The national presidents of each organization met to discuss the status of BGLOs, and decided pledging was no longer a requirement for membership. Those leaders then gathered with the national committees of their respective organizations to recreate the membership intake process and subsequently, the process went from being as long as a whole semester, to one week of education of history (Kimbrough, 1997, 4). While some chapters of the organizations moved accordingly to such change, many fought back against such decision to ban pledging, complaining to national headquarters and other positions of power within BGLOs that tradition would forever be lost. Kimbrough notes, "The undergraduate members continued to protest against the lack of bonding experiences, and expressed the belief that new members would not be close to each other or their organizations. Many regretted the loss of the traditions associated with pledging and argued that new members would feel left out because they did not share pledging experiences. According to undergraduates, this break with tradition would weaken a sense of brotherhood or sisterhood and would temper the respect that older members had for new ones" (1997, 4).