Cardinal Rule Broken by Our Greek Advisor ;-(

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Kevin

As to whether this would be the same if it was between two different NPCs, I think we'd have a brightline rule that it's a no-no. Going back to that '02 thread, no one, including you, seemed to have a clue as to any specific prohibition. While one NPHC group might have that specific prohibition, it's entirely possible that neither the NPC nor the affected NPHC have such a thing, but might instead have some sort of rule like the one I posted from Sigma Nu which could really be argued both ways.

Are you high?

My response in that thread has nothing to do with what you're saying.

And if you don't understand what I was saying re 2 NPCs...that's part of the problem.

[33girl]

There is a huge difference between an NPHC GROUP taking her and an NPHC CHAPTER taking her. Of course she's going to say that headquarters said there was nothing wrong with it - whether they really did or not. That may have been what the chapter told her. At any rate, any woman who is employed as a Greek advisor should know enough to at least keep her mouth shut, if she realized after the fact that what she did was wrong.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by 33girl

And if you don't understand what I was saying re 2 NPCs...that's part of the problem.

Am I high? No. If other people are having trouble understanding what you write and you're not being explicit enough, that's on you. This would be a different issue if it's between two NPCs because all NPC groups have mutual agreements that dual membership shall not exist. There is no such agreement with NPHC groups and the issue is not nearly as clear. While it has been established that 1/9 groups definitely has such a prohibition, that's 1/9.

The question here is not whether a wrong has been done, but whether a rule has been broken. That's a threshold issue.

Get past that before you throw another silly tantrum.

[NutBrnHair]