Participation in Ivy Council Has Merits

To the editors:

The recent coverage of the Ivy Council (Feature, Feb. 28; Editorial, March 7) has neglected several key issues and has misrepresented a few others. The main question raised by The Crimson and certain council members is, essentially, "Is the Ivy Council worth $1,000 a year to the council?" To answer this, we think it is necessary to know exactly what the Ivy Council does. The organization serves to facilitate the flow of information between the student governments of the eight Ivy League schools. In addition, the Ivy Council uses its unique role as the facilitator of communication to organize Ivy-wide events.

The recent success of the Ivy Leaders Summit, a conference that brought together ten accomplished student leaders from each school, speaks to the potential of this organization. Furthermore, on April 8, the Ivy Council is organizing an Ivy Wide day of Community Outreach and Public Service. (HAR'D CORPS at Harvard). These, along with our core role of bringing about dialogue, certainly add considerable value to the council. In particular, Harvard's Census 2000 grew out of Ivy Council communication and promises to be the major project of the current administration.

Now to address a few facts that were misconstrued in the recent coverage. First, the cost of the Ivy Council is $250 per year to the council. This cost covers expenses such as food, materials and conference book production. The additional $750 represents transportation costs for the delegates. In the future, we will recommend that a co-payment system be developed for the delegates to decrease the cost to the council. Second, Harvard delegates completed six of the eight required reports. The two that didn't get completed were the responsibility of a delegate who became sick at the last minute. Finally, we agree with those who believe more conference time needs to be spent in focused conversation. While the current structure allows time for more informal meetings, certainly more time can and will be spent to maximize the value to our home councils.

Putting value on the different services is not easy but it must be understood that this is only the beginning. The Ivy Council is still a young organization and it is constantly trying to improve itself and to provide more value to its members. We believe that the Ivy Council is valuable to Harvard now and will become even more valuable in the future. Harvard, rather than withdrawing, needs to make an active commitment to the council and provide that critical feedback that will lead to growth.

Matthew C. Ebbel '01

Fentrice D. Driskell '01

March 8, 2000

Matthew C. Ebbel, an Undergraduate Council representative, is president of the Ivy Council. Fentrice D. Driskell is president of the Undergraduate Council.

Hate Spong, But Say So

To the editors:

J. Stuart Buck sets out to criticize Memorial Church administrators for allowing Bishop Spong to deliver the William Belden Noble lectures (Op-Ed, March 6). He claims to be upset because Bishop Spong's beliefs do not coincide with the doctrinal requirements set out by Nannie Noble in 1898, the founder of the lectures. I say "claims," and although I have no doubt that this situation does upset Buck, he seems to be lying when he tells us he is concerned with W.B. Noble's spirit. Instead, Buck directs his criticism at Bishop Spong himself. The body of Buck's op-ed is actually a vehement attack on the Bishop, not an explanation of how he feels Spong's beliefs do not fit the occasion.

Buck calls Spong "self-congratulatory," accuses him of "racism," and throws in a sarcastic, willfully ignorant comment about one of the Bishop's parallels being an "unexplainable" analogy. How do these points relate to the Bishop's religious doctrine and its compatibility with Noble's stipulations?

Buck does not like Bishop Spong. But if, as Buck asserts, the fact that we may share Spong's beliefs does not imply that it is right for him to give the lecture, then why does the fact that Buck does not share Spong's beliefs imply that it is wrong for him to give the lecture?

It's fine to argue that Bishop Spong shouldn't give a lecture. It's even fine to simply take issue with Spong's opinions themselves. Just don't do one wearing the self-righteous mask of doing the other.

Max-Joseph Montel '01

March 8, 2000

Don't Trust Gym ID Log

To the editors:

Your coverage about the use (or misuse) of Hemenway Gym is misleading (Feature, March 6). The article refers to the gym as "untapped," "underused" and "underutilized." The ID checker's log is used as one piece of evidence to support this assessment. I simply urge that all decision-makers do not make any conclusions on the fate of the gym based upon these logs. I go to the gym four to five times a week at various times during the day, and the ID checker post is empty approximately half of the time. While I do not doubt that law students use the gym with more frequency than any other constituency, the overall use of the gym is far greater than the inadequate log books would indicate.

Michael S. Whamond

March 6, 2000

The writer is a second-year law student at Harvard Law School.