|
Simply due to the phrase that “AI” represents (Alumnae Initiation or Alumnae Initiate), I’m starting to think this whole discussion is rather pointless.
The fact that the word “initiate” is part of the phrase leads me to believe the selection process (whether on the sorority’s end or the candidate’s) has already been completed. We don’t call potential new members going through recruitment Collegiate Initiates – they’re called PNMs for a reason. Only once mutual selection has happened does the PNM become a new member (or whatever each org may call its candidates for initiation). (Yes, I realize that I’m comparing AI to recruitment; I know that comparison is flawed; I think my point is still valid.)
If the AI forum continues, given the definition of AI, it should include only those stories from women who have already initiated into or are about to initiate into a specific sorority. If this were the only allowable discussion in the AI forum, thread-starters would essentially be introducing themselves and the rest of the posters would be saying, “Congrats!” or “Welcome!” or something similar.
That’s it.
I don’t see why that kind of thread needs its own forum. That kind of thread just needs to go, like many have already indicated, in the specific org’s forum.
So, while I’m still against an AI forum, it’s now for a different reason. Once a woman becomes an AI, there really aren’t any questions she should have for GCers. Once a woman becomes an AI, there isn’t any need to know what each sorority’s AI policy is, as she has already familiarized herself with the policy of the sorority into which she is initiating.
Given the definition of AI, there’s simply no reason to have an AI forum.
|