[Hum] The wisdom of "hum", the power of "us"

Dear Friends

After the 2 years we had at "HumJanenge@googlegroups.com" (which BTW is still a fully functional mailing list for discussing RTI), your moderators were fed up with certain Google Group policies which were not allowing the Humjanenge google group to grow and expand further. This was also coupled with deep sense of frustration with the way RTI has been rendered irrelevant due to Mir Jafars within our ranks.

RTI is still (and will always be the mother of all processes for aggrieved citizens to get "justice" from the State). It is now time for us to come together on a HUGE platform to  completely expose these CORRUPT "super citizens" who are above the law and who don't feel the need to listen to us or answer our pointed questions. These f***ers who judge and point fingers at the whole world but won't disclose anything about themselves.

The distinguishing characteristic of HJ-GG from its inception has always been the high degree of freedom of speech and expression which took place on the group.  Different and independent views were actively encouraged. Conformists and NGO brain washed "activists" were roundly denounced and exposed- which is perhaps why secret instructions were regularly issued by every foreign financed NGO in India connected with RTI to get their members off our list (at least publicly) as fast as possible.

To understand the next step in our movement's evolution it is necessary that the theoretical concept behind our group dynamics is clearly understood.
This theory is the "Wisdom of Crowds"
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds]. Please read this link carefully to understand the basics.

No matter how much you know (or I know) as individuals our knowledge often amounts to nothing. "WE" (ie. "hum") require opinions, answers, feedback, sometimes a good hard kick in the arse, to set us straight when our egos go out of control..

At "Hum" we shall try to implement "T_WoC" faithfully by ensuring.

1)  Diversity of opinion - Many points of view and domain specialities
2)  Independence - Not trying to force fit / influence our subscribers to any PoV
3)  Decentralization - we value "local"/ practical knowledge and expertise (but not to the detriment of qualified practising professional /expert members)
4) Aggregation - The Moderators shall try to see that a "consensus" results from the major issues.

keeping in view

a) In some cases, groups are remarkably intelligent and are often smarter than the smartest people in them.

b) The best decisions are a product of disagreement and contest.

c) Too much communication can make the group as a whole less intelligent

d) That the collective is more likely to be smart only when
(i)  it isn't defining its own questions,
(ii) when the goodness of an answer can be evaluated by a simple result (such as a single numeric value,) and
(iii)  when the information system which informs the collective is filtered by a quality control mechanism that relies on individuals to a high degree. Only under those circumstances can a collective be smarter than a person. If any of these conditions are broken, the collective becomes unreliable or worse.

Food for thought.

Sarbajit