Editor, Daily Nexus,
Is Nick Pasto serious in his column (Daily Nexus, “Don’t Play Games With Students’ Meals,” May 16)? I agree that the food in both dining commons could be better, but to call it harmful and offensive? That’s going a bit too far.
Yes, I would prefer we had our choice of dining back. But the reason that it’s assigned is because everyone would converge on Ortega, not Carrillo, because Ortega has a better location. Sure, Carrillo has a good pizza oven, but everyone who eats there gets tired of the same choice of pasta, soup, salad or stir-fry every single night.
Nick complains that the servers attempt to ration the food, then says that wasting food will combat this policy. Does he not realize that people like him are what inspired it? Food waste is a big problem when you’re talking as many students per meal as these people are.
I’m not sure why the burrito bar was closed, but have you tried asking? Every time I’ve been there (admittedly, Friday-Sunday only), there have been burritos and fixings available, just not all in one location.
As for the pricing, have you compared the price for 14 meals per week to 19? You pay less per meal on the 19-plan because the dining commons knows you’re probably going to miss a few, so they don’t charge you as much.
Why don’t you complain about something that the dining commons aren’t doing to the best of their ability? Like Carrillo’s “ice cream” or “salad bar,” or Ortega’s lack of choices on any given day.
Students should have a choice of dining commons, but it’s not a monopoly. Students were told when they signed their contract that at least a 10-meal plan came with it. There are other places to get food in town. Eat there.