, there are still plenty of problems.  Various
AILG members have made the claims (and I don't have any reason
to doubt them) that the alcohol problem is (a) much worse in MIT
fraternities than in those at other schools, and (b) has returned
to pre Scott Krueger levels.

A committee was formed at the beginning of the summer to look
into this, and has come up with a nice, simple solution: ban
hard liquor (everything except beer, wine, wine coolers, or
champagne) in all MIT ILG's.

Personally, I think this is more simplistic than simple, will
not help much (if at all), and may make things worse, by driving
certain kinds of drinking even farther underground.  I expect
that'll be the gist of my reaction to the proposal.

If anyone has any reactions, comments, suggestions, etc. on this
proposal or the issue in general, feel free to send them to me
or to nutso-flaming-pikans, where I've redirected replies.

(To answer the first question which is likely to pop into the
head of anyone who is reading and thinking carefully: no, I'm
not sure precisely what "the problems" that still remain and need
solving are, and it's not clear that the committee drafting the
proposal did a careful job of defining what problem(s) they were
trying to solve, either.)
