As the days before randomized housing become golden memories, many students (especially first years in the process of blocking), are beginning to see the new system as capricious at best, and unfair at worst. At the same time, however, those already randomized say they've grown very attached to the house chance placed them in. Except for inter-house transfers.

As is the case with most controversial issues at Harvard, everyone has an opinion concerning the degree to which students are unhappy with their housing post-randomization. But the best measure of house satisfaction may be the attitude of students who transfered this week.

Last year, when house transfers were accepted for the first time after the institution of a randomization, 101 students chose to switch houses. This was, according to University House Officer Sue R. Kane (interviewed at the time of the figures' release), a drop of 70 students from the previous year.

A tougher application process may be responsible for part of the drop in applicants following randomization.

"I know [the application] is a lot more complicated than it used to be, which is a struggle for some people," says Suzanne Watts, assistant to the Quincy House Masters.

For Kristin N. Hill '99 the application was complicated, but not impossible.

"They don't make it easy for you, but once you get the forms done it's pretty easy," Hill says.

Quincy (the largest house) will facilitate the transfer of about 15 students in and out of the house, according to Watts.

"There are caps set on how many [students] you can let out and how many you can let in," she says. "There can't be a mass exodus."

It is too early to tell whether randomization has increased the number of inter-house transfer applicants and the more movement of students from house to house is certainly nothing new. However, the changes in the inter-house transfer process since randomization are. They have created a widened gap between how students and administrators view the process.

"The Committee on House Life looked at this process as a way for students who developed friends outside of the house to live with them," University Housing Officer Mac Broderick says.

Now living in Dunster, Hill recently transferred from Cabot and her experience leads her to disagree with Broderick's pronouncement concerning student transfer motives.

"I don't think people move into a house very often to live with their friends," she says. Currently living separately from the rooming group she transferred with, Hill says her move was motivated solely by a desire to leave the Quad.

The current transfer application offers three categories through which students can qualify to switch. A student may apply either singly or with a friend to move into a specific rooming group in another House, has the option to re-randomizein a group of two or more, or may re-randomize asa single--with the guarantee that he or she willbe placed into a single in one of the houses.

Those who re-randomize are granted the right tochoose two houses they don't wish to transferinto. Once this decision is made, however, theyare automatically placed in a different house fromthe one they currently inhabit.

According to Broderick, "the application issupposed to be nameless. It's based on numbers,which in theory would create a level playing fieldfor all applicants."

But Jedidiah S. Cohen '99, who transferred thissemester from Currier to Adams House with a"floating" group with roommates who are away forthe semester.

"At the meeting where they're deciding who totransfer, they realized I was trying to transferinto a non-existent rooming group," Cohen says.

Although some might argue that his transfer wasas abuse of the system, Cohen says House officialswere aware of his housing hi-jinks and helped himanyway.

"They transferred me under the condition that Iwas floating out to get a single and placed me inAdams House because they knew I wanted to be withmy friends," Cohen says. "They were veryaccommodating."

Whether moving from the Quad or merelyswitching their view of the Charles, many studentsare frustrated by the two-person transfer limit.Werner F. Ahlers '99, a Quincy House resident whois applied for re-randomization finds thetwo-person ceiling too low.

"There's three of us, and we didn't want to goin as a group of two because one person would'vebeen left behind in the house," Ahlers says.

Despite the few transfers who, like Ahlers, aredissatisfied with their current housing, the vastmajority of students in the houses are content tosay where they are.

"It doesn't seem to me like there's a hugepopularity differential between the Houses," saysMichael L. Harte '00. "Overall, I would say theprocess seems pretty objective and non-political."

As Assistant to the Adams House MastersVictoria R. Macy points out, most students aren'tdissatisfied with the transfer process, but ratherwith their specific housing situation.

"I suppose students are always frustrated ifthey can't be where they want to be," Macy says