The new voting system would have required students to log in using their I.D. and personal identification numbers—information that had been provided to the council to run past elections.

“This kind of exploded,” Morgenstern added. “Their major concern was having registrar’s data outside of Harvard’s domain.”

Illingworth emphasized the confidential nature of the registrar’s data.

“The registrar, as is her job, is very careful about confidential information,” he said. “If I asked her for a list of Harvard I.D. numbers, she wouldn’t give them to me.”

Lee said that the administration should not have been concerned about the council using the information.

“It’s not like we stole the information,” she said. “The registrar has provided us with this information, knowing that we were using it in a protected manner to conduct fair UC elections.”

Last-minute Efforts

After Illingworth’s decision Monday afternoon, Lee discussed with Morgenstern the possibility of sending an e-mail to every undergraduate via a spamming program.

Morgenstern said he had considered the possibility of disciplinary action being taken against him for sending out the e-mails without administrative approval, but still felt the administration “probably couldn’t punish me.”

Illingworth said that the possibility of ad-boarding students for violating the anti-spamming rule “hasn’t been a serious consideration in this office.”

And yesterday afternoon, Illingworth indicated he would allow the council to e-mail every student if he found the process to be effective and secure.

“I think I would make an exception to the ‘no mass e-mail’ rule, but I need to be sure that this would work,” Illingworth said.

Candidates in the council’s elections expressed some disappointment about the postponement.

“I think the delay in UC elections is unfortunate,” said Michael R. Blickstead ’05, who is running for election in Eliot House.

—Staff writer Alexander J. Blenkinsopp can be reached at blenkins@fas.harvard.edu.