You also didn't come on here seeking validation or a sponsor. You only looked at one group, and only looked at ASA after someone in it recommended you for it.

True...and I'm so glad she did.

Some people (like you) can handle it...and others can't. There's an element of over-sharing that tends to be present in many "AI Journals" that we've seen here. Just like rush threads, there are people that can write an excellent rush threads, naming the school and the sororities by name, and there are people who should have just kept their mouths shut, because it ended up costing them.

I see...I just felt a little defensive for a fraction of a second:o

I have observed that PNMs who come on GC and detail their recruitment experience as it happens on GC typically end up with piss poor outcomes. There can be 2 reasons for this:

1) They reveal too much about themselves, people "out" them and/or they make it too apparent that their personalities online/comments may be indicative of how they are IRL. Which can be taken negatively or someone just has an ax to grind.

2) They are oddballs who have more friends online than IRL and can't present themselves well in a social setting.

I think the same can be said for AI. We caution PNM's to use discretion. I know how much some love to read these exciting stories-- it reminds us all of a time when we were rushing and looking for the right fit for ourselves. Or we want to relive the excitement through these women's stories. But that's pretty selfish of us. There's a lot to be said for privacy and discretion.

I know that my GLO doesn't want to make our AI program a highly publicized practice outside of educating our existing members of the program and encouraging them to nominate women for membership through AI. We're not embarrassed or ashamed-- AI's are mini-celebrities in our sorority! That's because it is such a special circumstance and they can share their story with our members to influence them positively and encourage them to seek out women in their communities, their mothers or aunts or sisters for nomination.

AI is not recruitment. When it becomes recruitment, this sub-forum will be useful. Right now, GC is the top site to talk about Greek Life. Although a small % of the population is Greek, although an even smaller % remain active as alumni/ae, and although a very, very small % of Greeks even know about AI, the activity in the AI Forum on GC gives the impression that AI is a common part of our sorority practice. And that is bad viral marketing for the GLOs (the majority) who view AI as a special-circumstance occasion.

Again, I welcome AI's as SISTERS. I just don't think we need to broadcast this process until such time that our respective grand councils open up alumnae membership to recriutment and interest meetings for PNAI's. Until that time, I'll happily support my sorority's AI process through the proper channels of communication. This forum is not one of them.

To my knowledge, this post in no way launches any personal attack, ridicule or harrassment and does not violate the TOS.

I've just said this in one of the other threads, but the number one thing that makes me still want to see the AI subforum is being able to read a story like yours...I love hearing the stories of women pursuing an organization for which they were recommended or had pledged but never joined, or are members of absorbed locals. I think that, in the right circumstance, the woman's process and story is fascinating. It's just too bad that the AI subforum gets all mucked up by some crazy PNAMs.

Cosign times INFINITY

Exactly.

Regardless of the realities of the situation (which is that only a few AIs are initiated into NPC groups as a whole on an annual basis) if someone finds GC and the AI subforum they may think it's much more common than it is in fact.

NHPC Alumnae Chapter
 

As a member of a BGLO Alumnae Chapter (Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc.), I find it interesting that so many GLO members are averse to AI. We have Alumnae Initiation and it is just as serious as joining the Sorority in undergrad. You have to go through the same process as a collegiate chapter and you have specific requirements that have to be met before you are considered for membership in an alumnae chapter. There is a process outlined by the National Chapter of the organization and you are not a member until it is completed (no sorority pin or badge will be mailed to your home to signify you are a member). In a nutshell, the process for joining a NPHC Sorority is stringent and only those who seek out the Sorority are provided with information as to how they could potentially become a member. With that said, maybe NPC orgs shoud review their Alumnae selection process and make the requirements harder to become a member at that level.
It's like working a part-time job being a member of a NHPC Alumnae chapter because you are more exposed to the community and you are charged with carrying out the mission of the sorority on a higher level.:D

"Intelligence is the torch of wisdom"
Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc.
Dayton Alumnae Chapter

You are missing what we are saying - none of us (ok, maybe one person) is opposed to Alumnae Initiation. We are opposed to discussing the particulars of the process on GC...just as most NPHC members are opposed to discussing membership particulars for undergrad OR AI on GC.

Was there really a need to bump this fine thread?

Also, I'm surprised that a Delta would misspell the acronym NPHC twice in one post.

If you haven't, read the thread. NPC AI is not at all like NPHC AI. NPC groups do not expect to bring in non-collegiate members on any sort of regular basis.

So is spellcheck :rolleyes:

Do you discuss NPHC membership intake online?

That's right, I didn't think so.

Again, the issue here isn't whether or not we support Alumnae Initiation. Most of us (with the exception of one) support it. Many of us do not support Alumnae Initiation discussion.

Please take the time to read through some of the threads when you have the time.

I'm curious as to who, specifically, is an AI who doesn't support AI discussion? Is that every AI who signed "con" on the poll? My understanding was that the poll was whether or not to get rid of the AI subforum... not whether or not it was to be discussed.

If I'm incorrect on that, I'd like to know from AI's (not collegiate initiates) who is against discussing AI and why.