What's your problem with PRAJA? And, who says the majority of the members opposed any alliance with CAF? PRAJA by itself decided to keep out, atleast till such times as CAF reinvented itself.
Now, Vinay Baindur has been posting full texts of articles from newspapers, Col Mathew has been doing something similar, Dwarakanath has been doing it, and one gentleman has been sending invites of some Sangeet Sabha. I have also of and on been sending links (alongwith short key excerpts) to fairly high quality debates on PRAJA on subjects supposedly very relevant to CAF, essentially with a view to informing the many who I believe are interested in them. So, where is the problem there? You may have a problem with my responses to certain postings by a few. But, I and many others also have problems with these postings, as also the general direction (or lack of it) of CAF. Like I had stated earlier, I am a subscribing member of CAF, and I have every right to express my views as much as you or anyone else has. Yes, there appears to be a total polarisation, and it is obvious it can't continue this way. Just closing down the googlegroup is not going to solve the problem. CAF needs to re-invent itself. The earlier that happens the better. Muralidhar Rao On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 4:26 PM, raghavendra srinath < [email protected]> wrote: > One Mr. Pranav wanted to have some kind of collaboration with PRAJA which > was opposed by majority of members of CAF and the move was thrated. > > Srinath > > --- On *Wed, 2/18/09, [email protected] <[email protected]>* wrote: > > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Subject: CAF2980 Re: CAF Google group > To: [email protected] > Date: Wednesday, February 18, 2009, 3:12 PM > > Dear Srinath > > I endorse most of the views expressed by you . I have also observed, that some > are not even primary members of CAF and DO NOT attended any of the programs > but > ADVISE HOW CAF has to work and so on. Even many of the emails of this group > is > being floated to other groups.It is like a Kannada Proverb--ELLAMMANA JATRELI > > I agree with u, what all achivements that CAF is made so far is because of > few > volunteers who are silently doing the work.Infact ,some of the MLA'S have > even appreciated the boldness of CAF, while taking up certain issues to > streets > and courts inspite of its limited resouces > > Hope to see some change after the next meeting > > Regds > Mukund > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Srinath <[email protected]> > Date: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 1:47 pm > Subject: CAF2979 CAF Google group > To: Citizens' Action Forum <[email protected]> > > > > > CAF GOOGLE GROUP > > > > The recent spate of mails have prompted me to make some serious > > observations: > > > > 1. Who are all the non-members of CAF using this google group to air > > their views, observations and most of the times commenting on the > > functioning of CAF? > > > > 2. Who is the present moderator/administrator of this group ? > > > > 3. How has he/she allowed free access to people who are in no way > > connected with CAF ? > > > > 4. How is that some critical issues privy to only Managing Committee > > members of CAF being freely aired in the group? > > > > Since we all advocate transparency, can somebody enlighten me whether > > the following falls within the ambit of transperancy of an > > Organization like CAF ? > > > > 1. A matter as serious as hacking of CAF website being freely > > discussed in the forum much before being brought up in the Managing > > Committee? > > > > 2. Some of the members reacting to each and everything the freelance, > > non-action, non-accountable bloggers write in their free time. > > > > 3. Some of bloggers writing that CAF has become private and that being > > aired, the moderator being completely silent on this. How did the > > moderator allow this in the first place? > > > > 4. Will any registered Society allow its working, deliberations, > > action plan to be freely discussed, criticised in a free-for-all > > blogging group? Is this called complete transperancy? > > > > 5. A silent but substantial CAF member group who doesn't believe in > > freelance blogging is totally against this kind of transparency. > > > > 6. Whatever the CAF has achieved so far is entirely due to the > > sustained hardwork on the field by active, non-blogging members which > > includes RWAs. > > > > I strongly advocate closing down this CAF google group. Matters > > can be > > discussed among CAF members through individual mails. > > > > I would like to have a thorough discussion on this topic in the next > > managing committee meeting and a decision be taken. > > > > > > Srinath > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Citizens' Action Forum" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/citizens-action-forum?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
