Quote:
Originally posted by dardenr
I apologize if you felt insulted by a proposition for a term that connects those said organizations.
|
Actually, that's not what I'm offended by. I'm recalling your comments and the comments of other APOs in the "Dual Membership" thread and considered the part of your reply that I quoted a reference to that. Forgive me if it wasn't.
Quote:
|
Obviously, the term "social" is not palatable to some members of NPHC organizations, and "service" also has a different connotation.
|
Social is not palatable because that's not what we are. In all honesty, we're a blend of all types of GLOs: service, social, professional, and academic because of the circumstances surrounding our foundings. By the way, what connotation does "service" have? For that matter, what connotation does "social" have? And how accurate are we in continuing to classify organizations in this manner?