To the Editor: PennLink, the Alumni Relations Web site, which provides the link to the Perelman Quad Web site, offers us a vitally important, cost-effective means for telling alumni throughout the world about campus projects and issues of interest. Our experience with PennLink has been overwhelmingly positive. It has rapidly become a popular way for alumni everywhere to participate in the life of the University -- updating personal information, taking on-line classes, learning about and registering for upcoming events, etc. The personal contact with donors that the editorial advocates is precisely the strategy we use in soliciting major gifts. PennLink and the Perelman Quad Web site offer us an additional, very useful channel for providing information. Alumni who have contacted us through our Web sites have, indeed, indicated their desire to contribute or to learn more about opportunities to support their alma mater based on information provided about the University's needs. However, the primary point of the Perelman Quad Web site is not to solicit donations. Its purpose is to provide information that describes the project and acknowledges the important role that alumni support will play in its successful completion. Finally, some misconceptions about philanthropy and our recognition of donors are evident not only in these two opinion pieces but in the article which appears to have inspired them ("For a price, leave your mark on Perelman Quad," DP, 11/13/97). Penn has a long tradition of support from its alumni and friends. Across our campus, the names of generous benefactors grace not only physical spaces, but the programs and activities that take place within them. Penn is the living legacy of such support, which we honor and recognize in many different ways. We will always preserve and proudly display this legacy. Virginia Clark Vice President Development and Alumni Relations Feeling less secure To the Editor: I am writing in response to the editorial, "Part of living in the big city," (DP, 11/20/97.) As we have seen this week on the cover of the DP(Student kidnapped, Student shot, etc.), there is still a very serious crime problem on this campus. This absolutely should not be just a part of living in the city. The editorial was meant to reassure students, but in fact, it made me feel less secure. First it says we are not in the throes of a crime wave because crime is down substantially from last year. Let's not forget that last year was a record year for crime so such comparisons are useless. There have still been far too many victims this year. Next, it says there is an increased police presence in the area and on page one, we found out that a "Special Response Team was [only] a half-block away." Apparently this increased presence isn't enough. Or maybe the problem is with the Spectaguard employees chatting in groups of four or more on street corners instead of patrolling. Then, we are told to take heart because that street was lit by the UC Brite program. Again, apparently to no avail. Finally, the DP states we all need to take basic safety precautions. What did James McCormack do that wasn't safe? In summary, all of these supposedly wonderful safety initiatives such as increased guards, more lighting, and student common sense did nothing for Jason McCormack and nothing for the other unfortunate victims this year. So I don't know about other readers, but I am sure scared in West Philly even if we are not "in the midst of a crime wave." Bradley Tevelow College '96, Medicine '00 All students have trouble adjusting to college To the Editor: What's wrong with the college house system? What's wrong with randomized housing? Everyone has trouble adjusting to college life. Some groups of people face similar problems. In fact, there are lots of ways to divide problems into groups and find people to fill them in. The case has been made that some groups have a harder time than others adjusting to college life. Specifically, this case has been made by black students to justify the existence of W.E.B. DuBois College House. But, is the black student experience more difficult than, say the Jewish one, or the Latino one, or the Chinese one? More importantly, there are other kinds of diversity than the racially or heritage based kind? What about the gay student experience, isn't that as (potentially) difficult as the black one? Or the student-athlete? The athlete that has weight lifting at 2 p.m., practice at 3:30 p.m., a team dinner at 7 p.m., and game films at 8 p.m. has his or her own pressures. Don't they deserve to be addressed and supported? The point is everyone has problems. The problem with the system now, the proposed college house system, or any system that does not incorporate randomization, is that the University is put in the position of deciding which groups are worthy -- worthy of space (like DuBois), worthy of resources and support, indeed worthy of recognition. This should not be one of the University's roles, and the only way to avoid the choice is to make everyone equal. How can the University tell an alienated gay student that his time here is less difficult than a black student's, and so he doesn't deserve the support that DuBois provides his counterpart with? Daniel Goldring College '98
The Daily Pennsylvanian is an independent, student-run newspaper. Please consider making a donation to support the coverage that shapes the University. Your generosity ensures a future of strong journalism at Penn.
DonatePlease note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.
