To the Editors of The Crimson:

Your article on aid to non-registrants (2/23/83) is inaccurate and misleading. To begin with, your headline asserts that University aid to replace Federal aid lost by non-registrants is "unpopular" because fewer than half of male undergraduates support it. But your figures also show that fewer than half actually oppose this aid--in fact, opinion is fairly evenly divided (42 percent for, 46 percent against, and a whole 12 percent who could go either way).

Meanwhile, you completely ignore the opinions of female undergraduates, who have just as much right to comment on this issue as the men who have already registered. Neither groups risks the loss of Federal aid and both pay the same tuition--yet you seem to have decided that registered men's opinions matter and women's do not.

You further over represent the minority who oppose aid by quoting three of them, giving their reasons for opposing aid to non-registrants. None of the other students' reasons for supporting aid are presented.

The pollster who interviewed me by phone for your survey asked for me by name, then asked me to say "anonymously" whether I had registered. I am impressed that even 13 of the non-registrants you called trusted you enough to answer "no." I find it hard to believe you obtained accurate figures of registration under these conditions.

These points throw grave doubts on the validity of your analysis, in light of which you ought to acknowledge that the results are inconclusive. A better headline should have been, "Students Divided on Aid to Non-Registrants." David Karr `83