[decadence]

You seem to have a good list of criteria for determining who might make good members.
Thanks Firehouse! That [above] is what we have so far, anyone who thinks I’ve left anything else out which would be a good idea to include/has comments on the existing items, please share.

You might want to make a second list to be used during pledgship, outlining any reasons that might be grounds for termination.
So far the list of criteria for determining who might make good members … is the same list that PNMs would see as the list of things *they* have to “do”, to become a full member … is the same as the ‘chapter’ would have in front of them for voting & when were told: “vote on basis of the criteria in front of you and whether the pnm has complied with those conditions for full membership“.

I strongly recommend that you keep no written records of any discussions regarding status of individual members/pledges.
I assume this is to ensure the voting process is not a farce with all the decisions having in reality been made beforehand! Good suggestion. Someone recommended we note instances where we needed to inform ‘PNM’s’ that they were acting in such as way as to affect their chances of membership e.g. “‘warned’ x about y on such date”; to refer to if necessary. It made me a little uncomfortable - the idea of doing it, though I see the logic.

if you do vote someone out, you should make no announcement - keep it all in-house and allow the individual to leave quietly and with dignity. Especially make no announcement as to the reason.
One idea suggested was we should tell them reasons. My idea was if they themselves asked why they were unsuccessful, just to tell them they were found to have not fulfilled one or more of the obligations and expectations made available to them during the time before voting. On your point that no announcement or reasons given (to other members or non-members), of course yep. If I was asked by a third party in the general run of things, we’d just tell them no info. could be given as it was confidential.

A social organization enjoyes wider latitude in deciding who gets in and who stays in.
Presumably this means in relation to social fraternities e.g. ***** **, who require a 100% ‘yes’ vote on a member to admit him into the fraternity?