a different kind of ranking

Hey, it's your ranking system but...

National prestige should not be defined by number of famous members. Having famous members only means having people as members who demand to be noticed, who put themselves out there for all to applaud and award. That isn't why some women join a sorority, to be noticed and awarded. And its difficult to define famous, is it in any field or just entertainment/arts?

Number of FB likes and instagram followers can be manipulated and also should not be included.

Number of Rho Chis and PH execs are areas where womens participation and effort should be encouraged, and more power to those groups that have their women serve.

Philanthropic works and efforts within a chapter and group to uplift each member are important components of sorority life but hard to quantify.

While this is an interesting/different perspective, I don't think it's a very good measurement of of prestige/popularity/involvement. For instance, ZTA will have less social media likes since they are newer, and this doesn't take into consideration 1) how successful non-famous women are after graduating 2) alumnae support 3) retention rate and other official numbers 4) supportiveness and closeness of sisters 5) money raised for philo etc.

ok no but good try

Does this list need an update for 2017 Rho Chi list?

Very interesting into a look on a different view of sorority actual involvement

is this a joke

I never looked at it that way