Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism

Wikipedia has started to hit the big time. Accordingly, several critical articles have come out, including "The Faith-Based Encyclopedia" by a former editor-in-chief of Britannica and a very widely-syndicated AP article that was given such titles as "When Information Access Is So Easy, Truth Can Be Elusive".

These articles are written by people who appear not to appreciate the merits of Wikipedia fully. I do, however; I co-founded Wikipedia. (I have since left the project.)

Wikipedia does have two big problems, and attention to them is long overdue. These problems could be eliminated by eliminating a single root problem. If the project's managers are not willing to solve it, I fear a fork (a new edition under new management, for the non-techies reading this) will probably be necessary.

Read the remaining article here

Beer Purush

Fight for the Earth

http://exnorainternational.org/index.html

The Ones who thought and then, fought

http://www.5thpillar.org/

how many deaths will it take till he knows that too many people have died?

http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/aug/13inter.htm

A father fights for justice for his dead soldier son

http://specials.rediff.com/news/2007/apr/23slide1.htm

FOCUS ON YOUR STRENGTHS, NOT WEAKNESSES..

Marcus Buckingham knows enough about good management to know he's not a good manager.

Before launching a career as a management consultant and author of such books as First, Break All The Rules: What the World's Greatest Managers Do Differently and The One Thing You Need to Know...About Great Managing, Great Leading and Sustained Individual Success, Buckingham served as head of The Gallup Organization's strengths management practice. He was a manager, and he didn't much care for it. "I wasn't terrible, but I had no appetite for it," said Buckingham, who spoke about management and leadership at the Wharton Leadership Conference on June 9. The conference was sponsored by Wharton's Center for Leadership and Change Management and Center for Human Resources.

According to Buckingham, the best managers share one talent -- the ability to find, and then capitalize upon, their employees' unique traits. "The guiding principle is, 'How can I take this person's talent and turn it into performance?' That's the only way success is possible." And yet not everyone has that knack, Buckingham said. If he has learned anything from his years spent interviewing the best minds of the business world, it is this: Truly great managers, and truly inspiring business leaders, are rarer than many think. "Some of you in this room may not have that talent," he said. "If not, management can become a thankless task."

Checkers vs. Chess

How to tell a good manager from a bad manager? According to Buckingham, it's simple: Bad managers play checkers. Good managers play chess. The good manager knows that not all employees work the same way. They know if they are to achieve success, they must put their employees in a position where they will be able to use their strengths. "Great managers know they don't have 10 salespeople working for them. They know they have 10 individuals working for them .... A great manager is brilliant at spotting the unique differences that separate each person and then capitalizing on them."

It may sound elementary, but a quick glance around the business world indicates that many companies have yet to grasp this simple concept of putting people's strengths to use, Buckingham said. That's because the business world -- and the world at large -- is obsessed with weaknesses and finding ways to fix them. Buckingham cited a recent poll that asked workers whether they felt they could achieve more success through improving on their weaknesses or building on their strengths. Fifty-nine percent picked the former.

"A great manager sees the folly in this," said Buckingham, who has interviewed some of the business world's most successful leaders for his books. "A great manager knows he or she will get the most return on investment by working on strengths." Buckingham has seen this management style work. He just doesn't see it often enough, and he believes too many workers spend too much of their time doing things they don't like to do or simply aren't good at doing.

Buckingham co-authored his book, Now, Discover Your Strengths, in hopes of kick-starting a management revolution that will push mangers to focus on strength. In the book, Buckingham and co-author Donald O. Clifton describe 34 distinct worker profiles -- "Learner," "Achiever" and "Developer," among others -- and offer advice on how those personalities can best be put to use. "Most people are not using their talent at work at all," Buckingham said.

So how can managers tap into the talent they have in their organizations? Buckingham said a good first step is to determine what employees are good at. The tasks they learn quickly, the talents they naturally exhibit and the jobs they feel good about doing are hints about their inherent strengths. Once those strengths are uncovered, a good manager will put them to use. "You can only win as a company when you get your people into positive numbers," Buckingham said.

Optimism and Ego

Managing employees successfully is a rare talent. Even rarer, Buckingham said, is the ability to lead. And all good managers are not necessarily good leaders.

"I do think there is a rather keen and distinct difference between managing and leading," Buckingham said. The chief responsibility of a leader, for example, "is to rally people for a better future. If you are a leader, you better be unflinchingly, unfailingly optimistic. No matter how bleak his or her mood, nothing can undermine a leader's belief that things can get better, and must get better. I believe you either bring this to the table or you don't."

Along with that optimism, great leaders can also bring big egos -- and that's not a bad thing. While some have blamed the business world's recent string of scandals -- Enron, WorldCom and others -- on bloated executive egos, Buckingham disagrees. It's not ego that ruined Ken Lay, but rather a lack of ethics. There's a big difference, Buckingham said. And considering the responsibility facing business leaders to build a future for their companies, a big ego might be what is needed.

"If you are going to lead, you better have a deep-seated belief that you should be at the helm, dragging everyone into that better future," he said. "Virtually nothing about a leader is humble. I'm not saying they are arrogant, but their claims are big." Buckingham said successful leaders must find a "universal truth" to rally their followers. These universal truths stem from the basic human needs, fears and desires that unite all people, across all cultures. They also happen to be great tools for leadership.

Take, for example, one of the great human fears -- fear of the future. "We all share a fear of the unknown," Buckingham said. "The problem for the modern-day leader, of course, is that you traffic in the future." Buckingham says some the best leaders can overcome this fear -- and build confidence among their followers -- with a weapon of their own: clarity.

By presenting a clear message, and backing up their message with actions that support it, top managers of such companies as Tesco, Best Buy and Wal-Mart have rallied employees to their cause and enjoyed bottom-line success as a result, Buckingham noted. "The best way to turn anxiety into confidence is this: Be clear. Clarity is the antidote to anxiety. If you do nothing else as a leader, be clear." Former New York City Mayor Giuliani provided a good example of effective leadership through clarity, Buckingham said. When Giuliani took office in 1993, he could have turned his attentions just about anywhere; America's largest city certainly had its share of problems.

But Giuliani set one specific, clear and focused goal for his administration. He would reduce crime and improve quality of life for residents. Then he laid out three simple ways he was going to start making that happen: He announced he would get rid of the window washers who pestered New York City drivers; clean subways of graffiti and then keep the vandals away; and make all cab drivers wear collared shirts. The issues were, on their surface, minor. But they were relevant to his citizens. And by setting three immediate goals -- and then achieving them -- Giuliani was able to build trust among residents and respect among his workers. That trust carried over as he tackled larger challenges, and within a few years of his arrival, the FBI named New York the safest big city in America. "You can do a lot worse than pick just a few areas you want to take action on right now," Buckingham said.

Clarity of purpose has also been a driving factor in the success of Tesco, the British food giant that has more than 2,000 stores and 360,000 employees worldwide. When Terry Leahy took over as CEO in 1997, he decreed the company's focus would be, from that point forward, to serve the housewives of the world. Then he went out and did something to prove he believed in his focus: He added more checkout lines in all his stores, a move that led to significantly higher labor costs but also won over his customers and sent a message to his employees that they were there, as Leahy had proclaimed, to provide courteous, efficient service.

"That kind of clarity builds confidence in people," Buckingham said. Today, Tesco is one of the three largest retailers in the world, and Leahy's success provides a handy leadership lesson. "When you want to lead, start with the future." Buckingham said. "Get specific. And get vivid."

The "Do Nots" of Networking

Recruiters' Top 10 Complaints

Recruiters' Top 10 Complaints

Send letter to India by just writing an email!

the once ancient public sector enterprises of India mc. have slowly started to renovate themselves and make smart use of technology, and here's a great example of the same. The Indian postal department has now started giving an option to send letters to India by just writing an email, and the source is made available at fairly low cost (if you are not in India). Here's the url - http://www.indiapost.gov.in/IndiaPost-E-Post.html

An Article from PETA Newsletter

Dear Friend,

As an eyewitness to the barbaric practices that take place behind the scenes at Ringling, I'd like to tell you exactly what happens so that you can help me spread the word to people who still think that circuses that use animals are good family "entertainment."

I joined Ringling last April because I wanted the opportunity to work with animals every day. I was totally unprepared for what I saw.

The public has no idea that Ringling's handlers are taught to keep the animals afraid. I saw the elephants, horses, and camels get hit, punched, beaten, and whipped by circus staff members. Everyone from the head of animal care to totally inexperienced handlers abused animals. The abuse did not take place once in a while; it happened every day.

Witnessing this abuse left me a nervous wreck. I routinely complained to my supervisors about what I knew was outright cruelty to animals, but I was told repeatedly that I was overreacting. Just a few months after I'd joined, I quit Ringling because I couldn't stand the cruelty inherent in the circus any longer.

I was an animal lover before I joined Ringling. Now, I am also an animal activist. I have joined PETA's efforts to stop the horrific violence inflicted on animals by Ringling.

I am a mother of five children, and having seen what goes on behind the scenes at Ringling, I will never again take them to a circus that exploits animals.

Among all the horrors I saw behind the scenes at Ringling, one event stands out. That was the day I saw Ringling's head trainer viciously assault a sweet elephant who was chained by her front and back legs, unable to escape from the blows. For at least half an hour, the trainer beat her with a bullhook—a heavy, steel-tipped club that Ringling's handlers use frequently. At one point, I saw the trainer swing the bullhook into the elephant's ear canal with all his force as she screamed in pain.

That particular trainer was known to have a violent temper. On June 11, 2006, I saw him lead two elephants, whom I believe were called Luna and Tonka, within inches of a man who was videotaping them. Luna and Tonka are Ringling's most aggressive elephants, and I was shocked that the trainer would so recklessly endanger this man's life. I then saw the trainer attack the man with his bullhook. It was only later that I learned that the person the trainer had threatened worked for PETA.

The PETA staff members who tracked our tour stood in stark contrast to the bullies working for Ringling. I observed the tireless PETA staff members from afar and was impressed by their composure, dedication, and compassion. That's why I knew I had to tell PETA everything I'd seen when I decided to leave Ringling.

Now that I've come forward, I know that PETA—and members like you—will make sure that Ringling faces consequences for its heartless cruelty. Let's make sure the elephants' story is told.

Sincerely,

Archele Hundley

I can only imagine the kind of resources it takes to put investigators on the road in order to follow a company like Ringling for an entire year. But if it weren't for PETA's willingness to do so, no one would ever know what's being done to Ringling's animals. Thank you for supporting their work.

Google to launch Online Powerpoint rival

Google is adding a feature to its Docs & Spreadsheets Web-hosted software that will enable people to create presentations and slide shows, Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt said Tuesday at the Web 2.0 Expo here.

http://news.com.com/Google+treads+on+PowerPoint+turf/2100-1032_3-6176889.html

A Study in Usability

I wanted to sample the usability of Web Applications to actual business users and how they perceive value. In order to do the same, I went ahead and created a survey at LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/answers/technology/enterprise-software/TCH_ENT/36530-4256932

The advantage of a global community like LinkedIn is we always get high participation from people who really think and try to innovate. Without an exception, the answers show some real insights from real users of Applications. I think all of us developers might periodically learn something from the end-users and align our priorities. Hope everyone finds the survey as useful as I did.

Synopsis

This discussion has added so much value that I decided to share it over here...it has been truly global and I can't thank enough the few good men who participated in the discussion...so many horizons are opened when we get exposure to such a rich group of users...

My Question:
--------------------
When you use web-based business applications, what is the single factor you appreciate the most?

I would appreciate to-the-point answers, like "Speed" or "Less no. of postbacks" or "Lots of tooltips/help links" etc. However, your comments are definitely invaluable and could not understate their importance by any means. So feel free to give a one-word reply and then expand it.

Intention : Being a business application developer, my sole parameter for success is "Quality as perceived by the end-user". Want to increase that score.

Ed Lass, Albany says

OK, I'll bite:

Results for the user--the app gets the job done better than if it didn't exist.

Roshan Shah, Canada says

Minimal Clicks to get to what I want and fast loading of page and small forms to fill if any.

Devesh Dwivedi, Washington DC says

User friendliness: The application should be very user freindly and by that I mean easy to comprehend and apply/use as well. It should be a breeze and not a plop of technical junk. I love more advanced features and functionalities but if it comes at the cost of user friendliness, I won't buy that. - My two cents:)

Alok Jain, Washington DC says

If this is your sole prameter, I would suggest putting some time understand users and their needs.

The importance of any factor depends on users and context. For e.g. for a call center app used by young guys speed is important because their success parameter is dependent on number of calls they can handle. While in Internet banking feeling secure and having precise control/clarity is much more important than speed.

You could apply various techniques to find users' priorities, best would be to just go and observe them and talk to them.

My Take -

I totally agree with that "everyone can't like chocolate ice cream"! Different segments, age groups and job roles will definitely have different priorities and they cannot be judged by a one-size fits all approach. However, what i am trying to accomplish with this question is getting the opinion of different users in different professions and see if I can really find out any common subset - a pattern which would then give us a basic set - after which the specialization would come.

Shane O'Neil ,Canada says

Integration ... Software as a Service (SAS) companies that "get it" develop an API. Importing and exporting data is a necessity; however, an API allows the customer the ability to integrate the web based app with other applications for more flexible functionality, back end integrations and reporting.

From a software provider perspective, APIs can form the basis of a partnership and create stickiness. There is an investment from the client perspective to code to the API. To change vendors means new development cycles and hence a new investment so you'll have to really suck at what you do to make the client go through that pain. Clients will be more forgiving.

An API will also allow the client to develop functionality against your app that may be important to them, but off-strategy or a lower priority to the you.

Two cents. Hope this helps.

Vinod Kumar, Greater Boston Area says

I would extend upon Roshan's answer and say - Usability.

Usability has 2 parts - Intended & Perceived. Intended usability is quantitaive, can be measured by some of the factors that Roshan mentioned - e.g. no. of clicks it takes to go from one place in the application, to another. Perceived usability is subjective - It is how the user views the software as being user friendly.

Paulo Arancibia, Argentina says

A minimum number of click and postbacks by each action and a good balance of color.

Thierry Thomas, France says
Portability: it should really run the same way on any browser.
And speed, of course!

Fred Held, Greater Los Angeles Area says (I love this discussion!)
Sorry for the wordiness, but I love talking to developers.
1) Gets the job done faster, easier, 24/7 availability, remote capability
2) Help really works and does not send you to FAQ. I have NEVER found an FAQ that met my needs. Why that is done is amazing to me.
3) Chat help is incredible. I don't care if it is outsourced to the Congo as long as the person helps me and it is available 24/7
4) Mobile capability, over 40 percent of IBM Global services employees work from their home office small office or mobile locations. This trend is accelerating globaly.
5) Reliability and work is not lost due to a system glitch. An example of "cave man" designs is the clarification tool on linkedin. It crashes and gives a 1970 type meaningless insulting error report and the work is lost. Remember the now famos windows error message. " a fatal error has occured" WTF does that mean.
6) Intuitive usability, I can not say too much about user testing for usability. When at IBM we spent a lot of time on the system we were developing for our client on this. We created a user group who we tested. One such group were truckers. That was fun going to truck stops.
7) Downward compatability. MS and IBM are known for not providing this and forcing the user to upgrade making all the work done in the past unusable. This is bad marketing since the investment in this work far exceeds the cost of the upgrade.
8) How do you measure "Quality as perceived by the end-user". here is an example of IBM's Intranet ran by Mike Wing. They measure the soft stuff very well. A key question answered by the user population is the following. "What percentage of the time do you used the Intranet in your work to find out information versus co-workers and your supervisor" In 1994 they started measuring this the exact same way every year. They gained a lot of information in the survey and used the process of continous improvemnt. They then set a paremeter of succes. The paremeter was when 50% of the time the employee used the Intranet ot get the necessary information or help, they have achieved success. In 2000 they crossed 50% and started accelerating towards much higher numbers.

Once again I apologize for such a long answer but I am passionate about helping developers with rigid requirements documents, small budgets and tight time frames create software that is loved not loathed.

My Take -

I agree with you - "Don't make the customer think" should be the mantra for every web developer....because if I do, someone else won't and the customer would go to him....and web 2.0 is really a revolution.....its not just a technical overhaul....but it signifies the control going back to the customer...the web merging with "customer is the king" philosophy...I would go as far as to term as "The biggest revolution so far in the largest democracy (the web)"

what we really lack is to know that "Am I making that guy happy to whom the tool is being rolled out by the management?" Because at the fag end of the day, that is success to me.....to enable the user smile a bit more...as the system makes his life easier...proactively shares some of his real life work load...I don't want to make him grim with a 200 page user manual :) ...and customer satisfaction is THE GOAL for me....not knowledge of all the technologies or mesmerizing funda over recursive algorithms (though I would be more than glad to have both :) )...... even Simon and Garfunkel sang "Keep the Customer Satisfied" [;)]

Only thing I don't agree with you is the FAQ think....I have often been greatly helped by them:)....

Sachin Palewar, India says
I appriciate simple interfaces much like google and straight-forward navigation so that its intuitive and visitor doesn't feel lost and confused.
In technical terms use of Web 2.0 technologies and Usability concepts play an important role.

Alexander Samarin , Switzerland says
I think, first, you have to define "Quality" in your sentence.
My favourite - flexibility of business applications.
My experience shows that the business people like when their separate requests for change are quickly implemented in existing systems/applications. These changes are typically small (from the point of view of the business) and unpredictable.

My Take -

I couldn't agree more with ur answer...but one thing I want to point out is that you are talking more from the perspective of the management rather than that of the end-users. Extensibility would be a priority for the guy who sanctions the project budget...i.e. if I wanna add x functionality which was not there, I would like to shell out much less dollars than I did for the system implementation...it should be incremental and not break/recreate existing functionality....but that is something we devs nowadays usually keep in mind from the very design phase....however what we really lack is to know that "Am I making that guy happy to whom the tool is being rolled out by the management?" Because at the fag end of the day, that is success to me.....to enable the user smile a bit more...as the system makes his life easier....I don't want to make him grim with a 200 page user manual :)

All in all, a thrilling discussion, am overwhelmed :)

LinkedIn rocks!

Keep on Rockin in the Free World

There's colors on the street
Red, white and blue
People shufflin' their feet
People sleepin' in their shoes
But there's a warnin' sign on the road ahead
There's a lot of people sayin' we'd be better off dead
Don't feel like Satan, but I am to them
So I try to forget it, any way I can.

Keep on rockin' in the free world,
Keep on rockin' in the free world
Keep on rockin' in the free world,
Keep on rockin' in the free world.

I see a woman in the night
With a baby in her hand
Under an old street light
Near a garbage can
Now she puts the kid away, and she's gone to get a hit
She hates her life, and what she's done to it
There's one more kid that will never go to school
Never get to fall in love, never get to be cool.

Keep on rockin' in the free world,
Keep on rockin' in the free world
Keep on rockin' in the free world,
Keep on rockin' in the free world.

We got a thousand points of light
For the homeless man
We got a kinder, gentler,
Machine gun hand
We got department stores and toilet paper
Got styrofoam boxes for the ozone layer
Got a man of the people, says keep hope alive
Got fuel to burn, got roads to drive.

Keep on rockin' in the free world,
Keep on rockin' in the free world
Keep on rockin' in the free world,
Keep on rockin' in the free world.

The kid who turned down $1 billion!

They say u should always keep dreaming. And he sure believes that. We may remember the two Youtube founders - who sold their dream venture to Google and giggled like excited kids......This guy has held back...and refused a billion.....way to go, kid!

Link here

SFI Barbarism at Jadavpur University Campus

Update from The Telegraph : read here


Update from The Statesman : read here

Brawl in JU after SFI loses engineering faculty too WTI students say the SFI brought in CPI(M) hooligans to bash them up, members of teaching and non-teaching staff too lent a hand Express News Service

Kolkata, April 5: The Nandigram issue has apparently decimated the Student’s Federation of India — the students’ wing of the CPI(M) — in the Jadavpur University this year.

Following its loss in the Arts Faculty and Science Faculty elections, the SFI suffered its most humiliating debacle at the engineering faculty elections that was held today. While at the Science Faculty, We The Independent (WTI) bagged all the 4 seats, at the Engineering Faculty, the Democratic Students Forum bagged all the 5 seats.

All three elections were held in the last 10 days. And today’s results finally triggered trouble, with the SFI members allegedly unleashing terror on the campus.

Just when 200-odd representatives of We The Independent (WTI) — the students’ organisation which won the Science Faculty student’s union elections — set out to celebrate their 500-margin victory over the SFI, pandemonium broke: they were allegedly roughed up by their SFI counterparts. The WTI said the SFI had gathered CPI(M) hooligans and hoodlums from outside to beat them up.

Allegations and counter allegations flew thick and fast.

Students from the science faculty heaped accusations on SFI members. “They are absolutely frustrated because we have won all four seats in the 950-student faculty. We won by a margin of 500. Seven of our boys had to be taken to EDF Hospital for treatment of the injuries,” said a WTI member.

The most embarrassing claim made by the students was that some teachers also joined the SFI in bashing up the WTI boys. “Even teachers beat up the students in the Science Club room. We were also beaten up in the non-teaching staff office room. We are submitting a deputation to the Vice-Chancellor demanding the suspension of these teachers,” said Shesadri Mitra, one of the WTI students who also filed an FIR at the Jadavpur police station. The faculty tried to cool down the tense atmosphere.

Prof Swadesh Ranjan Roychowdhury, HoD, Chemistry, said: “We have instructed the students to write down their complaints and demands and submit it to the vice-chairman. There is no use increasing tension by flaring tempers.”

“It is obvious that a certain political party is trying to get back their stronghold after losing in every faculty and hence creating the ruckus... this is a desperate attempt to get back to power,” said another professor on condition of anonymity.

Sougata Roy, the general secretary of the JU Non-teaching staff union, which owes allegiance to CPI(M), however, said: “The WTI members were shouting anti-SFI slogans and suddenly got inside the Science Club and started beating up the SFI students. They also got inside our office and vandalised it. Now they are misrepresenting facts to cover up their follies.” None of the SFI members were available for comment.

Learning Nandigram Lessons by Praful Bidwai

Learning Nandigram Lessons

By Praful Bidwai

26 March 2007
Khaleej Times

West Bengal's Left Front, led by the Communist Party of India-Marxist
(CPM), has barely pulled back from a potentially self-destructive
disaster following the Nandigram carnage by adopting an 8-point agreement.

This acknowledges that the March 14 Nandigram incident, in which 14
people were gunned down, "was tragic" and won't be repeated; the
government "will not acquire any land in Nandigram for any industry"
and the police "will be withdrawn in phases".

The agreement says the Front's partners will "meet more frequently" to
take "all important political decisions... after discussion."

The agreement became possible primarily because of the public outrage
Nandigram caused and the tough stand taken by the CPM's main
partners-Communist Party of India, Forward Bloc, and Revolutionary
Socialist Party. They condemned the police firing as undemocratic and
"brutal and barbaric", and threatened to withdraw from the government.

Critical here was the role of the Grand Old Man of Bengal politics,
former Chief Minister Jyoti Basu. He said the CPM is running
"one-party rule in this state. It doesn't look like a coalition
government at all..." He reprimanded Chief Minister Buddhadeb
Bhattacharjee, and told the Front's non-CPM leaders to quit if the CPM
doesn't change course.

The agreement represents a victory for the people - and forces of
sanity. The victory was costly. And yet, it doesn't settle all issues:
Will the Front completely abandon its Special Economic Zones (SEZs)
policy? Will it refuse any truck with Indonesia's Salim group - a
front for the super-corrupt Suharto family-for whom 10,000 acres was
to be acquired in Nandigram?

Will it revise Bhattacharjee's "industrialisation-at-any-cost"
orientation, with total disregard for social and environmental
consequences? And will the CPM consult its allies on policy issues in
advance, rather than throw the weight of its 176 seats in the
294-member Assembly, against their 51 seats?

It's necessary to place Nandigram in context. The immediate cause of
the violence there wasn't land acquisition, put on hold after popular
protests in January. It was the CPM's attempt to regain control of the
area for its "cadres". The "cadres" brook no challenge to their power.
But on January 7, they faced the people's anger. Many were driven out.
They were itching to come back.

Nandigram wasn't solely a fight between the CPM and assorted
Opposition groups, including the Right-wing, thuggish Trinamool
Congress, backed by the Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind and other factions, which
had collected arms and blockaded the area. Like the TMC, the CPM too
employed strong-arm methods, revealed by the arrest of 10 of its
cadres. The blockade was a spontaneous people's initiative. As CPM
general secretary Prakash Karat admitted, the local "people turned against
us."

The plain truth is, CPM apparatchiks instigated Black Wednesday's
operation to settle scores in the "cadres'" favour by using the
state's might. They imposed collective punishment, an obnoxious
method, on the residents.

The 4,000-strong police didn't use non-lethal anti-riot water cannons,
rubber bullets and smoke grenades until their utility was exhausted-as
mandated by police manuals.

The police shot to kill. Most bullet injuries were above the waist
level. Many people were shot in the back. At Bhangabera Bridge, the
police pumped 500 bullets into 2,000 people.

The Central Bureau of Investigation has gathered evidence that CPM
"cadres" also fired into the crowd, many disguised in police uniform.
It recovered 500 bullets from them. It also found a 657 metre-long
"blood trail", which suggests "a gunny-bag holding a body was being
dragged".

It will take long to heal the wounds of Nandigram. It's worst outrage
to have occurred under Left Front rule in West Bengal. Even Karat
concedes that the firing was "disapproved by the people of West
Bengal... [who] have a high democratic consciousness."

The pivotal question is whether the CPM will learn the right lessons
from Nandigram. Or else, it'll forfeit its greatest gains, which have
ensured its victory in election after consecutive election for three
decades - a record unmatched in any democracy.

Sadly, Bhattacharjee hasn't lost any of his zeal for
"industrialisation-at-any-cost". Bhattacharjee has a crude, dogmatic
view of history, which sees industrialisation of any kind as progress.
He fails to understand that corporate-led neoliberal industrialisation
doesn't produce the collective Blue-collar worker (Marx's proletarian)
and that it lacks the employment and social potential of classical
capitalism. Rather, it bases itself upon
Whiter-collar workers, is extremely capital-intensive, and creates
enclave-based growth.

Neoliberal industrialisation involves capital accumulation through
expropriation of livelihoods. A progressive state must not condone it;
rather, it should discipline and regulate capitalism in the interests
of society.

But for Bhattacharjee, the Tata car plant at Singur, being built on a
neoliberal pattern, is the model. In reality, it's a stark case of
crony capitalism, with subsidies equalling a fourth of its capital
costs! It's also an instance of elitist, socially inappropriate,
high-pollution industrialisation.

Bhattacharjee is also an unreconstructed believer in "stages" of
historical development. For him, semi-feudal India must first achieve
capitalism and then attempt socialist reform. He says he's working
strictly within "a capitalist framework".

This view severely underestimates the possibilities for social
transformation available within India's backward capitalism and for
progress towards a more just society free of social bondage and
economic serfdom.

For Bhattacharjee, the ideal model to follow is China, with its giant
SEZs like Shenzen, unfettered freedom for multinational capital, and
legalisation of private property. He should know better.

Shenzen is a workers' nightmare, where no labour rights exist. The
mere loss of an identity card can reduce workers to destitution.
Chinese vice-minister Chen Changzhi has just revealed that 80 per cent
of the 1.84 million hectares of farmland earmarked for industrial
development was illegally acquired.

The Left, especially the CPM, must decide whether it wants to fight
for socialism, or merely manage capitalism Chinese-style, however
honestly. If it chooses the second option, it will go into historic
decline. It must also make a decisive break with the undemocratic
organisational culture it has inherited, which punishes dissidence and
encourages a "my-party-right-or-wrong" attitude.

Unless the Left undertakes ruthless self-criticism, it can't effect
course correction.

Worth seeing once, but falls WAY short of an epic

I am a die-hard Frank Miller fan(also Tarantino/Rodriguez enthusiast) and I loved the comic-book action depicted in 300, but only so much! I loved every inch of Sin City. But, I have some problems with this movie, and I think that stops it short of what it could have achieved.

1. Voice over - this film has a weak voice over. In Sin City, the cold, detached VO was one of the USP. But the voice used here is just not upto the magnitude the film tries to portray.

2. As an actor, Gerard Butler is just not powerful enough to act Leonidas - he shouts a lot and inspires a little - the lines he had could have given him a chance to make him immortal in the heart of epic movie lovers,but he fails to deliver the dialog with that mastery - sorry for the unfair comparison - but can't help thinking about Viggo as Aragorn / Russell as Maximus when I see something like that -and sadly Gerard has a hard time to live upto the expectation - screws up badly.

Still, worth a see. Entertaining, but memorable? No Sir! Frank Miller's Sin City was UNFORGETTABLE, this is just time pass.

Creating a Positive Professional Image

As HBS professor Laura Morgan Roberts sees it, if you aren't managing your own professional image, others are.

"People are constantly observing your behavior and forming theories about your competence, character, and commitment, which are rapidly disseminated throughout your workplace," she says. "It is only wise to add your voice in framing others' theories about who you are and what you can accomplish."

There are plenty of books telling you how to "dress for success" and control your body language. But keeping on top of your personal traits is only part of the story of managing your professional image, says Roberts. You also belong to a social identity group—African American male, working mother—that brings its own stereotyping from the people you work with, especially in today's diverse workplaces. You can put on a suit and cut your hair to improve your appearance, but how do you manage something like skin color?

Read the story here

Wall Street Journal Most Reputed Companies of 2006

The ranks are out here .............

Look at the top name :)


Rocks!