Hi Sarabjit , and other people on the list, specially the other moderators
Seems like we have some prevaricating about many bushes before we can chew on the substance of many issues.
Yet again i and some others have some problem with Sarabjit's, the moderator in this case, mail , specifically they are below.
The Moderators of this group have (after considerable internal debate)
decided that we (responsible RTI stakeholders) are collectively fed up
with being inflicted with the nonsense that 'activists" (RTI / Social
/ 498A / environmental .. etc ) keep inconsiderately posting to this
group.
Let the debate be public on this list, i would like, being interested in the politics of the decision to know who stands for what.
Kindly define Responsible RTI Stakeholder.
Because in colloquil it may mean one thing but this much misused word, from gambling, means nothing to do with what we are talking about (see end of mail for meaning)
RTI is not only the technicalities of getting information, which should have been ours by right, it is also about the politics of information and without the politics the information it is at best data. Unfortunate , as this is the state of this current RTI beast.
It wasn't unactivist people who managed to make RTI happen it happened because of a lot of concerned, active, activist people involved them selves in the politics of information. People who were interested in things other than those accruing directly to them.
On this list there has been the constant bashing of activists and often social, environmental activists have received fairly bad will here. I wonder why. I am a nature conservationist and some times (often enough) it means standing up to some very very big bullies. The kind of bullies one does not want to meet in broad daylight even in front of a Million People. For us RTI is a tool, a weapon, a method to get information that such bullies and theeir boorocratic (use sic when quoting if you need to ) friends. There are many wars and battles being fought and the powers that be are using evvery single unfair, dastardly, cowardly, criminal method possible to make sure that only their writ runs (many times it runs a riot as well) .
In this madness to not use RTI is criminal and to think of accessing RTI as only information and not politcal is quite stupid.
Why is it that filing an RTI (for the simpler things in life) makes some sections of the Government Machinery Perform. Simply because they hold them selves accountable to no one and at present the only accountability that we, as common people, can get, is to use a mechanism that was not designed so but has become so. Why is it that information being accessed under / through RTI makes accountable people very jittery and scared enough to take drastic steps. Where is accountability in the system, no where, RTI is as yet one of the very very few tools we have for that as much as we would like it to be otherwise.
Accordingly we have resolved that the new primary purpose of this
group is to facilitate information exchange between the stakeholders
in RTI process, so that responsible citizen users get maximum
information in RTI without delay, and that PIOs and FAAs deny maximum
information to irresponsible applicants / appellants without fear of
penalty.
The secondary (but equally important) purpose is to expose all the
'harami' RTI activists, and Information Commissioners who are killing
the RTI movement to the detriment of responsible RTI users.
ram
Meaning of the word stakeholder, which people should consider not using and rather use interested / beneficiary parties.
**
Stakeholder Stake"hold`er (-h[=o]ld`[~
The holder of a stake; one with whom the bets are deposited
when a wager is laid.
[1913 Webster]
No comments:
Post a Comment