[lifesaver]

While I am sure Kappa Sig and Phi Delt had good reasons and are sure in their decisions, feeling them to be the best thing for their orgs, I dont think this will seriously affect NAIC (North American Interfratenity Conference) in the long run, nor do I believe it to be the beginnings of a mass exodus of groups for several reasons.

(Note I am not indicating an agreement/disagreement withtheir reasons for leaving, just stating my belief on the effects of their departure.)

I dont know much about corporate culture that exists within the NPHC, so I'll limit my comments to the parallels and differences between the NAIC and NPC, relative here. I'll allow a fellow greek who is a member of a group with membership in the NPHC to share their thoughts and opinions ont he subject.

I draw attention to the NPC, because so often, people attempt to compare the groups. As if it were apples to apples. One specific policy example between the groups is recruitment. Our respective policies couldnt be more different. Aditionally, I am sure we could all agree that it would be a big deal if a member chose to leave the NPC.

While these two groups are probably the largest to ever leave the NAIC, they most certainly arent the first. The NAIC is a much larger, somewhat loose federation of groups with historically fluid membership. Sigma Tau Gamma left for a while in the 90's. I once heard (from a NAIC staffer) that it wasnt a good year if one or two member fraternity groups didnt leave, and a few others return. NPC groups have remained the same since 1952, proving a much more stable group in terms of membership.

2. NAIC generally goes not enact policy, whereas the NPC sometimes does (I believe they're called unanimous agreements) by getting all member groups to come to an agreement on a policy before it is enacted. NAIC has very few policies (I think most of them are resolutions) that they require all members to adhere to) mainly, the one barring membership in two organizations as an undergraduate (some groups allow for dual membership after graduation). I believe that for the better part of the history of the NAIC, this loose federation, allowing most groups to handle their own policy has been one of the fundamental strenghts of the NAIC.

3. As long as there are many groups the remain withthe NAIC its size still lends itself to credibility. Should the number of member groups dramitically change, then NAIC's efficacy and credibility will obviously change.

While I hate to see the NAIC family loose any members, I am confident in the continued success of the NAIC, and remain hopeful for an eventual return of Kappa Sigma and Phi Delta Theta.