RainMan, didn't you renounce your APO membership because you were afraid of the idolatry aspect? You seem to have no problem idolizing Kappa Alpha Psi all over the intraweb.

And if there is anything I got sick of hearing while I was pledging APO, it was the pledgemaster saying "In Crows we did blah blah blah." It's 2 different kinds of organizations. PERIOD.

I agree with you. While it's one thing to compare the best practices of organizations (APO and social fraternities/sororities ARE nonprofit organizations with similar operations), it's another thing to intentionally misinterpret and misrepresent what Alpha Phi Omega is in order to craft a chapter or organization that one thinks it should be.

Some things you outgrow over time. At the very least, you understand what works for your chapter is not likely to be a universal truth in APO.

On the complete other hand all together, there are times in APO when experience with a social GLO scene is beneficial to a local APO experience. A Petitioning Group I am dealing with is made up of mostly BGLO members, and also being a BGLO member myself, I can relate to these students on a level that other volunteers can't or choose not to.

Being a dual member in that case makes some things easier -- all it takes is a conversation saying "In XYZ, you might do *this* but in APO that doesn't work because..."

Selectivity prior to the pledge process is one of those things I advise against.

From the National Pledge Standards:

Membership in Alpha Phi Omega is a great honor earned through hard work, diligent effort, and dedication to our principles.

I don't see much difference between what you've said and the National Pledge Standards. Amen

I got a *real* heads up at my first section conference in terms of "what works in my chapter may not work in yours". My chapter's budget had single *line items* larger that the entire budget for at least three of the other chapters there, some of which were nearly our size. Trying to give the other chapters financial advice was a disaster.

One of the challenges to extension is figuring out what chapters are likely models for a new extension group and which ones are *not*. Trying to use the chapter George Washington University for a Model for a chapter at Howard University would be waste of *everyone*'s effort. (And vice versa). On the other hand, there are schools were existing models work fine. If I'm working on an extension to a Cal State University campus, I'll definitely try out the other Cal State campuses as Models.

There is only one case where I do advise a *certain* level of selectivity and that is in the area of super-rapid expansion. I wouldn't look badly on a chapter that tried to keep the number of pledges to twice the number of active brothers (or 15 if the number of brothers is less than 8). At that point though I'd ask staff to help in coming up with solutions.

One additional point.

A chapter that is running as 'paying a fee, a member you shall be' is in violation of the National Pledging Standards, just as much as a chapter that runs a year long pledging process or one that blackballs.

I'm just trying to imagine what APO would look like if it exactly followed the official NPHC rules regarding admission (post 1993) and *completely* failing...

OTOH, I'm also trying to think what would NPHC groups would look like doing if *they* followed the official NPHC rules and not having much better luck.

How would you possibly gauge "strong social rapport" in a objective manner?

Simply put, why would you join a fraternity of individuals you don't know and never took the time to get to know? In other words, using objective criteria, does the candidate(s) know and have a reasonably good social vibe with at least some the brothers? (in hindsight, perhaps using the word "strong" wasn't necessary). If not, being a brother isn't going to make the brothers like you.

Funny you brought this up, because I have a true story for you that illustrates its importance. I ran into this 40-something adult student at OSU who was a brother (joined about 2001-2002) via seeing his letters on a shirt. I introduced myself as a brother and we began chatting. As it turned out, this guy had did some time at a correctional facility (I don't remember what the crime was, except that it was a violent crime). Long story short, he heard about the Vikings and wanted me to "make him" a Viking because the brothers who initiated him wasn't too comfortable about his past. Needless to say, I declined his request for several reasons, and he would call me frequently wanting to chat, and I would give a few minutes to talk with him and he felt really really alienated and that the chapter essentially gave him the cold shoulder. Then he suddenly stopped calling and I lost touch with him.

It is instances like this that had there been a vetting process, this whole issue could have been avoided. I think the chapter did this guy (and themselves) a disservice by even initiating him.

I think that was one of the coldest acts of brotherhood I have ever seen. Real talk!

Funny you mention this, because in a back issue of the T&T (one of the 1992 issues at that), there is an article that allows campuses to institute an MIP program if their school prohibits formal pledging. And if I'm not mistaken, this MIP program was very similar, if not outright identical to the NPHC's Intake program. I also remember this issue being mentioned at the '92 CPW (either that or the 93 Sectional Conference--I think it was the latter).

I haven't read the article in well over 12-13 years so my memory of the article's details is extremely fuzzy, so if you have any back issues of the T&T from '92 or '93, check those. It is definately in there.

If APO was to use that standard, I can think of a LOT of my chapter brothers who would never have been allowed to pledge, much less become Brothers. I'm including myself in that group, too - when I went to my first rush event I only knew one person in the chapter - she was an acquaintance. I got to know and became close to several brothers during my pledge period and my time as an active. I don't think it made me less worthy as a pledge or a Brother because I didn't have a bunch of BFFs in the chapter before I joined.

Pity-party for one
 

As an active alumni volunteer on both the sectional and regional level, advisor to two different chapters and currently am a sponsor to an extension group, I have seen this first hand in several situations. I advised a predominantly black co-ed chapter for 5 years, and guess what? Every semester they tried to emulate NPHC groups with selectivity, all they got were people who were really good at putting up a fake and then disappearing the next time the Alphas or Deltas or whoever were running a line. The semesters they did it the right way, by putting out there that they're not like these groups and everybody who wants to try to be of service gets the opportunity to pledge, placed the standard of what is expected before them to attain active membership, and treated them how an APO pledge class is supposed to be treated... those were the semesters that people stuck around because they spent a semester thinking if APO was the right group for them.

So yes, I have seen it done that way, and I can say with multiple data points to back me up that it does not work with our existing structure and policies on the vast majority of our campuses.

You have a very serious misunderstanding of what it means to be in a fraternity, my friend, and I'm beginning to think that you would be the person who joined for the wrong reasons.

If you prefer to dismiss that as rhetoric, that's fine because I can't control what you think, no matter how horribly misguided and wrong it is. The pledge program IS the vetting process. If you can't or won't understand that, then APO *really* is the wrong group for you. We select, just on the back end. If someone comes up to pledge review and doesn't have their shit together, they've got questions to answer as to why, and if they can't get it done in time, they're invited to try again. If they've got it all done, then our national policies dictate that you need to have a much better reason that "I just don't like you" to not initiate that pledge. If you can't follow national pledging standards and policies because you find them inconvenient, then you truly have no respect for APO and I'm wondering why you haven't taken the recently-implemented option to resign your membership if you find our policies so detestable. I'm sure Judy and Bob would be able to process that for you in a timely manner.
I do. I call complete bullshit on someone who talks about how dedicated they are to APO out of the same mouth that is telling me that they have done absolutely nothing with or for APO in almost 10 years. It rings incredibly hollow, indeed.

And when was the last time you contacted or did anything with them? I'm guessing it's been quite a while since AGT is inactive and Rho Theta's website hasn't been updated since 2002.

That's great and all, but your resume is about 10-15 years out of date. What have you done for APO lately? Are you aware of a huge shift in how students think about volunteerism lately?

No disrespect to the women of GSS, but that has absolutely nothing to do with APO, so that isn't even germane to the discussion. But I digress...

And that happens. If you care so much about APO, why didn't you restart it? Why didn't you seek to improve what you saw as not meeting your needs? It sounds to me like you weren't willing to invest the time to make it better, and that you were hoping for someone else to do it for you instead of being a leader yourself...

So you weren't of use to the section at that time, or the section chair failed to contact you (which happens all too often). When I was a section vice-chair, we turned down alumni who it was felt would not make good sectional volunteers for a variety of reasons. I just talked to a recent alum of a chapter in my area who wants to go be an advisor for the same chapter she just graduated from. I advised her against it, because she would not be a good fit for the role, and invited her to try a different chapter in the area or to wait a couple of years and get her life in order first.

I hope the irony of saying we need to tighten up our standards on who we allow into our brotherhood in the same thread that you are complaining that you were not selected for Sectional Staff after asking only once is not lost on you. I guess you just didn't want it bad enough to actually work for it...

Oh boo hoo, so you weren't picked to present at the one national convention you volunteered for. I have attended 5 conventions, of which 4 were as an alumni volunteer. I have only presented twice at a nationals, and both were LAUNCH courses. I have prepared other workshops that were rejected at all three levels. What did you have to present? Was it something you saw of value to the students, but they didn't? Was it for something that they already had a much more qualified presenter lined up already?

None of this gives you the right to bitch and moan the way you do. It barely gives you the right to throw a pity-party. Again, I say: you knew what you were getting into when you joined. You knew that we do things differently because we're different. You had almost 3 months to decide if this was going to be the right group for you. Yet, you joined anyway and took an oath. If you don't want to live up to your oath, fine. I also hope the irony of complaining about people who leave APO right after pledging at the same time you talk about leaving APO yourself is also not lost on you.

That would be a moderately impressive resume if it wasn't horribly dated by almost 9 years. I believe I asked, what have you done for APO lately? And, as it turns out, the answer is nothing but bitch. Oh, and Viking stuff, but that doesn't count because it's not really APO.

You may have been holding a membership card for 17 years, but you really haven't been involved with APO for all 17 years. You have a very poor understanding of today's college student, and I encourage you to spend a bit more time with a large variety of them to get a better understanding before you go spouting off.

That's hardly trying. There are always ways to get involved and ways to effect change. It's pretty clear though, that your brand of change is a huge move backwards for APO, and it's not what the students want.

And this goes back to you have a very bad understanding of what it means to be in a Fraternity. You obviously don't have the dedication it takes to be in a fraternity if you're willing to just quit because you can't get your way.

Wait, you mean to say that the group looked at itself and decided to change it's structure to better ensure our founder's vision? Scandalous, I say! How dare they move from the original structure. And may I ask, since you're so adamant about doing it the Founder's way, what was YOUR Scouting affiliation when you pledged?

Let's get a few things straight, son...
 

I skimmed over the post to address the key issues at hand. Most of your post I read as mere expression of difference of opinion or quibbling to make a point, but here's the stuff I find most relevant:

Oh really? You know, if you were a Kappa, that statement might've meant something.

I actually would, thank you very much.

Alpha Gamma Theta, 1995 (it's located at a community college, and its 15 year active history was filled with long period of semi-inactivity). This, consistent with other community colleges, was due to the very unstable student enrollment patterns at these schools. It is for this reason that I don't think APO should have chapters at 2-year schools. And from what I've been hearing, the fraternity more or less agrees.

Rho Theta, 2005: I joined them at Steak-n-Shake for a post-initiation meal. I would also visit them every year at homecoming, but over the last 2-3 years, I haven't seen APO at all, and I attend Capital's homecoming every year without fail. I think they're (informally) inactive.

Your reference to the Germans have absolutely nothing to do with APO or the discussion either. What's your point?

btw, before you attack me, know that it was a Sheriff Buford T. Justice joke. Pump your brakes....

I wasn't interested, there was nothing about it that appealed to me. 'Nuff said.

Oh, so NOW the issue of fit becomes a matter of concern. How convenient...

After all that ranting and raving, let's get something straight: I'm not having a pity party at all, I'm just explaining what happened. If Sectional Staff wasn't interested or the National Convention didn't want me to put together a workshop, fine. That's on them. But I'll be damned if I'm going to continue to chase people who aren't interested in what I have to offer. They weren't interested, so I moved on. That has nothing to do with lack of commitment or lack of dedication. It has to do with not throwing quality time and effort after wasted and cutting your losses.

BTW, who the hell are you to say that my time spent doing "Viking" stuff doesn't count? Brothers from KA, KD, Chi Nu, Chi Up, Sig Pi, and TZ could probably run circles around your chapter and a lot of other chapters in the way of service projects. Mighty self-righteous of you.

Troop 029, West Park United Methodist Church

As someone who also volunteers at the sectional, regional, and national levels I can say it took me several years to get to the levels I am at. A good deal of this was proving to the PTB that I can be an asset.

In many cases I am working with or for the same people who initially rejected my attempts at volunteering. I think most of them are now grateful for my help and that I 'stuck around' to be there now.

Being rejected when you volunteer can be frustrating. But sometimes you have to keep at it before the doors open.

I've also been to 5 conventions. At almost all of them I've done workshops, sometimes mine, sometimes APO LEADS courses, usually both. I've offered more workshops then have been accepted. that's just the way things go.

Yup, cause all male chapters are not apo right?

Now, on pledging, pledging a weak applicant is like having a weak link in the chain or like having a coward in the ranks. I'd rather have ten people that bleed their fraternity than 200 people that are only active for a semester or two.

And on being like more a traditional fraternity as opposed than being different and accepting of all? I mean, it works a whole lot better than being a huge blob of unorganized and uncommitted brothers. I'll put my money where my mouth is, I think we won more national awards than anyone in region V, and hands down we were one of the smallest chapters to.

Now when my grandfather pledged Alpha Phi Omega in 1954, they're chapter was incredibly selective. Eagle Scouts and military only, I asked him how many service projects they did and he said 'well we ran a bookstore'. I was like is that it?

It was apparently the same thing my chapter early on as well, Pi Chi from what I hear was just an extension of rotc.

Attending national stuff doesn't really even register to me anymore as part of a 'fraternity resume' that a bunch of people keep throwing around here. I attended this and this, who the hell cares.