On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 19:12, Narendra Sisodiya < [email protected]> wrote:
> I have uploaded jan lokpal bill at - > > http://rajivdixitwiki.com/index.php?title=%E0%A4%9C%E0%A4%A8_%E0%A4%B2%E0%A5%8B%E0%A4%95%E0%A4%AA%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B2_%E0%A4%AC%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%B2 > > I have not read the Draft Bill, and I am not commenting on the merits of the Bill, as such. > Jan Lokpal Bill want to remove corruption and process of janlokpal mention > about website/document in its draft, So I created a page where we can write > down our modification to draft which we(FOSSCOMM) can submit . > > What modification we want ?? website must be compatible to Firefox, Chrome > etc, Website must not contains FLASH etc, Document must ODF and Multimedia > must be OGG. > "etc"? Will you support Lynx? W3M? Why list products by name? If you had drafted this 5 years ago, you would not have added Chrome. Do we amend the Act every couple of years, to include the browsers we like? If you want open-ness, let us say so. If you want "current flavour that is not MS", let us say so, as well. But they are not the same thing. We must add something more like, having a provision to pay via credit card > or online payment , direct submission of complain via website. So WE (the > internet savvy) must add our modifications and create a better Web2.0 > version of Jan Lokpal Bill. > Do you really want all this in an Act? What about payment by m-Banking? What about the poor, who have no access to the internet. can they pay via Postal orders? Again, my concern is that an Act that micro-manages all aspects ends up either useless, or having the Courts jump through hoops of the English language to make sense. Would Art 226, as litigated by the High Court(s), read with part III of the Constitution (Equality under the law) satisfy you? -- Sanjeev Gupta +65 98551208 http://www.linkedin.com/in/ghane
_______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
