Editor: In her editorial (“Beech is wasting the Supreme Court’s time,” Feb. 9), Lindsey Sine wrote: “During elections, the court should only be used in cases where the committee has delivered a punishment too harsh for the given circumstances.” What about circumstances where the Elections Committee is wrong? Of course, I guess you could just assume it is always correct; why even have an appeals process? Even if the punishment was minor, it should be appealed on the principle that the elections board was not correct in ruling against them.Sine also wrote, “No other party got to have an article about them printed on the front page of The Chronicle.” Whether an article is published comes down to the reporters of The Chronicle and the editors. Beech/Carrier have NO control over this. The Chronicle CHOSE to run this story; if the other candidates have anyone to blame it is The Chronicle itself. Regardless of all of this, the main thing people need to realize is that many of the elections rules have no purpose other than to dumb down the elections process. Originally, the memo from the Activate Party was meant for the other parties running in this election. It was requested specifically by Rochelle McConkie and Activate sent her a copy. But what if Activate had declined to send her a copy, and she instead got a copy from Fuse or Forward and wrote an article? Would Beech/Carrier still be criticized or punished? Under the rules, they couldn’t be. I guess if reporters want to get information about the activities of the various campaigns, they should ask their opponents for information. That’s the only way people won’t get hit with frivolous grievances.

Daniel BakerSenior, Business