Letters to the Editor

Start small To the Editor: In your recent editorial ("Don't follow Harvard, yet," DP, 9/13/06), you glibly state that it is "simply not feasible" for Penn to dispense with its early-decision policy altogether. Yes, Penn does not have the financial and administrative resources necessary to make such a move overnight, but perhaps we all need to think a little more creatively. Companies often test the market before rolling out a product across the nation. Similarly, Penn should consider eliminating early decision on a test basis through the Management and Technology and Huntsman programs. With their relatively small applicant pools, removing early decision from the equation should not pose a huge strain on the administration while ensuring that we continue to attract the best and the brightest. At the same time, Penn could use this initiative to justify a more intensive fundraising campaign. If the University moves toward this compromise, I will be the first to commit my annual bonus for the next two years to such a worthy endeavor.

Cynthia Yueng The author is a 2006 Wharton and Engineering alumna and former city news editor at The Daily Pennsylvanian Anonymous source To the Editor: Your article on Michelle Goldfarb's resignation ("Months after scandal rocked her office, student conduct head out," DP, 9/1706) at OSC included an anonymous quote from a "University Administrator." I have no problem with a reputable newspaper, such as the DP, in using anonymous sources. But I think you owe readers a duty of giving some better indication of the credibility of the anonymous person by indicating in some way his or her closeness to the situation. For example, "a College Hall administrator" or even "a high-ranking administrator." As written, the quote derives from any of the many, many administrators at Penn, 95 percent of whom would have no insight whatsoever to the situation. Who did you talk to, the assistant director of admissions at the Vet School?

Alan Thomas 1981 College alumnus

Absurd column To the Editor: Noam Harel's op-ed piece ("Penn needs a new name to get away from state-school image," DP, 9/22/06) is perhaps the most absurd and outrageous article I have read in a long time. Its level of insight borders complete parody, and his immature analysis of the situation is something one would expect from a naive high-school student, not from a 2000 Medicine alumnus. Not only is his assumption that renaming the school will let Penn compete with the "Top Three" completely pretentious and condescending, he provides no real proof other than offering anecdotal evidence. While he claims state schools can't compete with the Top Three, the University of California, Berkeley, has had about 19 Nobel Prize winners since its inception, six of whom are living. That is comparable, if not greater, than some of the "Top Three." His most outrageous claim however, is to whore our university's name to "the highest acceptable bidder." Not only does this reveal a complete and utter lack of self-pride, but it is condescending to all the faculty and students who have devoted their hard work and time contributing to Penn's bastion of excellence. Penn has achieved its status by acting as a forum for ideas from an exceptionally strong intelligentsia, not from a massive influx of corporate money. Harel's piece reflects a vain and self-absorbed point of view, which, fortunately, I believe is far from Penn's mainstream.

Tejas Patil College senior

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.