News

When Professors Speak Out, Some Students Stay Quiet. Can Harvard Keep Everyone Talking?

News

Allston Residents, Elected Officials Ask for More Benefits from Harvard’s 10-Year Plan

News

Nobel Laureate Claudia Goldin Warns of Federal Data Misuse at IOP Forum

News

Woman Rescued from Freezing Charles River, Transported to Hospital with Serious Injuries

News

Harvard Researchers Develop New Technology to Map Neural Connections

Elections Handled Poorly

Letters

NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED

To the editors:

I am writing to protest the way the Undergraduate Council elections are being handled by the election commission and The Crimson.

In an e-mail message sent Nov. 22 to all candidates, the election commission notified us of a mandatory meeting to be held the next day from 9 p.m. until midnight. Either the candidates or a member of their campaigns were required to attend. The commission's decision to inform 18 people of a mandatory meeting the next day indicates either they have no regard for candidates' prior commitments or they do not plan ahead.

The Crimson's list of indiscretions includes its poor way of introducing the candidates for council president: "Trevor S. Blake '00, T. Christopher King '00, John A. Burton '01 and Noah Z. Seton '00 will all vie for the presidential seat along with Henry C. Quillen '00, Eduardo J. Dominguez '01, David L. Levy '00, Edward 'Ted' A. Swasey '00, Rebecca F. Lubens '00, M. Michelle Robinson '01 and Jonathan Gruenhut '99" (News, Nov. 23).

What sets Blake, King, Burton and Seton aside from the rest of the candidates, making some appear like extraneous peons in tow? Is there a reason for relegating seven perfectly legitimate candidates to a second-tier position? And if there is, why was it not discussed in the article? JONATHAN GRUENHUT '99   Nov. 23, 1998

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags