Your thoughts on AI: discussion goes here.

Originally Posted by cutie_cat_4ever

Instead of all these debating back an forth, why not let your own GLO HQ people decide on this matter? Your HQ will know EXACTLY what to say and what not to say and let them clarify and suggest whether this forum should exist. Because afterall, it's your GLO image (or point of view) and what better person to say rather than your HQ?

I'm sure they will be really concern the things that are going on this forum, and even if they didn't want to actively talk about it on these forums, they could at least email the mods and let them know their concerns. That's called damage control. Even many of you said that the info on the website implies what to say or what not, in a lot of cases, not many people will go actively to serach on their websites. That's why they turn to GC.

Umm....I guess that's my 2 cents there, please correct me if I'm wrong, thanks! hehe

Greekchat's been around for over 7 years already. I'm sure members of our Inter/national Councils/HQs are aware of this site and already patrol the boards.

With the exception of 2 very active GC posters who also serve their organization at the highest level (that I know of, there may be more), most HQ officers are reluctant to post. Having an official speaking on behalf of the Fraternity on GreekChat I assume would open up a can of worms. HQs don't have full control over content that's posted here on GC, or on our own individual chapter websites, for that matter.

I (along with other GCers) wasn't even allowed to mention GreekChat anywhere near any of the International Council at a Convention I went to. That's enough for me to know how much they don't like GreekChat. That said, I doubt they'll be doing what you're suggesting anytime soon.

[cutie_cat_4ever]

Originally Posted by OTW

Greekchat's been around for over 7 years already. I'm sure members of our Inter/national Councils/HQs are aware of this site and already patrol the boards.

With the exception of 2 very active GC posters who also serve their organization at the highest level (that I know of, there may be more), most HQ officers are reluctant to post. Having an official speaking on behalf of the Fraternity on GreekChat I assume would open up a can of worms. HQs don't have full control over content that's posted here on GC, or on our own individual chapter websites, for that matter.

I (along with other GCers) wasn't even allowed to mention GreekChat anywhere near any of the International Council at a Convention I went to. That's enough for me to know how much they don't like GreekChat. That said, I doubt they'll be doing what you're suggesting anytime soon.

Oh, I see. I guess one would assume that HQ would be really concern what goes on these forums and how it portrays their GLO. It's generally true for most orgs or societies for higher ups to make a stand point (without citing any sources) to control damage, like politicians.

But I guess I can see having HQ voicing their opinions here as a form as risk management risk, sort of like you never know if you accidentially leaked out ritual or not.

With that being said, I guess that pretty much says that the AI forum shouldn't even exist in the first place , i guess?

[Jen]

Just imagine what would happen if a sorority suggested to its members that they should not post on a message forum such as Greekchat.

Just imagine.

[cutie_cat_4ever]

Originally Posted by ariesrising

Just imagine what would happen if a sorority suggested to its members that they should not post on a message forum such as Greekchat.

Just imagine.

I guess it almost sounds like controling their freedom of speech? and also gives out a pretty poor image of that particular GLO.

I guess things are just inevitable, esp with internet. I actually belong to a honor society that has rituals. One of my friends isn't in, but he told me he was able to search our rituals online (and he told me what they are, but of course I denied it) but you can say I was shocked.

Originally Posted by cutie_cat_4ever

Oh, I see. I guess one would assume that HQ would be really concern what goes on these forums and how it portrays their GLO. It's generally true for most orgs or societies for higher ups to make a stand point (without citing any sources) to control damage, like politicians.

But I guess I can see having HQ voicing their opinions here as a form as risk management risk, sort of like you never know if you accidentially leaked out ritual or not.

With that being said, I guess that pretty much says that the AI forum shouldn't even exist in the first place , i guess?

I also see it this way -- official posting from IHQ might lead others to believe that GreekChat and the Fraternity are affiliated in some way, when that isn't the case.

Official content resides on the IHQ website because they have full control over those pages. It's easier to direct those interested in AI there rather than have them come in here, where they have no say in what goes.

Originally Posted by ariesrising

Just imagine what would happen if a sorority suggested to its members that they should not post on a message forum such as Greekchat.

Just imagine.

I'd hate to think a sorority would prohibit and limit their members from personal expression.

[UGAalum94]

Well, I think clear documents from GLOs pointing out what could and could not be talked about online, as far as group policy is concerned, would have gone a long way towards resolving disagreements here.

For instance, if AGD came out and published a policy that directed women not to ever post policies of the group online that would have shut me up. It's the absence of that document that makes it seem debatable.

Women from the group who seemed to be posting policy could be pointed towards the official document, and there would be no question whether she was permitted to post about it.

[AlexMack]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

Well, I think clear documents from GLOs pointing out what could and could not be talked about online, as far as group policy is concerned, would have gone a long way towards resolving disagreements here.

For instance, if AGD came out and published a policy that directed women not to ever post policies of the group online that would have shut me up. It's the absence of that document that makes it seem debatable.

Women from the group who seemed to be posting policy could be pointed towards the official document, and there would be no question whether she was permitted to post about it.

Here's the thing though. Undergraduate recruitment is written in stone, it's above board, because it's the main intake of women into greek organizations. Not many people know about AI because it's not common and because every GLO has a different policy.
If this forum goes, then it would just go back to how AI is supposed to be, with the GLO approaching the woman and not the other way round. Let's say AGD allows you to post policy. Someone sees that here and thinks 'oh, well if they do it, then I can do it with XYZ and DEF and maybe MNO too.'
In that way, we're doing a disservice. Not only is the information misleading, but it could then lead back to sorority shopping which, as a general consensus, is frowned upon in the AI arena.
If this sub-forum is closed, then anyone with interest would go into either sorority recruitment or alumni involvement, post their question and they would be redirected appropriately.
Remember the sassy little slogan you see on bid day shirts?
'It's not for everyone and that's the beauty of it.' This applies 100x more to AI.

[ReachTheLimit]

Originally Posted by centaur532

Here's the thing though. Undergraduate recruitment is written in stone, it's above board, because it's the main intake of women into greek organizations. Not many people know about AI because it's not common and because every GLO has a different policy.
If this forum goes, then it would just go back to how AI is supposed to be, with the GLO approaching the woman and not the other way round. Let's say AGD allows you to post policy. Someone sees that here and thinks 'oh, well if they do it, then I can do it with XYZ and DEF and maybe MNO too.'
In that way, we're doing a disservice. Not only is the information misleading, but it could then lead back to sorority shopping which, as a general consensus, is frowned upon in the AI arena.
If this sub-forum is closed, then anyone with interest would go into either sorority recruitment or alumni involvement, post their question and they would be redirected appropriately.
Remember the sassy little slogan you see on bid day shirts?
'It's not for everyone and that's the beauty of it.' This applies 100x more to AI.

If someone gave out incorrect information about a sorority that isn't slander or libel. If anyone has documentation of someone suing a sorority because they got inaccurate information about joining one I would love to see it for my own amusement (that means, city, state, location, case name...not "Oh, it's been done" generality), because anyone that would file one due to information that they got on a public message board has a few screws loose.

It's a message board like any other, you have to do your own research to make sure that the information you are receiving is correct.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

Well, I think clear documents from GLOs pointing out what could and could not be talked about online, as far as group policy is concerned, would have gone a long way towards resolving disagreements here.

For instance, if AGD came out and published a policy that directed women not to ever post policies of the group online that would have shut me up. It's the absence of that document that makes it seem debatable.

Women from the group who seemed to be posting policy could be pointed towards the official document, and there would be no question whether she was permitted to post about it.

I think the best way to resolve the issue is to use your (the general your) common sense and realize that, although it may not be *directly* stated to not talk about it, if the topic is not in the GLOs 'public domain', i.e., web site, then don't talk about it. Especailly on a public message board.

The basic problem with discussing topics online is that you don't know who you are really talking to. If I came on GC claiming to be a member of NPC org ABC, and start giving out random, incorrect information *that anyone can print as documentation for proof*, then I've misled the PNAI and misrepresented the org, which might be considered slander or libel. I've done nothing but cause confusion. I think some of the NPC ladies just want to eliminate unnescessary confusion.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

What about the women who ARE following the right process, and just have some general questions? I think it is okay to have threads like "I was invited to lunch with some women from the AA. What should I wear, and what questions should I be prepared to answer?" These are things we would gladly help undergrads with.