[9649] in APO-L
Who, why, and when ... Re: fit ....
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Shawn BB Hillis)
Wed Oct 5 11:56:08 1994
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 1994 11:54:56 -0400
Reply-To: Shawn BB Hillis <ind00471@PEGASUS.CC.UCF.EDU>
From: Shawn BB Hillis <ind00471@PEGASUS.CC.UCF.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L%PURCCVM.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu>
--Hello once again, I hope you're all doing well!
Okay, I know a few of us have been paying attention to the "Fit
to be a brother" thread. Now, I've been led to believe that someone has
the idea that it's APO illegal (ie: against National Policy) to have
anything besides objective pledge standards. In effect, subjective
standards or requirements are not allow.
NOW, I would really like to know where THIS idea came from. Psi
O has never been far from the lines of communications from Nationals and
I do not ever recall this coming from anywhere.
Perhaps this is just something that is lip service or something
for the records. But if this ever was attempted to be enforced, I know a
_LOT_ of chapters would have to drastically change their pledge standards
and requirements. And I know what the National Pledging Standards say,
I've read them numerous times.
If someone could possibly inform me where this 'rule' is written,
I will gladly take steps to change it. If someone shows me where it's
infered or implied, I will emphatically argue otherwise. And if this is
a 'higher-up' decision, I will passionately dispute and challenge that
decision.
You can't tell I feel strongly about this, can you? :-P
Ps: and if I am horribly confused and it doesn't apply to me and
my chapter, I will sigh a BIG relief.
___________________________________________________
--Shawn BB Hillis | She offered her honor. He honored her offer. |
University of | And all night long it was honor and offer. :-P|
Central Florida ---------------------------------------------------
