Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
I see what you're trying to say, but I wonder if this isn't another example of how tier perceptions, which are subjective, can vary from campus to campus and be affected by campus values. I can think of at least one large campus I was pretty familiar where the fraternity that had the "campus leaders" in it was not considered top tier. The fraternities considered top tier tended to be made up of jocks, old money and partiers, not campus leaders.
How in the world do you know that the chapters any of these men were in were considered top tier by the students on their campuses?
ETA: By the way, one of the men you listed above was on the campus I was referring to during the time I was referring to. While he was a member of a great chapter of a great fraternity, I don't think anyone on camps would have described it as "top tier."
|
On the first point, you're exactly right MysticCat. The fraternity with the majority of student government leaders isn't necessarily top tier. I should have phrased it differently. I should have referred to the "leading fraternities" on campus. I prefer term that to 'top tier' a phrase I don't particularly like. Who the 'leading fraternities' are is always a matter of peception.
On the second point, I know because I have studied fraternities for years as a hobby and have made it my business to know. And I agree, let's not say 'top tier'. But I am convinced that the aggressive, accomplished, driven men join the leading fraternities. I didn't take time to craft that list. I threw in Michael Jordan because I like him (he was a member of a historically Black fraternity so it doesn't fit the model - but who wouldn't want Michael Jordan in their chapter?).
Which name were you referring to? I'll take the hit if I'm wrong.
Threaded Mode
