Question: Does anyone ever see the NPHC allowing inclusion of a 10th group?

[Rain Man]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
In that case, the NPHC requirements are justifiably stringent. Tenacity has to be proven.

That begs my question I mentioned 5 posts earlier:

If these orgs are strong, solid, and established enough to be part of the NIC (as some of these orgs are), what is the real issue at hand?

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by Rain Man
I became critical of them the day I was approached by one of their members for the 50th time being told that I couldn't do this, that, or the other, because that was something reserved for the NPHC. I then looked this character dead in the eye and said, "Bull$#!t! Watch me!" and walked away. I then resolved to never again validate or dignify the so-called power they claim to possess on a college campus.

You're bitter. You had your little feelings hurt.

Thanks for telling us so your OPINION on such matters can be duly noted and promptly dismissed.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by Rain Man
If these orgs are strong, solid, and established enough to be part of the NIC (as some of these orgs are), what is the real issue at hand?

We aren't the NIC.

[Rain Man]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
I've read all the posts. My comments stand.

*LOL* No, DSTChaos, my point was that the post on the NGA essentially agreed and attested to the point you made on councils that cater to short-lived fly-by-night orgs.

I wasn't trying to change you comments on anything; I was saying that I had your back on that point.

My fault for attempting to do so.

[TheEpitome1920]

Rain Man,

are you a member of an GLO?

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by Rain Man
*LOL* No, DSTChaos, my point was that the post on the NGA essentially agreed and attested to the point you made on councils that cater to short-lived fly-by-night orgs.

I wasn't trying to change you comments on anything; I was saying that I had your back on that point.

My fault for attempting to do so.

Yeah...so, my comments stand.

[Rain Man]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
You're bitter. You had your little feelings hurt.

Bitter my assets and liabilites. I'm not bitter at all; I'm just not one folk can step up to me and try to "beauregarde" with a lot of Greek "political" bulljive and think it's gonna stick

Thanks for telling us so your OPINION on such matters can be duly noted and promptly dismissed.

Just like everyone else here in this thread, including you? Hmmmmm?

[Rain Man]

Originally posted by TheEpitome1920
Rain Man,

are you a member of an GLO?

Alpha Phi Omega, Spr. '92, Epsilon Psi chapter, Kent State University

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by Rain Man
Bitter my assets and liabilites. I'm not bitter at all; I'm just not one folk can step up to me and try to "beauregarde" with a lot of Greek "political" bulljive and think it's gonna stick

You're bitter.

If you were NOT bitter, perhaps you'd be able to approach this topic from a different angle. You haven't typed anything in this thread that supports why the NPHC guidelines should be changed. You are just on an anti-elitist/anti-NPHC tangent. Boohoo for you, dudeguy.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by Rain Man
Alpha Phi Omega, Spr. '92, Epsilon Psi chapter, Kent State University

The jokes could be endless.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by Rain Man
Just like everyone else here in this thread, including you?

No.

[TheEpitome1920]

Originally posted by Rain Man
Alpha Phi Omega, Spr. '92, Epsilon Psi chapter, Kent State University

Cool. Just wondering.

[Rain Man]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
We aren't the NIC.

I will ask it again:

If these orgs are established, solid and strong enough to be part of the NIC, but are not established, solid and strong enough to be part of the NPHC, what is the real issue at hand?

Or more directly: Is being THAT established, strong and solid the real issue in being part of the NPHC?

[Rain Man]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
The jokes could be endless.

Whatever the freak that means

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by Rain Man
I will ask it again:

If these orgs are established, solid and strong enough to be part of the NIC, but are not established, solid and strong enough to be part of the NPHC, what is the real issue at hand?

Or more directly: Is being THAT established, strong and solid the real issue in being part of the NPHC?

The real issue is that we aren't the NIC so why even bring that up? I believe you have already read OUR criteria, so what's your point?

Are you petitioning for APO to be accepted in the NPHC, or something? Geesh.