I agree with the title of your article [“Protesters”: Get Out of the Bathrooms, Vol. 42, Iss. 8], and the subsequent point it attempted to make about pseudo-activism with an ignorant flair. However, I disagree with something to the point of substance founding the bulk of the article: that students had their chance, we gave it up, and now we should accept it. Correct me if I’m wrong, but that just can’t be true. Who the hell reads Currents? Why couldn’t e-mails be sent out to all students, faculty, and staff, titled: Long Range Development Plan Survey. Would that have been so impossible? It could have been automated for ease of tabulation and at the very least given us an idea who was in favor or against such a plan. But we all now how politics work in theory, and then we all (ok maybe not all) know how politics work in practice. The manipulation of the press, the secrecy of the funders, hail corruption.

This thing was probably in the bag with the builders long before anyone even heard the words LRDP. All about money my friends. So to the plea for passivity, I say “why, who deserves it?” I say sit in those trees, and save something worth saving.

They can figure out a plan B. How about a giant pastureland called the "Great Meadow" that is just an old clear-cut housing a few cows? Do they not consider it because it would ruin their faux-environmental image when driving up into the trees?

*Jesse B. Adams*