LETTERS: Paying fair shares for access

To the Editor: Currently, the modem pool is mainly funded through the Central Service Fee, a monthly fee that all owners of a PennNet wallplate pay, including on-campus residents and academic departments. This means that on-campus residents and departments are footing the bill for off-campus access for students, faculty and staff. When the University starts charging for remote access, this fee will decrease by about $2 per month, admittedly a minor change for the individual. However, if Penn did not start charging for modem access and upgraded the hardware as Callahan suggests, the CSF would increase significantly to cover these costs. Penn is not "too cheap" -- administrators are just concerned with wasting students' money. Another issue is that University is simply not good at providing modem service. When the modem pool was created, Internet service providers simply did not exist in the way they do today. The University was the only provider of the service in University City. In 1996, at the last upgrade, the Quad had not yet been wired and the University felt it still had an obligation to on-campus residents to provide Internet access. But because of the incredibly fast increase in connection speeds, any capital improvement at this point would be out of date within a year or two at most, at which point the University would have to make another investment of $1 million or more to upgrade the service again. Even with all of this capital investment, the University would still be behind Bell Atlantic in terms of quality of service and fees for on-campus residents would continue to grow while off campus residents enjoyed a free ride. Bell Atlantic, America Online and others can easily provide better service at a far lower cost. As long as the University ensures that students can access such restricted services as the library databases, this program is better than the current system. As an on-campus resident, I would rather have my CSF spent in a responsible manner than used to support an inefficient service. If I have to pay for my Internet access, shouldn't students living off campus pay, too? Theo LeCompte Engineering '01 Undergraduate representative, Network Planning Task Force Who are we to kill? To the Editor: I would like to commend Andrew Exum forEwriting against the execution of Philip Workman ("Dealing death, not justice," DP, 10/25/99).EThe death penalty is both a cruel and unusual punishment and hasEbeen tolerated in this country for far too long. When George Pataki reinstituted capital punishment, I felt humiliated to be a New Yorker. Perhaps just as shameful is that the views held by Andrew and myself on this issue are seen as radical. After seeing Leslie Nielsen perform as Clarence Darrow the other night, I was reminded of the ideal Darrow worked for: No man, guilty or not, remorseful or not, educated or not, deserves to die. I would hope that we as students would take measures to uphold this ideal, impossible as it may be. We could start right here in Pennsylvania, where there are 225 people awaiting death. Who are we to take away the right to live? Adam Lubow College '03