Is mutual selection really mutual?

[KSUViolet06]

Originally Posted by SureSister

KSUViolet06:

You are right about the “resist” sentence. Thank you for pointing it out so diplomatically. I have corrected the post.

However, I'm sure you would agree that the steps I mentioned wouldn't hurt her chances in next years' recruitment.

I agree that it most likely doesn't hurt you to be involved, but it does not guarantee you anything. Every chapter is looking for different things.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by CutiePie2000

That being said, I do think that your Rho Chi was also somewhat in the wrong to direct you to still put down choice #3: "I told my Rho Chi that I really really really wouldn't be comfortable with my 3rd choice and she said there was only a slight chance of getting it (bad advice) and I should put it down anyway".

I would say the Rho Chi's wording was wrong, but the sentiment was what she was supposed to propose to a pnm. I was a Rho Gamma (different name, same thing) at my campus for two formals in a row and we always stressed to the pnms that the best thing they can do for themselves is to expand their options.

I definitely would have left the decision more up to the pnm and would not have downplayed the possibility of getting choice three to her but my response would have been more like: "OK, you have a right to feel like you don't want to be in any chapter. However, all the chapters on our campus are quality women, and you maximize your potential as a sorority member by selecting three choices on your form. Think long and hard while you're making your selections so that you can be sure to be a happy camper at the end of bid day."

Just because, having been on the side where you have to tell a pnm that she didn't get a bid - it sucks. Especially when you get to know some of the awesome young ladies who go through recruitment and you don't even care what chapter they join you just want to be their friend.

[FSUZeta]

i would like to point out to the OP that should she decide to ask panhellenic to intervene for her and see if chapter#3 will honor her bid, and during her new member period decides that her original feelings about the chapter were right and she wants to quit the chapter and rush again in the fall, she must quit before she is initiated. once initiated into an NPC sorority, she cannot seek membership in another NPC sorority.

[PeppyGPhiB]

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

I would say the Rho Chi's wording was wrong, but the sentiment was what she was supposed to propose to a pnm. I was a Rho Gamma (different name, same thing) at my campus for two formals in a row and we always stressed to the pnms that the best thing they can do for themselves is to expand their options.

I definitely would have left the decision more up to the pnm and would not have downplayed the possibility of getting choice three to her but my response would have been more like: "OK, you have a right to feel like you don't want to be in any chapter. However, all the chapters on our campus are quality women, and you maximize your potential as a sorority member by selecting three choices on your form. Think long and hard while you're making your selections so that you can be sure to be a happy camper at the end of bid day."

Just because, having been on the side where you have to tell a pnm that she didn't get a bid - it sucks. Especially when you get to know some of the awesome young ladies who go through recruitment and you don't even care what chapter they join you just want to be their friend.

As a former recruitment counselor and panhellenic exec. member, I would encourage the OP to inform her panhellenic office about the advice given to her by a recruitment counselor that was incorrect. You don't have to name names, but it is important that the recruitment counselors get correct information. The PNMs rely on them for correct information. Though we all like to encourage women to consider all options and never discard any chapter that has invited them, it is ALWAYS a PNM's right to choose NOT to accept membership in a chapter and therefore not list them on her preference card. Unlike some other women, I do not think it's a good idea for women to list chapters that they know they will reject a bid from. It's creates bad morale in a chapter & pledge class, and it takes away spots from other women that wanted it (including maybe quota additions). If women "suicide" and don't get a bid, so be it. They can rush again later or not. We should not be coercing women into signing a binding contract based on incorrect information or lies.

[KSUViolet06]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

We should not be coercing women into signing a binding contract based on incorrect information or lies.

Right.

However, everyone needs to keep in mind that we only know what's being said here, and we don't know this Rho Chi. Therefore we don't really know what was actually said to the PNM and whether the PX lied, just didn't know the rules, or knew them and didn't communicate them correctly.

[AGDee]

There *is* only a slight chance of a PNM getting matched to her 3rd choice most of the time and I think the Rho Chis are trained to strongly encourage PNMs to maximize their options to be eligible for quota additions (when used) or to get a guaranteed bid (on campuses where they have this) The reality is, if the PNM didn't get choice 1 or 2, she wasn't going to get 1 or 2 whether she put a 3rd choice or not. If all the chapters are at Total and COR doesn't happen on this campus, then it doesn't really matter that she signed a binding contract. The only part that she said wrong was that the computer would freak out...

[Benzgirl]

Originally Posted by OTW

OH QUIT PLAYING STUPID.

You had your muxgo blog promoting that stupid book in your damn signature FOR WEEKS.

To refresh your memory, a cached view of your signature.

Oh, lovely.

[ASUADPi]

Originally Posted by OTW

OH QUIT PLAYING STUPID.

You had your muxgo blog promoting that stupid book in your damn signature FOR WEEKS.

To refresh your memory, a cached view of your signature.

Was this really necessary?

[agzg]

Originally Posted by KSUViolet06

Right.

However, everyone needs to keep in mind that we only know what's being said here, and we don't know this Rho Chi. Therefore we don't really know what was actually said to the PNM and whether the PX lied, just didn't know the rules, or knew them and didn't communicate them correctly.

I'm with you. On the computer thing, well that's a lie or a lie someone else told the PX. On the rest of the advice, it really seems that she didn't communicate effectively enough that it is a pnm's choice whether or not to exclude a chapter.

[tld221]

i am not effing with OTdub.

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

Was this really necessary?

Your post doesn't surprise me. Feel free to put me on ignore.

SureSister promoted her blog (advertising a book) in her signature for weeks. Stealth marketers really piss me off.

[SureSister]

SureSister's first post ever was on August 27. The tiny link to said blog was completely eliminated by September 2. It was on there for weeks?
Apparently the posts have been "cached." Do you suppose there are a lot of people who are digging through cached posts?

Let's note that SureSister has not referenced the blog in her posts nor directed you to go there. She HAS provided thoughts and advice for PNMs, just the same as many others.

SureSister prefers to demonstrate to our PNMs that a friendly Panhellenic-spirited community can exist in the alumnae or online world as well as on a collegiate campus. Now that others have lowered themselves to the level of calling a woman deplorable and stupid, she wonders... can it?

Wouldn't collegiate sorority members handle this kind of a discussion behind closed doors? Or would they throw etiquette out the window and hash it out on a busy midday sidewalk on campus?

Please note that SureSister is not the one who hijacked this thread to turn it into a discussion about a blog. She is fine with not mentioning it again. Now, are you?

[LadyLonghorn]

Only one question remains. With the exception of the PS in the above post, why does SureSister always refer to herself in the third person?

[nittanyalum]

Originally Posted by SureSister

SureSister's first post ever was on August 27. The tiny link to said blog was completely eliminated by September 2. It was on there for weeks?

The line has been removed from the TWO posts on which they were included and from the signature. Apparently the posts have been "cached." Do you suppose there are a lot of people who are digging through cached posts?

Let's note that SureSister has not referenced the blog in her posts nor directed you to go there. She HAS provided thoughts and advice for PNMs, just the same as many others.

SureSister prefers to demonstrate to our PNMs that a friendly Panhellenic-spirited community can exist in the alumnae or online world as well as on a collegiate campus. Now that others have lowered themselves to the level of calling a woman deplorable and stupid, she wonders... can it?

Please note that SureSister is not the one who hijacked this thread to turn it into a discussion about a blog. She is fine with not mentioning it again (as demonstrated by her above post). Now, are you?


PS: I am one of your sisters... treat me with respect as I do you. I DO read and reply to my private messages if you would like to send one.

Bob Dole ITY?

[epchick]

Originally Posted by LadyLonghorn

Only one question remains. With the exception of the PS in the above post, why does SureSister always refer to herself in the third person?

I was JUST about to post this, good think I refreshed the page before I did! lol

P.S. SureSister. You registered in July, which means you probably added that link on your blog since then. Just because your first post was August 27 doesn't mean your link was "hidden."