To the Editors of The Crimson:

All of us on the Undergraduate Council are resigned to the fact that no matter what we do, we will be the object of your newspaper's ridicule. So I have written this letter in response to your critical editorial of February 12 ["Stupid And Sleazy"].

Once again you have employed the tiresome tactic of implying that we are all Gov jocks, whose Executive Board perpetuates an "Old Boy" mystique. Thus, I would like to respond in kind.

The Executive Board of the UC has painstakingly tried to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. We personally invite every council member to the Executive Board meetings during the year, regardless of seniority. The board is open not only to UC members, but to all undergraduates.

We make no attempt to exclude others from these "secret" meetings, which you shockingly seem to compare to the National Security Council in significance.

Most notably, you seem to conveniently forget that we have a Crimson reporter present at every one of these meetings. Certainly he would reveal any clandestine plans of our elite organization--or perhaps he too is one of "us."

We have gone out of our way to open up the UC to everyone--we have nothing to hide. Our financial records are public record and all of our business is carried out in a public forum in front of every UC member, every campus reporter and every interested student in the College.

My simple message to you is LIGHTEN UP--we are students who are more interested in providing simple services to our classmates than creating a covert oligarchy set out on exchanging arms for hostages or taking over the world.

The Crimson's biggest sin is self-importance. After all, it was your own Michael Grunwald who wisely advised not to fall into the trap of taking ourselves too seriously. Above all, you should remember that we are all students. However broad our responsibilities, however serious our debates, they are but shadows of those in the real world.

I understand your concerns with the council's $20 allocation to bring the Spin Doctors to Harvard Square, but I can assure you that there was no grand conspiracy to give a kickback to one of our own members. The $20 was granted to a UC-sponsored event, approved by the full council at our public meeting on February 2. This resolution was treated as any other, with the Executive Board having no role whatsoever in its passage.

Further, the event was open to all undergraduates, and the UC approved the allocation on the condition that everyone 18 and over would be allowed to attend. The UC's endorsement and its money would have been revoked otherwise.

In short, any criticism of the Executive Board for supposedly plotting a Spin Doctor scam is wholly without merit, and any condemnation of the Executive Board for alleged secrecy is both childish and irresponsible.

But perhaps you raise some valid concerns. There is an organization on campus marred by secrecy in the way it selects its officers and conducts business. This private club mandates that its officers choose their successors in an extremely secretive process which no one is allowed to reveal.

Much like the old Politburo, this secret group ensures that its successors will toe the party line. Welcome to The Crimson! Granted, a newspaper's public responsibilities are different from those of a government, but the principles of accountability and inclusiveness are ones we should all live by.

People who live in glass houses on Plympton Street should not throw stones. David A. Aronberg '93   Undergraduate Council Chair