Other middle of the road proposals includerandomization of 50 percent or more of the spacesin the lottery.

But Winthrop House Master James A. Davis saidhe "wouldn't bet the ranch on that one," addingthat most seem to favor total randomization over50 percent.

A lack of statistical information about theeffects of these other plans has limiteddiscussion, masters said. A study two weeks ago byDean K. Whitla, director of the Office ofInstructional Research and Development, indicatedthat although a non-ordered choice system allowingthree choices would significantly lower the numberof students receiving their first-choice houses,about 90 percent would still receive one of theirchoices.

According to Davis, non-ordered choice wouldalso allow experimentation over the next fewyears, an option that a totally random systemwould preclude.

"There seemed to be a lot of consensus that allother things equal, a plan readjusted would be alot better than one that wouldn't beadjustable--the more flexible the plan, thebetter," Davis said.

But most masters emphasized that the reason allparties have been so slow to make a decision isthat even the non-ordered choice compromise hasnot generated overwhelming support.

"There are a lot of people that agree that itis a pretty good compromise, but we all realizethat it is a compromise," Lowell House MasterWilliam H. Bossert '59 said. "Non-ordered choicedoes not give us either maximum choice or totallydiverse houses.