Editorial Based On Partial Facts

Gady Epstein says that The Crimson must "[ask] questions every-body feels needn't be asked, and then [print] the answers everybody feels shouldn't be printed." ("What Is to Be Done?" Jan. 26, 1994)

He Misunderstands at least some part of this objection, though--an objection illustrated on the same page in the editorial on Adams House coed rooming groups.

Some of us would be happy to have questions asked and answers printed if we could cunt on unfiltered answers that paint a full picture, not just a popular, provocative or (worst) an easy picture.

The editorial is based on a significantly incomplete knowledge of both what the Adams House Senior Tutor did, and why he did it.

As such, even if the editors would have arrived at the same conclusion once they had the full picture, with only partial information the editorial position is per se an irresponsible one.

If, as Epstein says, The Crimson wants to be a "good citizen" of this community, it could start by acknowledging (or perhaps realizing) when its information is incomplete, and refraining from taking positions on things it just doesn't know enough about. Virginia Mackay-Smith   Assistant Dean for Coeducation