View Single Post
  #1  
Old 07-24-2020, 08:52 PM
SWTXBelle SWTXBelle is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Land of Chaos
Posts: 9,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Alum View Post
A very general example of why legacies might not be required to be at the top of the two bid lists.
1500 PNMs
100 on first bid list are legacies.
101- 200 are also legacies at the top of the second bid list.
201-1500 are also on second list.
Some legacies had graciously indicated they found their home elsewhere but legacy at the top of the first and if necessary second bid list had dictated this placement.
201 was the first available spot for a non legacy.
The chapter might have wanted 201 to 1500 more than 101 to 200 but had to follow legacies at the top of the bid list policy.
I know this doesn't happen everywhere.
As much as it pains me, no special treatment might be better.
If the legacies indicated they wanted another chapter by ranking them first, that is where they would be matched, they would be removed from the first bid list of their legacy chapter, and those on the 2nd would move up. Far from "not happening everywhere", I'd be willing to be it hardly ever happens. Also, you are not accounting for legacies which were dropped after first invitational round. Read enough recruitment stories, be active in recruitment, talk to your former students who are pnms, and you'll quickly discover that even with preferential treatment, plenty of legacies are dropped before preference. It's setting up a strawman to say that for lo these many years, legacies were never cut and thus were depriving some other deserving pnm of a spot. If anything, the preferential treatment meant that legacies were more closely scrutinized after the one courtesy invitational, as they needed to be cut before pref.
__________________
Gamma Phi Beta
Courtesy is owed, respect is earned, love is given.
Proud daughter AND mother of a Gamma Phi. 3 generations of love, labor, learning and loyalty.

Last edited by SWTXBelle; 07-24-2020 at 08:59 PM. Reason: Clarification
Reply With Quote