Fall Rush at UGA

[CrackerBarrel]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I don't doubt the rankings are basically accurate although I do sometimes wonder how people can get impressions to discern among different tier groups that they don't really associate with.

I would think that within your own tier, you'd actually know, but beyond that, how would anyone know about groups that they weren't having socials with who weren't clearly outstanding or on the brink of folding?

I've said this before, I think: the rankings may do disservice to the kind of journeyman groups that are a pleasure to be in and make college more fun but aren't really dazzling folks in the first tier. Guys and girls who aren't going to get bids to the top groups (because of lack of connections or whatever) might really benefit from looking at these groups in some other context other than just as third tier or whatever.

It's particularly true for girls who don't really end up having that much control over rush. If you aren't getting a bid to a higher tier group, what good does it do to know in advance that the group that wants you is "bottom feeder" in the eyes of a guy who graduated three years ago or even that the group is bottom half of the second tier?

The guys tiers are a lot more important I think, because if you're rushing it makes a big difference to know if in the middle tiers you're looking at a house that is only slightly worse than the very best houses or a house that is a lot closer to the houses where you might as well not join a fraternity than it is to the top ones.

Sorority tiers on the other hand are based primarily on which of the fraternity tiers they do their events with, then ranked within that tier by what stereotype fits their house.

And obviously some of the lower tier houses may be a lot of fun or very rewarding to be in, just they do very poorly if judged by the same categories which establish who the very top houses are.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by CrackerBarrel

The guys tiers are a lot more important I think, because if you're rushing it makes a big difference to know if in the middle tiers you're looking at a house that is only slightly worse than the very best houses or a house that is a lot closer to the houses where you might as well not join a fraternity than it is to the top ones.

Sorority tiers on the other hand are based primarily on which of the fraternity tiers they do their events with, then ranked within that tier by what stereotype fits their house.

And obviously some of the lower tier houses may be a lot of fun or very rewarding to be in, just they do very poorly if judged by the same categories which establish who the very top houses are.

It's interesting that you say that about sorority tiers being primarily based on fraternity socials. I think popularity with fraternities is a component of sorority tiers and is the primary reason why some groups can't ever move up to the next level, but I had considered recruitment results the primary thing for sororities.

Interesting.

[CrackerBarrel]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

It's interesting that you say that about sorority tiers being primarily based on fraternity socials. I think popularity with fraternities is a component of sorority tiers and is the primary reason why some groups can't ever move up to the next level, but I had considered recruitment results the primary thing for sororities.

Interesting.

Well, when you see these tiers they're usually being put together by guys. The reasoning tends to be "we're top-tier, the girls we hang out with are top-tier."

And yes this does keep sororities from moving up some, but part of it is the girls' fault too. There are guys in the fraternity who would like to do stuff with them as they improve, but they keep agreeing to do stuff with the same lower tier houses they've always hung out with and say a high second-tier house makes themselves look bad if they have a social with a sorority who had a lot of their other events with much worse houses.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by CrackerBarrel

Well, when you see these tiers they're usually being put together by guys. The reasoning tends to be "we're top-tier, the girls we hang out with are top-tier."

And yes this does keep sororities from moving up some, but part of it is the girls' fault too. There are guys in the fraternity who would like to do stuff with them as they improve, but they keep agreeing to do stuff with the same lower tier houses they've always hung out with and say a high second-tier house makes themselves look bad if they have a social with a sorority who had a lot of their other events with much worse houses.

Probably true, but man, it seems lame. Very middle school popularity thinking.

[nate2512]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Probably true, but man, it seems lame. Very middle school popularity thinking.

Denying whats obviously there is lame.

[ugadawg]

Very interesting discussion, much of which I agree with. As to the tier thing, everything tends to be ranked (schools, grad schools, sports teams) some of which is based on performance and a lot on perception. My intital point, which was not clearly made, was that three people on another site, ranked houses. That information was then posted here as an accurate list. And the three that made the list were bashing houses (a low tier activity in my mind). They might be right in the rankings, but I think the guy going through rush should consider the source of the list.

[CrackerBarrel]

Originally Posted by ugadawg

Very interesting discussion, much of which I agree with. As to the tier thing, everything tends to be ranked (schools, grad schools, sports teams) some of which is based on performance and a lot on perception. My intital point, which was not clearly made, was that three people on another site, ranked houses. That information was then posted here as an accurate list. And the three that made the list were bashing houses (a low tier activity in my mind). They might be right in the rankings, but I think the guy going through rush should consider the source of the list.

While I don't condone "bashing houses", you have to admit that at nearly every campus there are houses which are running jokes amongst everyone better than them. To strongly object to tiers and honest observations about houses suggests (as has been mentioned) that someone is in one of these fairly low rated houses and resents the fact that they wound up somewhere other than top-tier.

I didn't go reread the tier thread in question, but it's generally reasonable to assume that most of the posters are somewhere between the top tier and the middle of the second tier. If you aren't looking for a "fratty" house or social events with the top sororities, than no the list may not apply to you.

But again to just say "look at them making fun of bad houses and making these arbitrary tiers, they are ridiculing the lower tier, that's lower tier in itself" only suggests to me that you protest a bit too much and aren't real happy with where others consider your house to fit in to that matrix.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by nate2512

Denying whats obviously there is lame.

Maybe, and denying it certainly doesn't do anything to change reality.

But it just seems that groups could approach it more like individuals do, it seems to me. If there's a person that I think I might enjoy knowing, I don't elect not to do stuff with them because they have friends I'm not crazy about. I might choose not to go to the same event as the friends I don't like that much, but I wouldn't say, well, I can't associate with you because I'm going to catch your friends' uncoolness.

I understand that the reputations are apparently all interlocked, but it seems like if you had confidence in your group's being good, you could risk it.