Why do LGLO/MCGLOs follow NPHC practices?

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by fantASTic

You know, I mentioned it because I see QNXi members on here upset all the time because another organization shares two letters (Phi Nu Xi, I believe?)...In all seriousness, however, this is relative to my point - you can't ASSUME they're copying you. You don't KNOW that. And until you can say, with 100% certainty, that they are deliberately infringing on QNXi, then I find it a bit presumptuous to accuse them of it.

Due to some legal issues that came up, I'm not really at liberty to discuss this situation. But, suffice it to say, I am 100% certain that they were deliberately infringing on Theta Nu Xi.

As far as using specific terminology, refer to my last post - the deliberate use of the word 'incorporated', using the term 'aspirants', etc are all directly from the NPHC...and I've seen them used by MCGLOs on this board repeatedly.

Again, what I was talking about was organizational. You're talking about "the NPHC." And, I don't want to delve too far into it, but ALL of our organizations are incorporated and NPHC organizations do not all officially use the term "aspirant." I realize these are simply examples you used, but you seem to be missing my point.

If someone had the handle DeltaDiva, by the way, I would not be at all surprised to find they were a Tri Delt, which is part of my point. DST does not own the label 'Delta'.

Given what you've posted thus far in this thread, I wouldn't expect you to understand why a non-DST DeltaDiva would raise eyebrows.

[Ch2tf]

Originally Posted by fantASTic

You know, I mentioned it because I see QNXi members on here upset all the time because another organization shares two letters (Phi Nu Xi, I believe?). By those standards, as an Alpha Sigma Tau, I
should be VERY angry about Alpha Sigma Alpha! How dare they?? Copycats! In all seriousness, however, this is relative to my point - you can't ASSUME they're copying you. You don't KNOW that. And until you can say, with 100% certainty, that they are deliberately infringing on QNXi, then I find it a bit presumptuous to accuse them of it.

This statement proves that you absolutely do not know what you're talking about. We know with 100% certainty that these women were DELIBERATELY infringing on TNX. I find it a bit presumptuous that you would make this statement without ever asking the members of TNX on this board why their response was what it was.

Originally Posted by fantASTic

As far as using specific terminology, refer to my last post - the deliberate use of the word 'incorporated', using the term 'aspirants', etc are all directly from the NPHC...and I've seen them used by MCGLOs on this board repeatedly. I don't have anything against QNXi - don't get me wrong, I think MCGLOs can be great - but I do see a lot of hypocrisy sometimes.

Yet another instance of you not knowing what you're talking about. Not all NPHC orgs use the term. And because of how our process is, that is what they are, aspirants.

Originally Posted by fantASTic

Basically, my overall point here is that: a). You can never assume someone is copying you

I agree with you that you can't make the assumption. But when a former pledge/interest/interest group becomes the founder of a new GLO that "shares" all/parts of the pre-exisiting organization's surface characterisitics, then one doesn't need a good deal of critical thinking skills to see what is going on. Those familiar with the pre-exisiting orgs and their "identity" can pick up things a lot quicker than those that aren't.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

This statement proves that you absolutely do not know what you're talking about. We know with 100% certainty that these women were DELIBERATELY infringing on TNX. I find it a bit presumptuous that you would make this statement without ever asking the members of TNX on this board why their response was what it was.



Yet another instance of you not knowing what you're talking about. Not all NPHC orgs use the term. And because of how our process is, that is what they are, aspirants.



I agree with you that you can't make the assumption. But when a former pledge/interest/interest group becomes the founder of a new GLO that "shares" all/parts of the pre-exisiting organization's surface characterisitics, then one doesn't need a good deal of critical thinking skills to see what is going on. Those familiar with the pre-exisiting orgs and their "identity" can pick up things a lot quicker than those that aren't.

And, daggone, soror. I'mma get outta your way.