The Tech - Online EditionMIT's oldest and largest
newspaper & the first
newspaper published
on the web
Boston Weather: 54.0°F | Mostly Cloudy

Institute needs more undesignated bulletin boards

As president of a student group that relies on posting flyers for much of its publicity, I would like to offer some thoughts on the new poster policy ["Group works to devise new postering policy," Sept. 12].

The Tech's article cites a space planner for Physical Plant as saying that the present number of bulletin boards is "adequate." I took a walk down the Infinite Corridor and counted the number of bulletin boards. I don't know what happened to the board that I remember at the Building 4 intersection, but I couldn't find a single board that was not designated for a specific activity. I suspect that few would find no space to be "adequate" space.

It seemed to me from your article that MIT's main objections to postering are the time involved in removal of posters and the damage to the paint that poster tape causes. I believe the following proposal would solve both problems.

Place bulletin boards on any large, uncovered wall. Keep these boards "undesignated." Allow any group to post on these boards, provided they adhere to certain guidelines.

First, require every group which wishes to participate to do poster-removal duty twice a term. This would reduce MIT's removal cost almost entirely. Second, require each flyer posted to bear a symbol indicating the group is participating in the program. (Each poster would not need separate approval, reducing the administrative overhead and cost to MIT.) Third, require each flyer to have a "to be removed by" date on it. Flyers whose date has passed, or whose date is more than a week from the present, would be removed by that day's designated removal group. Finally, place a maximum on the number of flyers per group per board, either one flyer per board or four posters per building.

Groups violating these rules would lose postering privileges and could then be fined according to the policy currently being considered.

Current postering takes place because it is an effective way to reach students who would not take the time to read a daily events board in Lobby 7. Rather than eliminating the practice, which would hurt small groups while having less impact on more established groups -- who have designated space along the Infinite Corridor -- I believe that MIT would best serve the community by giving all groups equal opportunity to this valuable publicity resource.

Andrew M. Greene '91->