Re: [IAC++] How AAP should go about the job

For the record, "0" (ie. ZERO, None Nil, Null, not even one) of the current "WE" are elected.

Democracy does not mean "one man/woman = one vote". As per the current WE it simply means every one of the "we" must have the opportunity of participating equally in IAC affairs. We also say that this is not ideally possible at present till some operational issues are not sorted out.

To this end, the current batch of WE volunteers intend to erect / configure off the shelf open source packages to enable IAC members to do their own thing individually/collectively and/or with/without IAC's umbrella.

You are darn tooting right that the previous IAC "managers" had violated not one but hundreds (if not thousands) of ethical norms. We are trying to assess these openly and by giving the violators every chance to present the correct picture/version.  These actions need to be chronicled by the IAC and not by outsiders.

The previous IAC management essentially consisted of a grand old man Anna Hazare trying to manage his "gang of four" - Prashanth, Arvind, Manish and Kiran. As far back as August 2011 the split between Anna+Kiran versus the rest 3 was apparent and it revolved around the money (supposedly upwards of 20 crores) which Arvind was "banking".  Anna's blogger Raju Palekar has documented all this.

As of now only Kiran Bedi of these 4 seems to be insisting that she is still part of IAC. She has never contacted us. From the media we also learn that she plans to do fund-raising in IAC's name.

As such IAC will have to concentrate on Dr Bedi and her arrogantly corrupt ways / private foreign funded NGOs (with 15 bank accounts each) which caused the IAC to "split" last year.

We haven't  figured out a way to do those things with footers you want.  SYMPA (the software on which this list runs) is not easy to setup.

Therefore, we'll probably try your other approach - ensure that emails are not so "Tu Tu main main" predictable. That will need a general upliftment of the posting standards to the list - which also means that less mails will get through moderator filters.

Sarbajit

On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Vidyut Kale <wide.aware@gmail.com> wrote:

For the record, how many of the current WE are elected? This is with
direct regard to an earlier description of running this place
democratically, shaping policy based on inputs here, etc. Also if the
electing was done before the split, does it reflect the consensus now,
seeing as how the splitting factions had considerable following and
many may have joined because of that?

This is not aimed as a criticism, as I fully understand that the list
is going through a difficult time. I also understand that regardless
of the number of members in support or opposition of something,
organizational violations have offered. I base this completely on the
information provided on this forum.

I find it inexplicable that the confusion lasts for so long. Perhaps
the point has become to disagree for many.

With a view to restoring normalcy and enabling productive discussions
instead of repeated rehashes of the same explanations, would it be
possible to add a link to the footer of the list emails with a brief
explanation of the current situation and further repeats of the same
information leading to the same arguments be avoided?

It would be more useful to focus on the country rather than fixate on
some people - either in support or objection.

I am new here, but the emails are rapidly getting very predictable. If
the split results in dysfunction here, then it doesn't matter which
faction took over or who at all is "right" - the list is rendered
useless.

Vidyut