'Jim' No Hoax
The letter by Messrs. Johnston
and Whitehead (CD, Dec. 6),
subtly questioning the authenticity
of the recent interview with "Jim"
(pot at the University), and the
editor's reply deserve some comment.
While the admissibility of this
observation as "evidence" (as
called for in the editor's reply to
Messrs. Johnston and Whitehead)
may be subject to question, I
wonder why the editor did not
make a clear statement denying
that the story was a "hoax" (if
indeed it was not). Such a statement
would seem to be the most
obvious way to clear up the whole
controversy.
Abner J. Schlabach
Grad. A. & S. 4
The interview was not a hoax.—Ed.
