most underranked house

What exactly do people mean when they say KKG faltered badly last fall? I am hoping to get them as one of my pref houses because I talked to girls I really related with there (and I am definitely not skinny/blonde/other things people say about Kappa) but I'd like to know what people are talking about before tonight in case I do get them.

At this late date I will allow you may be a pnm (not a troll) so to answer you: please don't worry about the nasty rumors and gossipy postings in this anonymous chat room. They do not mean a hill of beans. Be glad you have homes you want to visit and have met women IN PERSON who may soon become your sisters!

I agree to a certain extent. But it takes a couple of years for a new class to have a big impact on the house. But this year will be major for many houses so it will be interesting to see how things go. I hope XO can survive as they were a solid house but not sure about entire probation issue and how PNMs will see it. Fun days ahead!

Sororities go onto, and are relieved of, probations all the time nationwide. And obvi that includes the older and stronger/more widely recognized NPC groups, not just the 'newer'/less populated sororities. There is no shame or problem, most groups have women willing to behave more properly, and pnms do not need to "worry and fret".

@nationwide. I'm not sure if you believe your post or not but if you check the facts on what you are saying there is no question you are incorrect. PNMs won't need to 'worry/fret' if they do their research and don't join a house on probation. Just look at number of houses that have lost their charters over the past 5 years. No need to take the risk. But, if you like the people you meet and the house is on probation AND you know what you are signing up for then absolutely join the house. But know that once on probation its hard to get off probation and the ongoing supervision is a big drain on house morale. Talk to people at other schools that have experienced the situation. Its no fun. Maybe things will be different for XO and I hope they are but its an all around difficult situation and I feel for the house as they have been such a huge part of the Cal system for so many years. Hope they do well in recruitment!

SK U ARE NOT A CONTENDER FOR DGS SPOT stop spewing false information especially something as far fetched as that claim

DG you all really need to get your heads out of the sand and WAKE UP! SK has been knocking at your door now for a few years and with the way you are sinking its entirely possible that SK will replace you post 2017 recruitment. Lots of downvotes of DG last year to go SK and APhi.

as someone not in dg i still can say sk is not close to taking their spot.

NPC has worked hard over fifteen years to make RFM an integral factor in formal recruitment. Should one or more Cal homes choose to use extra deep cuts during recruitment in order to lower their perceived new member bid number, that flies in the face of what NPC has worked to achieve: a sorority home for a larger percentage of all pnms.

All NPC groups at Cal working with Cal's panhel AFTER this Fall's formal recruitment to bring one new NPC group to campus should be your goal, not denying more 2017 pnms the chance to belong by intentionally cutting more women than usual during Cal's formal process.

@meg. Panhel works until it doesn't. Right now it doesn't work for us as the large class last year resulted in things that made most in the house quite unhappy. The large class was also not great for the pledge class itself. If the system is not going to work to make sure such things don't happen then we have to take the situation on ourselves and we will. While it is unfortunate that so many people are going through this year (not a surprise if you look at admin stats btw) that is a circumstance of the system and not just our house. Yes we are part of the system but if the system is broken and its choices are adversely impacting our house then we have to act in the best interest of our house. The idea that the 'issues' of the system become our problem and that we are responsible for being a membership stopgap is frankly ridiculous to say nothing of unfair. Its unfortunate if PNMs this year are adversely impact by quota decisions but we have to decide what kind of experience we want to offer members and if we can't deliver that experience with large classes then the class size must be reduced. Sorry if you don't like our choice.

@meg. After alot of internal discussion on the topic in the house most aren't even sure bringing a new chapter to Cal should be the goal given the current circumstances of some of the houses in the system. A new house might help but given how new houses have fared I am not sure which NPC would want to come here to tell you the truth. Its a very difficult situation and I certainly feel for those going through this fall 2017 but to make system faults the responsibility of an individual house is just wrong. I hope more houses make the same very difficult and serious choices but at a certain point you just have to say 'enough' when things aren't working. The issue becomes one where if we have another huge class this year (stats say this will happen) then nothing gets done by the system. Then the system says well you have handled 2 large classes so then its no issue to handle 3 large classes. Then the large classes become the norm and that norm is what we don't want to have happen as its not consistent with our promise to new members and is frankly something we don't want to have to live with. Tough times to be sure.

So are you saying the Cal sorority system overall ought to take your home's idea and make it their operating standard to cut more pnms, and thereby bid a smaller percentage of pnms, based on the smaller new member classes desired by a minority of Cal sororities? And do you also mean this same minority number of current sororities will be like your group and not desire another NPC group to come onto campus?

Isn't that an elitist attitude toward the growing number of students desiring a sorority home?

Reading other GR pages I am baffled by the 'rejection response' of some campuses toward new sorority groups when a campus chooses a smaller NPC group to colonize--this usually occurs on campuses where only the smaller NPC's are not yet a chapter. Cal hasn't that particular problem, but do you forsee Cal possibly choosing one of the smaller NPC groups to colonize, and thus opening panhel up to criticisms about how any small NPC group will not be able to have housing/large pledge classes/prestige worthy of our campus?

All I am saying is that we have issues where people do not agree and are unable to resolve the differences. Jamming large classes on houses is unfair to the all the houses in our system that have to integrate these large classes and diminished the Greek experience for all members in our opinion (FYI we don't have consensus on this issue but majority ruled). On the issue of other/new NPCs I frankly have no idea on who/when etc. so don't hang your hat on that happening anytime soon. I do know that any NPC looking at our school will look at the health and functioning of the system to decide whether its worth their time and money (very very expensive) to join. Housing in Berkeley is amongst the most expensive in the country and so the prospect of any NPC coming to Cal is super expensive. You make the assumption that this is an elitist choice. This is the furthest thing from the truth. It would be a great thing if our houses were designed for huge huge classes like those seen at other schools but sadly they are not large. Living in house is a big part of the overall experience and most people joining want to live in house. With multiple years of large classes this will no longer be an option which is unfair for those seeking to join. I ask that you consider the fact that we want a certain house and membership experience for our members and cannot do this with classes in excess of 50 people. Growth must be managed to preserve member experience and overall panhel health.

How can large new member classes be unfair to those that join? People in all stages of life have to give up old ideas for new. Change can be good when handled correctly. It isn't that difficult to tell Fall 2017 pnms their chances for living in the house are weaker due to houses having more sorority sisters to interact with and love.

Having larger new member classes is simply the fact of Cal sorority life as of Fall 2016 formal recruitment. And there is no guarantee the number of new members will continue to climb.

The easiest way to cut the number of pnms going thru formal recruitment is to raise the initial GPA requirement when you sign-up for recruitment. If it's 3.0 now, make it 3.3--3.5 and see the pnm sign-up number reduce really fast (like some on this site seem to desire).

Your final paragraph brings to mind the issues Indiana is having in growing their quota number to allow a larger percentage of pnms to join. Maybe your Cal sorority chapter has already contacted your Indiana chapter for ways to continue enhancing your new member numbers without feeling overwhelmed. (and for those reading this yes, some Indiana houses are physically smaller than others therefore some Indiana sororities hate the idea of a required quota number).

The optimal house size issue can be debated all day and every day with a total guarantee of zero consensus. To say the house size has to change NOW simply because now we have more PNMs is something that many don't agree with and is a debated topic amongst those that care about maintaining a certain house environment. If you know people at other schools that have huge classes and house totals over 250+ talk to them about their houses. These 'mega houses' have never been the character of our system and while adding 20 more people or so each year vs historical levels on the surface doesn't seem like much, the reality is that it did change things and mostly not in great ways. People can preach the need for change all day long but change for the sake of change doesn't add much value in my mind. We are in the situation we are in with the system because of choices made (or not made) by panhel. We also have houses in differing stages of development which has a major impact on how we can proceed and potentially grow. The issues are complex and there are no simple answers. I do think that house size has an impact on culture and sisterhood and I think a fair number of people would agree with this point. Living in house has special meaning and is important at Cal and always has been. I seriously question whether any house should be forced to go over historical quota levels simply because more people show up. Difficult issues to be discussed in the future.

Totally agree on DDD. I think they should truly be in top 5. The one house I totally don't get even after being in the system for 2 years now is ADPi. Never see them out and don't get their philo at all. Agree with with all the other posts that DS and XO need to go to the bottom of the pile until they prove themselves again. Still not sure how DS as a local will be received by PNMs but I guess we will find out shortly.

I don't think I've ever met someone from Acacia lol are they still alive? Do they throw any parties?

troll