Frankly, I am disturbed to think of the number of students who will not get housing contracts this coming
year, myself among them ("Dorm contracts fail to meet need," Feb. 1).

I understand priority must be given to freshmen and some students choose to live off campus.

However, such a disparaging difference in the ratio of contracts offered to those requested compared to last year is appalling.

Was it a critical transgression or just a lack of prudence on the part of the Assignment Office?

I believe there are a finite number of dorms on campus and the number of students accepted to the university must be predicated on that availability. To accept a large number of first-year students without even the foresight to think about their housing in the coming years is worrisome.

I know the lottery is as fair a system as possible, but it could be refined. Preference should be given to students who have not had disciplinary problems, essentially serving as a reward for good behavior and a wake-up call to those who have not done so.

Far be it from me to know how to run the university, but I guess the whole reason for this is that the administration only noticed the dollar signs and did not have the best interests of the students in mind.