2006 election is experience to learn from

Regarding 'An Ugly End' (Editorial, April 19):

I should have handled the election email situation differently. I realized it as soon as I had time to calm down from my initial anger, a few hours after I reacted in the form of an email to the quadchat forum. I totally agree that I should have kept my concern confined to Hakim and myself, and I apologize to him for acting impulsively in a way that may have done damage to his character in the eyes of others.

Ultimately, however out of place the capital "O" was, I made a claim that I could not substantiate. I could only point to the possibility of it being true, and I should have pointed it out only to him. If this possibility constituted reality, which cannot be known for sure, it would still be too far a stretch to label Hakim in any way a homophobe. From what I've heard from his very supportive friends, he's a great guy, and I'm inclined to believe them.

It definitely seems like an ugly end, an end in which we all lost. But on the bright side, there is plenty to learn from this whole thing, and, while I certainly won't pretend that this was my goal from the beginning, I think we have all emerged the wiser. That being said, I hope we can let the issue rest here resolved and resentment-free. It is definitely time to move on. Matt Mims '06

Grade deflation criticism is right on

Regarding 'With reason on our side' (Katherine Reilly, April 16):

Reilly's article reflected exactly what I was thinking. I hope the administration reads all of these newspaper articles. They show that we are not just a bunch of freeloaders who are upset at the loss of an easy A.

There is logical reason for our opposition. Joanne Dekis '08

Proposals have already hurt students

Regarding 'A plan's pitfalls' (John V. Fleming, April 19):

I am saddened to learn from Fleming's excellent column that some faculty were not advised of the grade deflation proposal before the national press got hold of the story.

Whatever the result of the faculty's vote — and I personally hope they vote against the proposal — it strikes me that the wide publicizing of the initiative does nothing but harm Princeton students. As a result of the publicity, which includes an editorial praising the proposal in The Wall Street Journal, Princeton has been branded a university where grades are inflated.

If the proposal passes, it will be a faculty endorsement of the proposition that Princeton's grading was too easy. The faculty's voting down the proposal or making any changes which might be perceived as "weakening" it will then make it look like they want to persist in easy grading.

Either way the vote goes, then, Princeton students and recent graduates have already lost. I wish the administration had held meetings with faculty and students before airing this proposal to the world. Marta Alison Richards '73 P '04