Quote:
Originally posted by Rain Man
To the NPHC naysayers, you ought to be ashamed of yourselves. Who are you (or anyone, for that matter) to feel that it is your place to validate any org? Furthermore, who asked you to do so in the first place?
|
All the ranting & raving you've done, and do, about NPHC members having condescending attitudes toward non-NPHC members and here you come with one. I swear, it never ceases to amaze me how many people condemn members of the NPHC organizations for having dismissive, sanctimonious attitudes, yet those SAME critics have the same attitudes about us.
We need to be "ashamed" for expressing an opinion about a website that's public information? "We" need to be AKSED for an OPINION about a website that's out in PUBLIC DOMAIN?? Man, please. You have GOT to be kidding. Using your same logic, who asked YOU to give your opinion
About the Theta Phi Psi website, I'm about to get strictly academic. I'm going back to Intro to Business. That website is a marketing tool. It's my opinion that they are marketing themselves very poorly. It appears that others feel that way as well. Their student status DOES NOT excuse poor design. Honestly, I know 13 year olds who've designed sites better than that, but I digress. Even if you put the site design aside, the spelling and grammar errors are inexcusable. Those types of errors diminish the credibility of the organization, much the same way that those same types of errors would lessen a reporter's or a newspaper's credibility. As you so cleverly pointed out, they are college undergraduates. As such, their writing, spelling and proofreading abilities should be MUCH better than what's presented on the website. Someone on another message board mentioned an analogy dealing with serving a steak on a garbage can lid. For all we know, Theta Phi Psi could be doing big things, but you can't tell by looking at their site.
If you'll take the time to read and consider the comments made, the issue expressed in most of the replies is not that the organization exists. The issue is the presentation. It's crappy. Plain & simple.
It's AMAZING to me how quick we are to make excuses for something just because it's new and because someone put forth "an" effort. I was always taught to put forth my best effort. Lord help them if this website reflects their best effort.
As for this being handled "poorly and immaturely," well, let me ask you something. Is it immature because most of the replies are criticism, constructive & otherwise? Or is it because most of that criticism comes from members of NPHC organizations? Would the commentary be less immature if these same comments came from people who are not members of any GLO at all?