Kick the keg policy
The new keg policy implemented by the Inter-House Council has noble intentions, but, as is often the case with noble-intentioned policies, it fails to consider the reality of the situation. Howell House has complained of low attendance at its weekend parties and is pointing the finger at competing booze-laden social house parties. Its solution-reserving kegs so as to prevent other houses from utilizing them-hinges upon an assumption that a lack of alcohol elsewhere on campus will draw people to the house's weekend activities.
This theory does not explain the popularity of alcohol-free Af-Am dance parties nor the well-attended movie nights, cookouts, and coffeehouses that other social houses offer on the weekends. Even with old keg registration rules, other dry events have been successful.
Howell House's logic oversimplifies the various factors related to lack of turnout at its house events. The house faces an uphill battle in its quest for a popular party and higher attendance, particularly with regards to the stigma attached to chem-free housing. Until Howell House can persuade the student body that it offers quality dry entertainment, it is likely that turnouts will continue to disappoint, regardless of the number of kegs tapped at other houses.
Unpopular protectionist measures will only serve to hurt
Howell's cause by breeding resentment within the student body. It is Howell's
own prerogative to stay chem-free, but keeping alcohol out of other houses'
reach is unreasonable. It represents an imposition of the house members'
preferences on the student body as a whole, and such an imposition cannot
be reconciled with their original noble intentions.