I've got a business proposition if anyone's interested.

We get a big cart, like a hot dog stand, and park it down on College Avenue. We stock it with two-by-fours, poster board and industrial-strength Sharpies. And there will be wheels on it, so anytime anything controversial is happening, we can go straight to the source.

It'll be your one-stop protest shop.

There are many things that college students do when they have the opportunity.

Watch football. Play beer pong. Use the word "hella." But if there's one activity that your average college kid will engage in at the drop of a hat, it's a good ol' fashioned protest. Weekday, weekend, on the way to class, on the way to work, at work, whatever, come up with a clever chant and a worthy cause, and undergraduates will show up to wave around signs, banners or wire hangers, where appropriate.

Obviously, this is mostly a good thing. It shows that we're civic-minded, socially aware and have glands that are excreting outrage into our systems at a healthy pace.

But when are the occasions where we shouldn't let everyone know what we want and when we want it? When does a picket line go the other way and start hurting a cause?

This debate took up a good chunk of The Daily Collegian's letters section throughout the week before spring break, and the topic at hand was the protest of women's basketball coach Rene Portland at the Lady Lions' final home basketball game Feb. 26.

Many accused those protesting Portland's alleged anti-gay bias of sullying the game as a whole. It was said that this protest detracted from the overall mission of gay students. Is this the case? Are more people behind Portland's allegedly divisive views now that a basketball game has been disrupted?

No matter how simple (or elaborate) the protest, it must be judged carefully. Any event that disrupts the natural flow of things probably has some cogency and a clear message, beyond a simple "We don't like this."

Did the protest disrupt things? Yes, it certainly did. But why? Just to be contrary? Just to irritate basketball fans? No, certainly not. This was a carefully planned and well-timed event. By interrupting the traditional last game festivities and for a brief moment pretending that the Penn State athletic tradition isn't the sacred cow we all worship, the protesters were sending a message that couldn't have been sent any other time.

The protest reminded people that the latest round of Portland versus lesbians has already disrupted the normal flow of Penn State athletics. Slogans and banners didn't bring down the season's last home game -- Portland did. And if these allegations are true, that's every indication that she will every time a female athlete attempts to come down off of Brokeback Mount Nittany and be open about who she is.

The focus can only return to basketball and the performances of the players when Portland steps down.

This was the message that the protesters sent. You can't pretend this is an unrelated issue, something that happens at Old Main and in the pages of a newspaper while the sports world continues unaffected. It's not OK to play a season of basketball like nothing happened when issues are left unaddressed. Another protest on the HUB lawn wouldn't have said the same thing that a protest at this game would have, and it would have been foolish to let the occasion pass by.

It can't be denied that some groups protest anything they can find with no clear message or purpose in sight. And sometimes, protests get people angry. Every once in a while, a cause is hurt, rather than helped, by such a protest.

But think more carefully the next time you see slogans on poster board. There may be a more intricate message in place then the three-word slogan you read on your way to class.

But everything else aside, does anybody have a hot dog cart I can borrow? I think there's some really money in this idea, just as long as students have sources of outrage. And around here, there are plenty from which to choose.