The Bad Taste of "Runner Mortis"

The Editor misses the point of the argument If the Athletic Club did so well it could hardly be used as a guide to understanding tournament disaster. The question of improvement is irrelevant: it is a read-herring. Even the best can be improved.

Anyway who is the Editor to participate in the argument and to pass such remarks as he does in his lengthy footnotes? If the Editor can't keep his mind out of athletic affairs I suggest that he give bodily assistance by joining us on training nights at Kelbum Park next season. Meanwhile he can start "getting fit for training" (as our anonymous critic so aptly puts it) then if he trains 'a't least ten hours a week" (ibid) he would not only get fit, he would also get rid of his surplus wind and would not need to "Gas" so much.

Sporting Clubs in other (leading) colleges, viz., Otago and Canterbury, are not subjected to the local Rags Editorial and anonymous disparagement. They look after their own affairs and judging by tournament results they manage splendidly. May V.U.C.'s Athletic Club have the same privilege?.

If anyone is in bad form it is the Editor. It is not his task to enter into controversy with writers at all, certainly not in the partisan manner he has, Well Ed., how about putting your own house in order?

(The Editor of "Salient" has in the past used the right of reply to what amount to criticisms of policy. This correspondence questioned the right of "Salient" to print an article, and toe quite rightly answered that issue. For the rest we merely corrected misrepresentation of the original statement. "Salient" probably uses editorial replies far more sparingly than any other newspaper we can think of.

Mr. Blazey should learn that argument ad editorem is no more acceptable than argumentum ad hominem.

The correspondence is closed.—Ed.)