On Mar 9, 2010, at 7:03 PM, Naresh Ajwani wrote:
The big brand was even ENRON-lop sided culture/norms give lop sided results.
Sorry, I can't parse this.
Push to the whistle blewers is nothing new, my reference to OLYMPICS is in the context of RESPECT.
Friends who have been involved with the Olympics came away with something less than respect, but I suspect that wasn't what you were referencing. I might suggest that due to the varied cultures and languages represented on the apnic-talk list that hyperbole and obtuse references are probably not as effective as you might like.
1. I have explained Electoral College/body in my last mail.
Sorry, I must have missed it. It would probably be more useful if it was documented in an actual policy proposal.
2. Yes EC members are to represent themselves but why don’t we research that how come with 30 members support few get elected whereas despite 60 members support one is not elected. Kindly refer the contexts.
I suspect your research will show that it is due to proportional representation and the fact that the 30 members that voted for the incumbents were willing to vote for them again. This doesn't seem surprising to me.
3. We have started a debate, policy wud follow.
This seems exactly backwards to me. How can one have a debate unless a policy proposal is documented to the point where everyone understands what is being discussed?