From Our Readers
To the Editors of The Crimson:
After an erroneous editorial (Time for Fairness, October 21), I had hoped that the University daily would bounce back with the type of cogent and accurate editorial that it is capable of publishing. My hopes were dashed, however, with the appearance of an editorial that revealed something quite frightening: Crimson editors apparently don't read The Crimson!
The editorial (A History of Futility, October 22) assailed the Undergraduate Council, calling grants allocation its only "serious function," and touting Big Fingers and chocolate milk as its only acomplishments. My advice to those who wrote this hastily-researched piece is to read last year's Crimson. Therein you will find that, among other accomplishments, the council was responsible for drafting what has been called New England's most liberal alcohol policy; opening the Freshman Union until 7:30 every night and for all of Senior Week; enacting a new, more open housing lottery system; tightening up CUE Guide editorial policy; drafting a proposal currently before the Faculty Council to expand Thanksgiving Recess to a week; sponsoring a host of successful social events; publishing pamphlets on heating and interhouse hours; and writing a number of reports that will serve as the building blocks for future proposals.
This litany of council accomplishments is only partially complete, but it should suffice to illustrate the grossly unfair nature of yesterday's editorial. Is it "wildly optimistic," to borrow your phrase, to hope for fairer treatment of the council in the future? Richard Eisert '88 Chairperson, Undergraduate Council