<p>I would have thought the University’s own report and surveys, cited in post #104, provides a reasonably good picture. Large sample, not based on rumor, prejudice, or dated reputation, and based on students’ actual behavior.</p>
<p>Here’s part of the recommendations of the final report:</p>
<p>"Fraternities and Sororities</p>
<pre><code>Relationships between fraternities/sororities and some of the eating clubs have an unfortunate impact on several areas of concern: the pervasiveness of an alcohol culture at Princeton; the socioeconomic stratification of the clubs (and especially the selective clubs); and a sense of exclusivity and privilege. Relationships between these organizations and the clubs, and the willingness of some clubs to provide space for them, create tension in the relationship between the University and the clubs.
Consider actions by the clubs to reduce the advantage associated with fraternity and sorority membership in the club selection process and access to passes, and action by the fraternities and sororities to postpone their admission process to sophomore year."
</code></pre>
<p>Was there something wrong with the surveys? Graph #5 has the entire student body in the data; Graph #6 has virtually every fraternity member.) Did the University mischaracterize the results by relying on rumor, prejudice, and dated reputation? Were they hampered by “scant” or “zero” experience? Did they “misreport”?</p>