The Ethics of Sgm's

Sir,—Rather than let some poor cobber of mine abuse Gwrp I will bolster my persecution complex with this lot.

The implied charge of forgery in Gwrp's editorial was answered at the Sgm after a similar wild charge. To abide by the Constitution members must deem signatures to be valid until any invalidity is proved. I have never forged signatures, so I can't see why this rot got into an editorial.

The style of the editorial was such a fine example of righteous and etihical Journalism that its motives are obvious. Someone is very angry and perhaps even hates Bill Dwyer and myself. Hate usually grows from Jealousy or fear.

It must have been something big to cause a charge of "political smear tactics." If this charge was directed at Dwyer and myself, then likewise to you mate. Journalistic smear tactics are usually answered in the courts. Such rubbish shouldn't appear in Salient, published with Stud. Ass funds and opening up the Association for costly lawsuits. Salient is not medium for lies and malevolent innuendo.

It's easy to rake muck, but it usually shows a lack of morals as well as ethics. If other peoples' money is used and risked it also shows remarkable irresponsibility.

I hope that Salient will never again reach its all-time low and that it will regain its name for fair and responsible Journalism. I am, etc.,

R. E. Magnusson