最後還是回到七三—對Task Force的建議失望

d) Each hall may decide to assign 1/3 to 2/3 of its intake of students with 0 year of hall experience at the beginning of each academic year to nonlocal students (with ‘a’ equal to 1) depending on its circumstances, with the constraint that the overall percentage of nonlocal students in halls at 33%, and the overall percentage of students with ‘a’ equal to 1 each year being at 70%. If the number of local students with ‘a’ equal to 1 exceeds the number of places for them, then admission is decided by lottery.

e) Taking into consideration of natural departure due to graduation and overseas exchange, the overlap between the residents in a hall in two consecutive years should not exceed 50% (Please see Annex 1).

不知是哪裏來的最新資料。對Task force完全沒有正視舍堂權力過大的問題，而只是微調有權力的範圍感到失望。

整個問題並不在於比例多少，而是迫使欲住舍堂的同學，要麼住上水天北一類離港大一小時半以上的地方，不能搬家的就請想辦法討好舍堂收生辦的同學，否則沒有任何住的機會。至於為甚麼沒有，Diki那邊有寫，也貼上了民主牆，大家可以拿來討論—簡單而言，除非舍堂所能控制的部份比不能控制的少一截，否則a人和b人的比例就是現在七三的前者後者。若果a人:b人=7:3，那就是和現在一模一樣：七三制。

即使受到非舍堂同學的連番質詢，舍堂方面的同學一直未有正面的回應為何舍堂需要權力去決定收取何人，而不認同所謂的Random Association，認同舍堂文化可以隨著intake而不停改變。我不知道整件事上舍堂的同學扮演了甚麼角色(除了JHDC和Dr. Albert Chau開會以外)，但整件事的結論就是，根本沒有人理會非舍堂同學的訴求：不是改變比例，而是根本地削去十數個獨立王國的實權。