Your thoughts on AI: discussion goes here.

[SoCalGirl]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

Somewhere up above someone made a comment that it appeared to her Gamma Phi Beta was one of the easiest places to AI.

That is a tremendously disrespectful statement that implies sisterhood is for sale and that the great honor of AI can be had for a little aggressive campaigning on one's own behalf.

Am I the only one that interpreted that earlier post as a person can come on GC and make inaccurate assesments based on what's already on here so why not have a place to post accurate info regarding AI??? Seriously? Am I the only one?

Originally Posted by Adelphean

My question is, what does it matter if there is a sub forum or not?

Anyone can come on this site and do a quick search to find that there are several GCers who are AIs.

Even without the AI forum, which I never read until all bickering started, I could deduct that ASA, ZTA, GPhiB, APhi, and ADPi ALL have some sort of AI as their are AI members from those sororities on this board. I would also think that GPhiB would be the easiest one to AI into because there are several members of GPhiB who are AIs. This may not be true, but this is what I would gather if I knew nothing a/b any of the sororities.

Originally Posted by EE-BO

Somewhere up above someone made a comment that it appeared to her Gamma Phi Beta was one of the easiest places to AI.

That is a tremendously disrespectful statement that implies sisterhood is for sale and that the great honor of AI can be had for a little aggressive campaigning on one's own behalf.

Two reasons why the AI subforum is a bad idea.

[SoCalGirl]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

But to be honest, I never much read the AI forum, and I don’t think I’d personally miss it if it were gone. I’m more concerned with the effort to suppress speech that you just don’t like, or you just don’t think should be out there.

I hadn't realized we even had an AI forum until all the drama started. I've read posts about PNAMs journeys but I thought it was all part of the general Alumi forum.


Ooooooo....had another thought for Tom. The forum is the ALUMNAE forum. Last I checked, that means it's for the ladies. I nominate Tom to moderate an ALUMI fourum for any collegiate alumnus who wishes to pursue membership in an IFC/NIC group. I'm sure he'll be thrilled to show men the way down the golden road to fraternity membership. Oh, and just to beat him to it, he has previously posted, basically, that he agrees not every singler person in the world should join a GLO.

[AlexMack]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

But to be honest, I never much read the AI forum, and I don’t think I’d personally miss it if it were gone. I’m more concerned with the effort to suppress speech that you just don’t like, or you just don’t think should be out there.

I don’t think things should be deleted that don’t violate the TOS or the rules of the particular group being discussed. If you create the expectation that sub-forums or threads can be deleted if several very vocal people demand it, this site will be less helpful and less interesting.

Funnily enough, there are certain people on here who do believe posts/threads should be deleted because they're personally offended, not because the thread itself is offensive as a whole. That sort of behaviour should also be nipped in the bud because it discourages discourse, which you yourself disagree with.
Moderators should be left to do their jobs and decide which threads should stay or go.
Honestly, I am not sure why this forum exists purely because-the general opinion here is that AI is a private process for each GLO. Therefore, what information can this forum provide other than, 'you need to speak with that GLO or a member privately.'
What purpose does this forum have if people are told the same thing over and over?

[greekalum]

That's the point, Alphagamuga. I don't care if someone in another organization wants to post their story. I don't think anyone does. What I care about is someone posting, "I am trying to join either Princess Leia or Han Solo or maybe Luke Skywalker.. OMG Princess Leia has not written me back" and then people who are NOT members of Princess Leia and have NO idea what that organizations' policies may be posting, "OMG I hope they call you! GOOD LUCK!"

No, the person attempting this would not get as warm a reception if she was posting her story in the forums of the actual organizations. But I think there is a good reason for that.

[tunatartare]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

Had the idea of creating an AI forum for each group rather than one for all been the only focus of this thread, I probably would have been down with that.

You are quite possibly the only person on here who thinks that it's a good idea. Many people feel that GC has expanded the interest for AI too quickly. If we create 26 separate AI forums, it will give off the impression that "yes we do AI, we welcome all, please come shop around, and ask us all of your questions."

[EE-BO]

Originally Posted by OTW

Two reasons why the AI subforum is a bad idea.

Exactly, and thank you for quoting the original post- I was too lazy to go back and do it myself.

From what I have seen there have been many great stories and posts on AI, but when shopping for AI becomes accepted practice- comments like the one made about Gamma Phi Beta are inevitable.

My fraternity has a few AIs, but it is never really discussed. They are not AIs- they are brothers, pure and simple. And the selfless work they did without seeking reward gives a pretty hard perspective on those who just want to get in a GLO as an adult.

When I first came to GC, I was surprised to see any AI discussion- but was pretty cool with it, and content to just read about it and offer a thought here and there. But over time it has made me kind of sick to see what some people are willing to do in order to get in.

But at least GLO members are giving out honest advice when people ask. As long as the forum exists, people who post wanting help with sorority shopping should be prepared to face the same kind of hard questions and tough reactions they will get when they start contacting chapters.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KLPDaisy

You are quite possibly the only person on here who thinks that it's a good idea. Many people feel that GC has expanded the interest for AI too quickly. If we create 26 separate AI forums, it will give off the impression that "yes we do AI, we welcome all, please come shop around, and ask us all of your questions."

Well, my point was that I wouldn't object to restructuring the forums to limit abuse of AI, but I object most strongly to the "I don't like this discussion, so I'm going to shut it down" approach many people seemed to be taking.

Each group having its own forum would mean each group could control the flow of AI information out there and yet not supress the discussion of other groups.

[tunatartare]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

Each group having its own forum would mean each group could control the flow of AI information out there and yet not supress the discussion of other groups.

Please read my post again. Each group having its own forum would mean there would be too many requests out there. In 26 different forums.

[greekalum]

Each group already HAS its own forum. If Sally AI wants to start a thread in the XYZ forum saying, "here's how I became an XYZ," no one would stop her and I think most of the XYZs would cheer her.

[SoCalGirl]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

Well, my point was that I wouldn't object to restructuring the forums to limit abuse of AI, but I object most strongly to the "I don't like this discussion, so I'm going to shut it down" approach many people seemed to be taking.

Each group having its own forum would mean each group could control the flow of AI information out there and yet not supress the discussion of other groups.

Not every group has a moderator to control the individual forums. I'm fine with a sticky somewhere on GC that says basically some groups do and some don't and if you want more info to contact the nearest flesh and blood member that you actually know. There's not even a need in my opinion to actually list which groups do or do not AI. Come to think of it, I nominate practically any member of the D9 to whip this into shape. 'Cause once again, D9 intake and AI are probably where the NPHC and NPC can best see eye to eye.

[EE-BO]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

Each group having its own forum would mean each group could control the flow of AI information out there and yet not supress the discussion of other groups.

That is true, but the problem is that then the world would know which GC users were pursuing AI in a given sorority. It would remove any privacy or anonymity for those seeking advice, and I don't know any GLO member who would be willing to moderate a forum where people come to seek a form of membership that is not traditionally open for people to seek on their own.

You would basically either need to have moderators that were not GLO-members and could not be of assistance, or you would be asking GLO members to take on a task that their GLO headquarters would not want them to perform.

Worst of all- you would be setting up a whole section of GC that IMPLIES there is an AI recruitment process for people to pursue. This is just not reality.

AI is a private invitation- it is not rush.

AI is a process- it is not a class of member. All initiated members are equal.

Separate it out, and you imply either of the above when neither is the case.

The more I think about this, the real difficulty is that there is no control over the propriety of asking about AI.

Rushees are under strict rush rules and have an incentive to be discreet and respectful of the process.

AI candidates have no such restrictions, so you have the few who are pursuing it in the right way and just want some advice or a place to share their stories AND you also have those who are seeking AI for the wrong reasons and have no trouble saying whatever they want- or even spreading false information about a given GLO.

To point it out a third time- the comment made above about Gamma Phi Beta being an "easy place to AI" was a slap in the face to every sister in that fine organization who was ever graced with initiation in honor of her service and sisterhood.

You and Tom are correct that there does not necessarily need to be restriction on free speech on this forum. What goes or doesn't go is up to the forum owner.

But AI candidates have come here and made false statements, gotten upset at honest guidance about their chances based on how they present their case and in some cases have actually made unpleasant remarks about chapters and how they want to "change things" as AIs.

At this point, it becomes a PR issue for the GLO and for all members of that GLO who post here.

For the most part it is what it is- this is the internet. But if someone ever came here and was posting without discretion about wanting to AI into my organization without even having a connection or past work to earn it- I would get at least as upset as some others have in the past on this forum when someone was showing a lack of respect for their GLO.

[UGAalum94]

Right, Greekalum, at least that's what I think would happen.

KLPdaisy, I think I understood what you were saying: you think that separate forums would validate the idea of looking for AI info online.

I, personally, have no problem with AI information being online as long as it's not ritual, and I still maintain that, despite what some say, some information about AI can be public.

Separate forums still allow free discussion for the groups that want it, but would permit regulation by groups that don't.

I think that's preferable to trying to silence AI discussion completely.

EE-BO, I think sometimes group members do talk about their experience going through rush or what they thought in their new member period. Or how and why they accepted a COR bid. I don't think that there's a problem with AI members being able to do the same thing. I don't think having AI stories creates the perception that it's a special class of member after initiation (well, any more than the circumstance of AI itself does).

Because ultimately one does have to be invited to join, I don't think having information out there about AI really promotes it as recruitment. Having information out there could actually be discouraging if you wanted it that way.

A GLO AI forum that stated "AI is by invitation only. It is considered bad form to solicit for membership." could shut down interest in AI from outsiders pretty darn quick.

Since, as far as I know, AIs can't join without sponsors who know them in real life, people can shop all they want online, but if no real world group picks them up, all the shopping in the world doesn't help.


I also have to say that PNMs and PNAMs do us a great service when they reveal that they are COMPLETELY CRAZY before we allow them to join. Forums that allow them to tip their hands early in our involvement with them may actually be doing the group a great big favor. I don't mean that you talk back to them, be rude to them, insult them, blow sunshine. But you just don't let them join your group.

[greekalum]

[QUOTE=EE-BO;1333459]That is true, but the problem is that then the world would know which GC users were pursuing AI in a given sorority. It would remove any privacy or anonymity for those seeking advice.... To elaborate, with anonymity, the "advice" is useless. If people are trying to join an organization that only does AI under very specific circumstances, no amount of "go Harry Potters!" will make an advice seeking thread useful for them. Without anonymity, these threads are inappropriate for almost all organizations- the response to "I'm trying to join XYZ" will almost always be, "please talk to someone in real life." I don't know any organization that would say, "Here's all the info you need, right here on the internet."

You would basically either need to have moderators that were not GLO-members and could not be of assistance, or you would be asking GLO members to take on a task that their GLO headquarters would not want them to perform. Which is what we have now with the current forum. We have non-members of a specific organization encouraging people to seek membership in that organization, and we have people trying to give out misinformation.


AI candidates have no such restrictions, so you have the few who are pursuing it in the right way and just want some advice or a place to share their stories Most of these women? Wind up becoming members and can THEN share their story.

AND you also have those who are seeking AI for the wrong reasons and have no trouble saying whatever they want- or even spreading false information about a given GLO. Sing it. This is the problem the AI subforum engenders.

[valkyrie]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

I, personally, have no problem with AI information being online as long as it's not ritual, and I still maintain that, despite what some say, some information about AI can be public.

You're only speaking about AI information related to your organization and not others, right? Let's say that I do not want AI information related to my organization posted on GC. How would you answer the following questions:

Are our opinions enough? What if another AGD who posts here disagrees with you and thinks no AGD AI information should be posted on GC?

Should members of our respective organizations vote on the AI-GC issue? Who is qualified to render an opinion -- all members? AIs? Officers? Who makes that determination? If sorority XYZ decides it does not want any discussion of its AI process discussed on GC, who monitors that? The moderators of this forum, even if they're not members of XYZ? How is that appropriate?