I'll admit I missed this one in passing when it came up before in the thread.
the unusually strict definition of sexual harassment,
Yeah, they just decided that one seemingly at random and not, for example, from the majority opinion (penned by SCOTUS Justice and notorious male antifeminist misogynist Sandra Day O'Connor) on
Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, the Supreme Court case that ruled that educational programs are liable for failing to stop student-on-student sexual harassment under certain circumstances under Title IX.
Guidelines for the procedure to respond to a thing using the same definition of that thing as the court case that ruled they have to respond to that thing is
clearly madness. Obviously, they should use a definition from a court decision on a different piece of law.
Hell, the Title IX standard being looser than the Title VII standard is the only reason certain "feminist art projects" were allowed to exist. Sure you want to hold campus anti-rape protesters and "art projects" to Title VII standards about what might be considered harassment? Because that's not going to end well for the protesters and projects in question.
decrease in cases that the college must consider
So, the complaint is that the school has no responsibility in situations where the school has no control or where US law doesn't apply (for example when abroad)? Or that they aren't required (but have the option) to pursue cases where the victim doesn't want them to?
potential increase in genuine victims dissuaded from taking action
How so? What in the new process dissuades genuine victims from taking action?
All policy reflects the preoccupations of the people who carried it out. There's never any harm pointing out what some of them may be.
That icky preconception that there should be due process for the accused, there should be a fair hearing of the evidence from a neutral perspective and that the accused should be able to defend themselves rearing it's ugly head again.
if not the insistence that authorities should not be informed.
What insistence authorities should not be informed?
You have two separate processes, and either or both can be used in any combination. The normal criminal process and/or the Title IX process which has a much lower standard of evidence but also can only hand out academic punishments. The accuser can literally take it to the Title IX Coordinator, and leave their office and head directly to the police, or vice versa. Or do one or the other, of their choosing.