States that don't have chapters

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by dnall

As for the rest, I've already disengaged. I don't wish to discuss it further. Quit trying to run people off just because they don't want to play by what you want the rules to be.

That's obviously not the case, or this conversation would have ended on page 3.

And we'll continue posting as we see fit.

Welcome to GC

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

That's obviously not the case, or this conversation would have ended on page 3.

And we'll continue posting as we see fit.

Welcome to GC

Hey, I'm over this. Let me show you by continuing to post how over it I am.

Also trying to win other people over to my side, but I'm OVER IT.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by dnall

I'm going to end this conversation, because anything I could have to say beyond this point would not be nice. Please do not speak to me again.

And yet . . .

Originally Posted by dnall

Cliff notes? Sure, I'll do that myself.

I said I was done, too, but since you didn't end the conversation when you said you would (twice now), why should anyone else?

It's clear that you don't get it. The more accurate real life version would be this.

1. You made statements under the (not unreasonable for someone new here) assumption that the conversation in this thread was a more or less private conversation among ATOs.
   
2. Non-ATOs responded to your statements with requests that you speak only for your org.
   
3. You responded with surprise, because you (again, not unreasonably for somone new here) assumed it would be clear from the context (i.e., that this is the ATO forum) that you were speaking for your org only.
   
4. Others explained that your assumption does not accurately reflect the way conversations typically happen at GC.
   
5. You, while offering an apology that could be reasonably be read as a non-apology, proceeded to explain how that's a stupid way to do things and you don't buy into it. Things should work the way you think they should work.
   
6. Others responded either by (1) trying to say stupid or not, it's current reality and it is the explanation of why your initial statements drew responses that surprised and confused you, and/or by (2) telling you to get over yourself. Meanwhile, no one challenged you on the position you state for your fraternity.
   
7. You, rather than just letting it go or saying something along the lines of "well, that seems like a dumb and counterintuitive way for things to work, but at least it explains why I got the responses I did," instead pounded away on how it's wrong, and even brought in a fun hazing example.
   
8. Hilarity ensued.

Originally Posted by dnall

Quit trying to run people off just because they don't want to play by what you want the rules to be.

And here's the point you're totally missing: It's not about playing by the rules. Good or bad, right or wrong way to do things, It just is. It's the explanation for why you got the initial responses you did -- nothing more, nothing less.

And no one is trying to drive you off. Quite a few people have commented favorably on what you've had to say in posts elsewhere. But there's an almost universal reality that lectures from the new guy on how everyone else is doing things all wrong rarely win people over.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

And yet . . .

I said I was done, too, but since you didn't end the conversation when you said you would (twice now), why should anyone else?

It's clear that you don't get it. The more accurate real life version would be this.

1. You made statements under the (not unreasonable for someone new here) assumption that the conversation in this thread was a more or less private conversation among ATOs.
   
2. Non-ATOs responded to your statements with requests that you speak only for your org.
   
3. You responded with surprise, because you (again, not unreasonably for somone new here) assumed it would be clear from the context (i.e., that this is the ATO forum) that you were speaking for your org only.
   
4. Others explained that your assumption does not accurately reflect the way conversations typically happen at GC.
   
5. You, while offering an apology that could be reasonably be read as a non-apology, proceeded to explain how that's a stupid way to do things and you don't buy into it. Things should work the way you think they should work.
   
6. Others responded either by (1) trying to say stupid or not, it's current reality and it is the explanation of why your initial statements drew responses that surprised and confused you, and/or by (2) telling you to get over yourself. Meanwhile, no one challenged you on the position you state for your fraternity.
   
7. You, rather than just letting it go or saying something along the lines of "well, that seems like a dumb and counterintuitive way for things to work, but at least it explains why I got the responses I did," instead pounded away on how it's wrong, and even brought in a fun hazing example.
   
8. Hilarity ensued.

And here's the point you're totally missing: It's not about playing by the rules. Good or bad, right or wrong way to do things, It just is. It's the explanation for why you got the initial responses you did -- nothing more, nothing less.

And no one is trying to drive you off. Quite a few people have commented favorably on what you've had to say in posts elsewhere. But there's an almost universal reality that lectures from the new guy on how everyone else is doing things all wrong rarely win people over.

This is why we love you.

[AlphaFrog]

Y'all know how terrible I am at analogies, and I've decided I've made a mistake with the Middle East one in this thread. It's probably much more likely that the Muslims will ease up on the burkas and peace will break out in the Holy Land than GCers actually accept being told how/when/where to post. My bad, guys.

[dnall]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

And yet . . .

I said I was done, too, but since you didn't end the conversation when you said you would (twice now), why should anyone else?

You, while offering an apology that could be reasonably be read as a non-apology, proceeded to explain how that's a stupid way to do things and you don't buy into it. Things should work the way you think they should work.

You, rather than just letting it go or saying something along the lines of "well, that seems like a dumb and counterintuitive way for things to work, but at least it explains why I got the responses I did," instead pounded away on how it's wrong, and even brought in a fun hazing example.

And no one is trying to drive you off. Quite a few people have commented favorably on what you've had to say in posts elsewhere. But there's an almost universal reality that lectures from the new guy on how everyone else is doing things all wrong rarely win people over.

Point taken. I'll make this my last post in the thread.

My apologies were sincere. They were just limited in scope.

I could have easily said, hey I'm new here, that seems like a dumb way to do things, but I get now that's how things work and that explains your responses, so my bad not including a disclaimer & now I'll comply with what you're telling me is the way things work here. I understood that at the time, but it would have been a lie.

I disagree with the practice by a lot of people on here to disregard subcategories & the context they imply. I think it's lazy and disrespectful. I don't care if it's common practice. I refuse to comply with it. I'm not on some campaign to force others to follow my interpretation, just saying that I will. If that causes friction because I don't lead with a disclaimer, sorry I'm not sorry.

I think some people by having posted on GC a while think they're due a greater margin of respect. I have no problem with mutual respect, but I won't humble myself before people who have posted more or less because it's a completely meaningless characteristic. How long you've been on here really doesn't equate to a greater or lesser experience or knowledge level about greek life subjects. While GC is its own entity, greek life is what matters. I'll defer to people more qualified to answer a specific issue within greek life, not someone with a higher post count.

When you tell someone if they don't like the "way things work here" then they can find the door, and in the context of attacking them, that would be driving them off. People should be able to disagree with "how things work" and stand up for that without people making a federal case out of it.

So that's it. You're right. When people shoot back a retarded response to an initial post, I should ignore them and focus on the OP rather than attempt to defend my beliefs ad nasium. I'll try to do a better job of that.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by dnall

Point taken. I'll make this my last post in the thread.

My apologies were sincere. They were just limited in scope.

I could have easily said, hey I'm new here, that seems like a dumb way to do things, but I get now that's how things work and that explains your responses, so my bad not including a disclaimer & now I'll comply with what you're telling me is the way things work here. I understood that at the time, but it would have been a lie.

Thanks, George Washington.

I disagree with the practice by a lot of people on here to disregard subcategories & the context they imply. I think it's lazy and disrespectful. I don't care if it's common practice. I refuse to comply with it. I'm not on some campaign to force others to follow my interpretation, just saying that I will. If that causes friction because I don't lead with a disclaimer, sorry I'm not sorry.

LMAO. It's nice that you think that and all. We don't want you to be sorry, we'll just continue to think you stupid for it. In our lazy and disrespectful manner.

I think some people by having posted on GC a while think they're due a greater margin of respect.

Not really, no.

I have no problem with mutual respect, but I won't humble myself before people who have posted more or less because it's a completely meaningless characteristic.

*gasp* oh no!

How long you've been on here really doesn't equate to a greater or lesser experience or knowledge level about greek life subjects. While GC is its own entity, greek life is what matters. I'll defer to people more qualified to answer a specific issue within greek life, not someone with a higher post count.

We don't care.

When you tell someone if they don't like the "way things work here" then they can find the door, and in the context of attacking them, that would be driving them off. People should be able to disagree with "how things work" and stand up for that without people making a federal case out of it.

We don't care if you leave or stay, so we really can't be bothered to drive you off.

But this is totally comparable to a "federal case." What are you 14 years old and slamming the door to your room?

So that's it. You're right. When people shoot back a retarded response to an initial post, I should ignore them and focus on the OP rather than attempt to defend my beliefs ad nasium. I'll try to do a better job of that.

You misspelled ad nauseum.

U mad tho?

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by dnall

When you tell someone if they don't like the "way things work here" then they can find the door, and in the context of attacking them, that would be driving them off. People should be able to disagree with "how things work" and stand up for that without people making a federal case out of it.

I can agree with that, and if I anything I said came across otherwise, I apologize.

Moving along with you.

[AlphaFrog]

Betting pool is now open as to whether that actually was, as stated, his last post in this thread. 10-1 odds on "not".

[33girl]

Originally Posted by dnall

I disagree with the practice by a lot of people on here to disregard subcategories & the context they imply. I think it's lazy and disrespectful. I don't care if it's common practice. I refuse to comply with it. I'm not on some campaign to force others to follow my interpretation, just saying that I will. If that causes friction because I don't lead with a disclaimer, sorry I'm not sorry.

I can't understand why you think this is "disrespectful." People post in other orgs' forums all the time. The issue seems to be that YOU thought it was OK to bash a whole subset of Greek life (West coast Greek systems) since it was in the ATO forum. Why on earth this is more ok than writing on your facebook page that so and so group sucks, or creating rush posters that disparage other fraternities, is beyond me. You got called on it, just like you would get called on drooling over random chicks by your girlfriend who you thought was in the bathroom. Unless it's explicitly stated or you're in a password protected area, it should be assumed anything you say on the internet is for everyone to see and comment on. But like I said, YOU got called on being douchey and now you're trying to blame it on others.

For REAL examples of disrespect in an org's forum, see here and here.