Sunday, December 26, 2010

RE: FW: Very biased article- today's Kantipur

December 26, 2010
Ram Babu Nepal

Dear Ram Babujee


Good to hear from you. Thanks a lot for your solidarity. In my considered opinion, not only the adjective he has used “very” is unacceptable but even the word “bias” is out of place. In view of this I challenged him publically (that’s why you all in my list-serve received my email to him) and he has miserably failed to substantiate his charge, which is evident from his response to my email you are referring to. You too can peruse his response by clicking the link below as I have uploaded it in my website:

Your comment on writers is commendable. However, there are “writers” and “writers”. A number of them do churn out lies for a few silvers; in favor of a particular idea, person or party. This breed do not fall in the ambit of writers that you have visualized.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst

From: Ram Babu Nepal []
Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2010 17:30
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Subject: Re: FW: Very biased article- today's Kantipur

Dear Ratna Sansarji and Dirgh Rajji,


It may be inappropriate to enter into a debate between two persons. I am writing you both because I have had the chance to read e-mail exchange when Ratna Sansarji forwared it to all of us who are in the NNSD mailing list, I suppose.

I do not see any point to add the adjective very biased for Ratna Sansarji's article because he has given reference to the specific article of the then Constitution. If any article was quoted incorrectly or misinterpreted then it is the duty of a reader (who wishes to make comment) to indicate where was it misquoted. Different persons may view differently to a specific situation and this is common. What Dirgha Rajji is pleading in his e-mail is different from the subject matter of the article. There can be debate about the good and bad aspects of different political systems. Not all aspects of Panchayat system or era were harmful. It is a matter of balance what we achieved in what cost. If return was less compared to investment, then there is room to criticise.

Writers are treated with respect. Therefore, every writer should be careful in sustaining the respect of readers. No writer should manipulate his writing skill and twist facts and figures. Prejudices should be avoided for credibility.

I request that every commentator should thoroughly review and determine whether I am taking right path or picking relevant issues before criticising others and avoid adding adjectives to the extent possible.

With best regards,

Ram Babu Nepal

On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Ratna Sansar Shrestha wrote:

Dear Dirgha Raj Prasai jee

No comments: