[15639] in APO-L
Many topics in one
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael Delman)
Sat Nov 16 03:09:43 1996
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 02:47:27 -0800
Reply-To: Michael Delman <cliffhng@IX.NETCOM.COM>
From: Michael Delman <cliffhng@IX.NETCOM.COM>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
I'm sorry about sending a bunch of posts the last time. This time I'll
incorporate all the posts into one.
The Italian Stallion wrote:
>
> > One question for the chapters with little sis programs: are your
> > little sises allowed to wear letters?
> >
> > Cindy
> Yeah, but they have to have the letters 'LS' on the sleeve, and they
> have their big brother's chapter number on the back.
> -Delta 1159
> Mark L.
I thought only brothers were allowed to wear letters. That is until
last convention when petitioning groups were given permission to wear
letters with the words 'petitioning group.'
Oz, the Great and Terrible, wrote:
>
> Bravely and without thought to personal injury, Sara Beth Tanenbaum said:
>
> > I wish to stimulate conversation on a different topic. I am
> > curious as to what brothers around the country think of the amendment
> > (#A-9) that would require all brothers at all chapters to complete 20
> > hours of service per semester to remain actives in good standing. I don't
> > believe anything like this has been proposed recently so I have no idea as
> > to what people's opinion on this issue would be.
>
> (1) Our school follows quarters, not semesters.
Then it could be something like 10 hours per quarter or 20 per
semester. That type of amendment I would see as being within the scope
of the bylaw, and could be proposed on the floor.
> 3) The question is best decided by the individual chapters in any case.
I agree. Almost impossible to enforce. Worse to have a non-enforcible
bylaw than none at all. Also, it would be worse to lose a chapter due
to an unobtainable service requirement than to have each brother do less
service.
Curt Garner wrote:
>
> There is NO ONE that "doesn't deserve to be a part of APO". In my chapter
> (Gamma Rho, Univ of N. Texas), we used to have pledge interviews, which we
> thankfully don't do anymore. One fellow, when asked why he pledged APO,
> replied "to meet girls". If anyone was offended, it was very hard to tell.
> Most thought it humorous and honest.
That is the reason for the pledge period. You get to see if he is
joking or being honest. If he is being honest, you see if his desire to
get women would make the women feel uncomfortable. I would be more
afraid to let in someone who would cause several current brothers to go
inactive for feeling uncomfortable, than to vote said pledge down.
> Another person came along later, and was quite possibly the most incredible
> boor ever to walk a college campus. He not only pledged, he became active
> and was later elected to a high position, where continued conflict followed.
> The semester was still a success, as was the program he was in charge of.
> Despite my personal dislike of him, and his mutual feeling toward me (no
> real secret), I still believe Alpha Phi Omega was better off for having him
> around, because he gave of his time and effort in service.
I don't say vote someone down for being a boor. Just for being an
asshole.
> At least ya tried.
That's what the pledge period is for. Trying.
