Example two: It’s a furiously hectic 12:19 p.m. You and a friend, because God forbid you attempt this exercise with more than one other person, wait in an exhaustingly slow line for food. Crowds swarm around you, and you are growing impatient. As you and your friend exit the food line, you weave through herds of people to get some water. After being nearly knocked over three times, you search futilely for 20 minutes for a place to rest your weary bones and enjoy your meal. Sucks for you, though: There are no seats.

Which one sounds more familiar?

Lately, it seems as if Wash. U.’s student body has increased to the size of the University of Wisconsin’s. Either that, or wizards magically shrunk the campus over winter break. Either way, there is a problem. There are no seats at almost any location, the lines are long and slow, and venues frequently run out of food. And let me tell you this, if I don’t get that warm, giant chocolate chip cookie from the DUC café, I get cranky.

These complaints may seem selfish in the wake of tragedy, and I agree wholeheartedly. There are greater problems in the world, and student groups have addressed them in a variety of ways across the campus. In fact, the student response to the crisis in Haiti has been dramatic and inspiring—even today, a booth will be in the DUC throughout the afternoon to raise funds for the Haiti earthquake—so I see no reason to press the issue. Furthermore, if I were writing for The New York Times, I might be more prone to expand my journalistic horizons. But I’m not. I write for this school’s newspaper, and this happens to be a major problem across campus. With the extravagant tuition they pay, the students of this campus should not have to trudge from building to building looking for a place to eat lunch. I don’t know how the University would approach the seating problem, but the DUC, Holmes Lounge, Whispers, and even Hilltop Bakery are nearly unanimously seat-less during peak lunch hours.

When I see students eating outside in 25-degree weather, I know there’s a problem. We were not meant to be penguins. When I see friends huddled together on the half bench thing with the artsy-metallic-looking-swirl-design, it’s clear that the school has not done an adequate job creating table space in the DUC. It’s not only that there are no seats in the main dining room. The café is always full, as is the secret back room past the Career Center. How do people even know that room exists? I’m not whining about something irrelevant. While it may not be a global cause, a top-notch university, such as the one we attend, should have facilities large enough to support its student body. Call me crazy, but it’s a royal pain to have to cover three buildings as if you were in a Navy SEALs operation just to find a chair. Not only is it inconvenient, it’s embarrassing.

Questions that may arise during your trek for salvation: “Why has that kid walked around Whispers three times in the past 10 minutes?” Or, “Why is that kid carrying his food all over campus…Weirdo.” So if the practical aspect of more seating isn’t enough to spur this campus into widespread revolt, let my made up impressions of people judging your lame, seat-less self seal the deal. Good luck finding a table today! Wait…it’s Friday, and no one is on campus; never mind.

The new service, called Webfood, is intended to reduce waiting times and congestion in the Danforth University Center (DUC) for students’ convenience. The program, developed by Bon Appétit administration, Student Union (SU) members and students at large, is the product of efforts from over the last two years.

“If you’re someone that’s frustrated about going to get food and it’s a long line, and you spend most of the time you want to spend with friends waiting in line, you no longer have to do that,” said senior Jeff Nelson, SU president. “Even if you don’t want to use Webfood, you can benefit anyway, because the lines will be shorter.”

Bon Appétit selected the independent service Webfood from several similar options in large part because other U.S. colleges, such as Cornell University, have used the system to positive reviews.

“It integrates very nicely with [the campus card system] we currently have, which lowers the cost that it would take to implement it,” Nelson added.

Another benefit that became apparent as SU was researching Webfood, Nelson noted, is that fewer wrong orders will be thrown away.

“You’d be surprised at how often it happens,” Nelson said. “They’re trying to get through 50 people in the lunch hour, so sometimes they mess up orders, sometimes they forget things, and food is wasted.”

Menu items will be limited at first, though more options will be added over time as students and food service employees become more comfortable with the new system.

The Webfood system limits the number of orders that can be placed at one time. That means an order’s cooking time alone determines how far in advance students have to order their food.

“The item won’t be prepared 15 minutes ahead of time; it’s literally just a few minutes ahead of time,” said Paul Schimmele, assistant to the director of operations in Dining Services.

While Webfood may be advantageous for students, Schimmele said Bon Appétit staff likely won’t benefit from it in any particular way.

“I don’t know if it is any easier for the staff; it’s just a different way to take an order,” Schimmele said. “I don’t think it complicates the job once everybody understands how the system works. There’s going to be changes to the routine a little bit, but I don’t think it affects what they do really.”

Nelson has heard concerns from some that Webfood may eliminate opportunities for students to interact personally with Dining Services staff, but he disagrees.

“If you value standing in line and talking with the workers, developing that relationship, you still can,” he said.

Schimmele and Nadeem Siddiqui, resident district manager for Bon Appétit, downplayed potential problems with Webfood’s implementation, saying the administration is taking the process slowly to avoid complications.

In addition, incoming freshmen and students taking summer classes on campus will be testing Webfood in a pilot program before August move-in to avoid snags.

“I’m sure there will be timing issues, other sorts of things. We want to make sure all that is tidied up before August when we open it to the larger market,” Siddiqui said.

Basic items from Trattoria Verde and Delicioso’s tacqueria and grill stations, snacks and beverages will be available for pre-purchase on a Web site that has yet to be revealed. Orders can be placed at any time of day, but can be picked up only between 7:30 a.m. and 10 p.m. at George’s Express in the DUC.

Most students have not heard about Webfood and none have had the opportunity to try it, but some are looking forward to trying it.

“If I’m going to have to wait 20 minutes either way, I’d rather have that 20 minutes in my room,” senior Amaka Onwuzurike said.

Despite Webfood’s intended benefits for students, the program may not be gladly received by all.

“I’ve heard some people sort of criticize Webfood and say it’s just a luxury. I think it’s really a necessity,” Nelson said.

Many campuses across the U.S. have instituted a “flex points” system in order to give their students the greatest number of dining options, and I think that Wash. U. should do the same. Formerly opposed to the idea, I feared that a flex points system would place restrictions on the use of dining money and that those extras such as coffee, smoothies, Subway and Ursa’s would be eliminated from the roster. Dining Services has gladly taken charge of all of these venues, however, and alleviated this concern.

I spent the summer on Columbia University’s campus meal plan and was impressed at how well the flex system complemented dining points. Campus food—including coffee and smoothies—could be purchased with flex points or dining dollars. Flex point use, unlike that of dining dollars, extended beyond campus to many local businesses, markets, kitchen supply stores, delis, Chipotle and even campusfood.com. And for those students unable to eat their fill of flex points, they could wash or read them away at the campus laundry facilities and bookstore. Sound vaguely familiar? It’s certainly a similar but less limited version of the campus card.

A flex points system would certainly encourage patronization of local businesses­—a concept that Wash. U. seems to support. There is certainly an abundance of student-populated restaurants and stores within easy walking distance: St. Louis Bread Company, Chipotle, Ben & Jerry’s and Schnucks are just a few favorite names. Furthermore, off-campus students would greatly benefit from some options closer to home than campus food when there is no time to cook. I would be happy to buy a greater number of flex points if these options were presented to me in conjunction with a lower number of compulsory meal points and reasonably low overhead charges.

This is likely where the largest obstacle comes into play: Flex points would only work most effectively if they were combined with a smaller meal plan. I’m no businesswoman, but I am sure that Bon Appétit holds some type of contractual protection against too great of competition. How could the prices at Bear Mart compete with Schnucks? They simply could not. And though we all love the BD burrito menu, the prices are much more comparable to Chipotle than the quality of said cuisine. Yet while we are talking economics, it’s also undeniable that Bon Appétit would retain the important convenience factor (Chipotle certainly is not open or accessible for 2 a.m. hunger calls). Students would enjoy the much-needed benefits of some good old-fashioned competition.

Considering Bon Appétit’s tight and ever-escalating hold over the campus food options, I remain perhaps unrealistically idealistic about the possibilities for flex points at Wash. U. For now, I continue to use every point of my off-campus meal plan at the only place on campus where I feel my choices are abundantly endless: Subway.

This issue seems to apply mainly to freshmen, who are required to purchase a full meal plan. Since freshmen generally only have access to the information Wash. U. provides about the meal system, many of them end up buying large plans­—so large that it is not feasible for most students to use efficiently. A popular freshman year choice is the “Meals Plus Plan,” which in the 2008-2009 academic year costs $4,048 and comes out to 2,920 points per year (1,460 points per semester).

At first, the number of meal points students are allotted always seems insignificant, but as the year goes on, lots of freshmen have too many unused points. This problem is so common that almost all students are familiar with the situation. On the other hand, some of the athletes and students with higher metabolisms find that even the larger meal plans are not enough to sustain them throughout the year. So, the problem is not that Wash. U. is goading students into purchasing larger than necessary meal plans, but the lack of information students receive about their options.

Once on campus, students quickly learn that the finances of the meal plans don’t work the way most plans do.

Normally, when you buy in bulk you save money, but at Wash. U. when you buy your food in bulk you actually lose money. This is because at the beginning of the year, when you purchase a meal plan you are paying money toward both the food you will eat and also toward the services and facilities required to have that food option available. Every point in the meal plan, then, costs more than $1.00, but later on in the year, when adding meal points, you only pay for the food and are not charged any overhead fee. Points that you add later on are only $1.00 per point.

The cheapest way for students to eat on campus is always to buy the smallest meal plan possible and add points to the plan as she needs them. This strategy has two benefits. First, it allows students to gauge how much they are actually eating and the food they are eating and second, it is just plain cheaper no matter how much food you consume.

It is irrational for someone to choose any other meal plan, which begs the question of why students choose to pay for the food in any other fashion. For freshmen, the answer is obvious: they aren’t provided enough information to know the economics of meal plans and how adding points works. To help ensure students are making the best decisions, Dining Services should provide better descriptions of the meal plans and also explain how points can be added in the event that a student’s meal plan choice is insufficient.

The logic for how a student can save the most money using campus dining is clear, and the best meal plan for every student is the smallest one no matter what her eating needs are. This raises the question of why Wash. U. allows students to buy any other meal plan, and particularly raises the question for why Wash. U. describes the less economical plans as better than other plans for some students. One possibility is that Wash. U. wants to make sure that the students who are eating on campus the most are paying the most overhead for the facilities and the staff that cooks the food. But, by creating one standard amount of overhead that students pay per point, the University can still dole out responsibility for overhead to the students using the facilities the most because the students using the facilities the most will spend the highest number of points.

Whether intentional or not, the way the meal plan system is currently implemented takes advantage of students who are not informed about how it works, particularly freshmen. It is time to change to a system that has the students’ best interests at heart—one that charges them equally and appropriately for the amount of the food they eat—not a system that preys on the uninformed.