I think the independent living group structure at MIT is fairly unique and makes for a large part of the students' experience and some of my strongest memories are living group related, probably 2:1 over laboratory or classroom related memories. I'm a strong supporter of the living group situation at MIT, even with the problems that come along with it. (I think that a certain level of problems are unavoidable when contemplating the first-time independent living of 17-22 year olds, whether coed or single-sex, dorm or independent living group.)
Source/disclaimer: I'm also MIT Phi Delta Theta, older and not overlapping with/never met Drew.
> When people talk about things you can't say in tech companies, being in a greek organization is one of them. I would never advertise the fact that I was in a fraternity for fear of how people would perceive me.
I was in a fraternity myself and I don't bring it up unless it's relevant because I'm an adult and nobody cares anymore.
People will only perceive you poorly if you bring it up when it's not relevant and that's because they'll, rightly or wrongly, think that you never grew up.
If anyone actually does care, it's probably a shitty company culture. Why would anyone care about your social activities at college post graduation and working at a real job?
There's good reason. Fraternities are the exact opposite of meritocracy. Their very reason for existence, in fact, is to subvert meritocracy through cronyism and nepotism for those who can afford it. Because of this, people engaged in strictly meritocratic work (science and engineering) find that whole world repulsive.
There may be some like that but there are plenty that are not. I don't remember anyone getting in my fraternity that way and we averaged over 100 members at a time.
Richard Feynman, John Bardeen, Linus Pauling, and Kary Mullis were all in frats. That's just from 5 minutes of googling famous American scientists I could think of, I'm sure there's more.
That said, I don't think we can judge people in the past using modern ethical values and it doesn't take away from his achievements.
I think part of the problem is what is meant by "fun" in the workplace. Fun at a workplace should mean something like you enjoy being there, are interested and challenged by your work, and have a cohesive team that works well together.
If you are struggling to have "fun" at work without creating the perception that it is like a fraternity, then I think you have likely missed the point entirely.
This comment is a near ideal solution to the problem of "how to derail the thread, fire a shot in the culture wars and likely still gain karma".
I think it's important to discuss unwelcoming work environments every single time we celebrate a tech company's success because more often than not, tech companies continue to have terrible work environments for people of all walks of life.
Fortunately, this is a moderated forum. Your prejudices towards Greek organizations may or may not have a valid basis, but taking the entire discussion into an ideological brawl is a disservice to all.
> tech companies continue to have terrible work environments for people of all walks of life
Agreed. Please don't make them worse than they already are.
> At M.I.T., he joined the Phi Delta Theta fraternity, which he has said helped him learn how to build a corporate culture.
> Dropbox also developed a reputation as an unwelcoming workplace for women. “Some of the things they’ve been struggling with are how to balance Dropbox being a fun place to work with accusations of having a frat boy atmosphere,” Mr. Mann said.
Not much of a plot twist there!