Brown's basking in the redistribu-tive advantage earned by Harvard's elimination of early decision admissions is at best ignorant, at worst profane ("Forget Harvard," Elms, January/February).

At some sober moment in its hopefully not too distant future, Brown will also see fit to do away with such a flagrantly prejudicial admissions practice. Brown's erstwhile early action system was, mercifully, not binding, which exempted low-income students from the Russian roulette of committing to a college without knowing what aid it will provide. Even so, what talented urban teens need more than an exit clause is forgiveness of the sins of their school systems, which tend not to prepare students for the admissions battle in time for a November deadline.

The mere fact that a post-secondary learning institution elects to let students in before it lets other students in, behind the veil of letting applicants boldface their enthusiasm, acknowledges that, in the end, we privilege the readier. This, on a level playing field, would pose no problem. But with resources unevenly scattered as they are, Brown can't pretend to a fair harvest when it hungrily plucks those who ripen early only because they receive a greater share of sunlight.