This in response to the "As We See It" article in the December 13 issue of the Guidon. The premise of the article is a bit naïve. The author's idea that this group should sign their names is a bit off, given my experiences with signing my own name.

The author says that the facts "will not be revealed until those who are aware and willing to be honest, are willing to sign their name […] the university administrators should listen, and be willing to respond without prejudice." There is a bit of a problem with this.

Following the letter we sent to the Guidon regarding the lack of trust of the administration (a similar message as the aforementioned article), we were called to the commandant's office. I won't go into a detailed description of that meeting, but we came away with the general message of our letter being dismissed (that of the lack of trust). When it was addressed, reading the line that asked that "Jackman Hall" do something to prove its trustworthiness to the Corps of Cadets, Colonel McKean simply said, "I don't think so." Instead of discussing the idea of the letter, mistakes were attacked, such as our writing about the room search policy that is, in fact, an adaptation of that found in the MCVCC Rules and Regs, which was our mistake. This may be an example of why some people feel they can't sign their names: they don't think they could make a difference if they did.

Trust dissipates in the eyes of some when commandants can use weapons like the Honor Code against cadets, but are not held to the same code themselves. Trust dissipates when cadets hear about hirings and firings. Whether distrust of the commandants is justified or not, doesn't it show that something needs to be done to sew the rift? Comments like "I don't think so" don't help. That is what our previous letter was about, despite whatever errors were to be found in cited examples.

I came away questioning if Corps life was even worth it. It wasn't long until I heard some juniors awaiting the Ring that my question was answered. There is something intangible here - and I believe that word is "brotherhood." If anything, I believe that the group writing those "Think" pamphlets is just trying to preserve that, though perhaps through questionable means.

Yours Truly,
Rob Wolcott

I am writing in response to the recent "As We See It" article in the December issue of the Guidon. Amid the ongoing tension between certain members of the student body and the administration, I find it amusing to read such a biased article in your publication which completely undermines its own premise.

The anonymous author bases his whole point on standing up for ones opinions, and then fails to sign the article or even begin to take responsibility for his strong opinion. The article even goes so far at to state that opinions expressed with no one to take ownership of them have no validity. Am I supposed to then interpret this article as invalid??

Curious,
Cdt. Tom Beyerl '04

Editor's Note: The "As We See It" column is an editorial, which is designed to be an opinion piece. (And is appropriately placed in the editorial section.) It not supposed to be, nor is it purported to be, objective. "As We See It" is written by a different member of The Norwich Guidon staff each edition, on a topic that is voted on by the entire staff at our weekly Monday meetings. It is not meant to be representative of the newspaper's opinion. Any questions or comments regarding the content of "As We See It" may be addressed to the Managing Editor via email (guidon@norwich.edu) or campus mail.

Back to Guidon index