When I post here, I'm representing AEPhi - all the more so because there are so few AEPhi's who post here. I'm very cognizant of that, so I try not to make nasty comments just for the sake of being nasty, or anything like that. (I wasn't so careful in my early GC days, but lately I'm trying to really watch what I say.)

At the same time, I'm also representing myself. I've posted on such topics as my favorite beer, mixed drink, my stance on abortion, etc. I hope it's clear from the tone of those posts that they're my opinions, not AEPhi's. Unlike greeklawgirl, I can't just turn my signature off... my affiliation is right there in my username.

So, I agree to some extent with PM_Mama and to some extent with Laura. Each of us represents ourselves, but each of us who chooses to make our affiliation known also represents our org. It's not one or the other - it's both.

'

Exactly. I guess I'm unclear as to what behavior would represent our organizations in a negative light. Aside from violating the terms of use laid out by John Hammel it seems to be very much a matter of interpretation and personal standards as to what is offensive.

For the record I very much agree that these boards aren't nearly as anonymous as we sometimes imagine them to be and that we all represent our organizations to whomever may be reading this.

I guess I'm just desperately wondering... Where are the lines as you see them and have I crossed them?

This is a tough one! I'm all for individuality, but since on GreekChat the only way most of us are known to each other is through our greek affiliation, I can see how our actions would reflect on our group.

For example, there are two members of a certain sorority who disagreed with my defending one of my sisters when one of them went off on something she said. They bombarded me with these obnoxious, delusional PM's to the point that I wrote one of them that I would have to contact her Nationals and tell them she was embarassing her sorority. I mean, some of the things they said to me! And their affiliation was obvious from their screennames. Now, since the only other (insert sorority name here) I had ever had much contact was my grandmother, I figured "Boy, have THEY gone downhill!" and just felt kind of disgusted toward the whole organization.

But the funny thing is I eventually had to contact the Moderator of their forum and ask her to tell them to shut their traps and the moderator was awesome! Very, very classy lady. And so were the five or six other members of the sorority who took the time to PM me and assure me that those two were NOT the norm.

I guess I made a short story long, but I think ones actions on here can definitely cause someone to form an opinion about an entire organization. Fairly, or not.

Feisty, GRRRRRRR


lol

I know who you're talking about. No, wonder she's been on her best behavior recently, too. :eek:

Blaine, you are a goofball ;)

Would you rather I had hopped a train to (edited to delete name of big, squarish state) and beat them down??? lol

I have an example. I don't know many Dekes. On the "Parents" threads under rush, dekeguy made a WONDERFUL post. I was so impressed, that the next time dekeguy posts, I'll want to check it out.

http://130.94.21.174/gcforums/showth...9&pagenumber=2

As a result, my first "notable" impression of Deke is positive.
On the OTHER HAND (UFPike-This is NOT referring to you) there is a GLO whose GC posters have behaved rather badly, IMO. Whenever I open a page and see one of the signatures I recognize, I don't even want to hear what they say. If I see a reply to something I post, I automatically ASSUME it's going to be something negative.

Nah, You done did good!!! :)

Big squarish state, LOL you crack me up!!

Here's a vice versa type question-
What if your org. decides to do something (something not too dramatic) that you personally disagree with? How do you handle that situation-do you go along with it or should you say something? I know this might seem like an obvious answer, but I know that I've been faced with this problem and most likely others have to. It can be very tough to deal with.

This DID happen-An org I was affiliated with decided they wanted to support Pro Choice and on a personal level I am Pro Life.

I QUIT!

I just felt they had no right to APPEAR to speak for all the members on a subject that did not reflect every members' opinion.

Had it been a Pro Life stance, I would have stayed, but then, it would have been promoting MY personal agenda, not someone else's AGENDA!

Where there is no perfect answer for this... All that can be said is you must follow your priorities. In JAM's example, her pro-life stance was assumedly more important than her affiliation with the organization. So she quit due to incompatabilities.

This of course is a major issue that a GLO probably would have better sense than to take a stance on.

It's not always a choice between quitting or not..

If one of my brothers said something on here that I disagreed with I'd handle it via PM or in the Sigma Nu forum as appropriate.

Good question, if I felt STRONGLY about something, I would not participate. However, I won't make a big deal out of it, I would just quietly w/draw, unless I get flack for it.

As for the boards, I have no problem w/ disagreeing w/ my brothers, and vice versa. As long as it is civil.

I think it depends what kind of stand it is. If AXD decided to change its philanthropy from children to, say, National Alliance Against Colds, I would think it's a foolish choice, but it wouldn't cause me to give up my membership. There's a reason most GLOs pick philanthropies that, while they don't excite every single member, don't offend anyone (who is against children, or the elderly, or against fighting cancer?).

AXD makes decisions often that aren't those that I (with my limited perspective as only a member) would make. Why do we colonize at X, why do we close at Y? Why do we do progam Z? But because of the inclusive nature of a sorority, I find it hard to imagine that they would take any stance that many members would find objectionable enough to quit over. If they decide make their philanthropy one of the political parties, if they decide we're only accepting members of a certain religion, members would depart en masse - but that isn't going to happen.

Voice your concerns, respectfully.

Present alternate situations, respectfully.

Let whoever you speak/communicate with know that you are constructively criticizing the idea, not the person who thought of it/is pushing for it.

Be prepared for some people to tell you you are being "disloyal" and "resistant to change" and "promoting disunity."

But at the end of the day, you will be glad you did it. Our orgs are in the business of strengthening and educating women - and strong, educated women speak their opinions, even when they are not always popular ones.

I see that this thread was over three years ago, but I came across it looking for advice on how to correct my "signature"

I think it is interesting that people write post to this thread and I see other people with new names because they don't want to represent their organization.

They want to be "ananomous alumna"

Of course you represent your sorority/fraternity/organization. You represent your family when you go out. You represent you sex. You represent any group of people with which you are involved. Don't you think what your children, represent what happens in the home? Well, likewise what your sisters do represent what happens @ chapter meeting or @ your chapter room.

I was told not to embarrass my parents or my sisters with any actions. I always took that into consideration.

NO, I wouldnt think bad of all Phi Mu's just because I disagree with you, that would be rediculous, but, if a Phi Mu were rude to me for no known reason I might not give any other Phi Mu a chance to do that too me, again. (Using phi mu because of thread starter)

interesting topic for thread though