Dear SBP Bobby Mills,

Congratulations on being a finalist for Leader of the Pack — however, I find it very inappropriate that you applied in the first place. There are several student leaders out there well worthy of this scholarship who aren’t already receiving $4,500 from the administration. Really, you don’t need the $1,500 that Leader of the Pack receives the way that others do. You already are in the public eye every minute of the day, and I am very disappointed that you felt you needed this to happen as well, taking away the opportunity from someone else to step up big. Considering your current position, there is room for doubt in the fairness of a vote between you and the other Leader of the Pack candidates who are not as well known to the whole of the student body.

With respect,

Ben MazurJunior, religious studies

Disappointed in Bobby Mills

Yet again I am hardly impressed in the ethics practiced by Student Government at NCSU, namely Bobby Mills’ finalist position in Leader of the Pack. Bobby Mills should have recognized on his own the conflict of interest in holding these two positions and the blatant ethical issue in even applying. However, if he did not, somewhere along the extensive application and interviewing process comprehend this, the administration should have pointed it out to him.

As Student Body President, regardless of his performance, Bobby will already receive over a $4,000 stipend, free parking pass for all of campus, boxed seats to many sporting events and now a meal plan.

I do not know if I am more disappointed by Bobby or by the administration and faculty who selected him as a finalist in this scholarship competition.

Christine DiPietroJunior, political science

Gumby’s Needs a Reality Check

Dear Mr. Hippler,

I take issue with some of the things you suggest in Wednesday’s article pertaining to the reopening of your establishment. First of all, it is tremendously brash that you assert the score is due to poor scoring methods, rather than the actual quality of your service. I was a patron of your store my freshman year, and I can assure you that the service is different now than the service 2 years ago. Furthermore, to assert that you were “slandered” is absolutely preposterous, as slander would require proof of defamation of your organization through false statements. To throw such a term around loosely is negligent and false. However, the greatest issue I have with your comments is the statement of being “Nifonged.” To insinuate that your store receiving a poor heath grade after failing to satisfy a list of criteria pre-established by the State is remotely similar to the persecution of three boys within a racially divided neighborhood for an unspecified political gain is irresponsible and trite. It is my opinion as both a student and a citizen that you need to shape up, stop obsessing about your financial bottom-line and update your facilities, and comply with the health standards of our community instead of complaining about them in student publications.

Andrew TuckerJunior, political science