[anon5]

I agree with you on your second point. A person good for situation A may not be good for the position B. But that doesn't give a license to rubbish all of the person's achievements. As people at large seem to be doing the past few days.

You caught me in one of my several weaknesses (your first point). But you must at-least acknowledge that I said it myself.

Don't agree with your last para. Now you are presuming, I have not made an effort. I did not read the bill. But I made efforts - right from looking up wikipedia a few months back on 'Ombudsman' and many other things (articles/views etc.) ...

And second point in your last para: Please distinguish between ambivalence or (admission of confusion) regarding somebody else's action and accusing me of being confused. I spent 45 minutes, trying to articulate my views (it did tax my articulation capabilities) and re-read it before posting. I am not confused at all about what I am saying. I am only not sure, if what's happening is making sense in the right way. My hunch is that it does not.

EDIT: Corrected a few typos

[chakde]

Well props to you for truthfulness. I don't think anyone is rubbishing the PM personally.

I was reading the Progress Principle today. It makes the point that setbacks have an outsized influence on one's mental makeup - much more than progress does. Check it out.

What corruption leads to is a set of daily setbacks to individuals. On the one hand the govt says this problem is impossible to solve. On the other the protestors say they have researched the issue and here is a way to solve it.

Which one do you pick and support ? It's a no contest to me.

I may have been ambivalent in April. But now in Aug, seeing that the govt has watered down their version of the bill so much that their lokpal won't even accept allegations of corruption from the general public ... it is clear they have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. That made me more interested in the topic and I read the bill and both sides of the argument. My conclusion is that this is the chance to grab. Even if it reduces corruption by a few percentage points it will be a victory, and will release energy for the tasks that you mention so urgently need to get done.

[anon5]

I am impressed that you read the bill, and then decided to support it.

I did not like the process of getting it done, for one thing. We are having this discussion in a much more civil way. But please look across the Internet (just a twitter search on 'Anna' will give you all colors of tweets). Particularly, in the earlier part of the fast. People are ready to bulldoze/dominate/abuse others...

The 'I am Anna', 'You are Anna' irritates me. No body can have such a steep rise in stock, in just four months ...

Wearing a black hat for a moment. The big suspicion I have is: 1) Anna was used as a tool by Mr. Kejriwal and Ms. Bedi. This is very different than what Gandhiji would have allowed to be done of himself. 2) Anna also did it primarily for fame a retired activist, getting his time in the sun at last ...

Now again wearing my grey hat: I do believe that Arvind Kejrival and Kiran Bedi are good people, basically. But good people also can be misled (they have to be more careful.)

I think, my note above is written in a sober tone. I have just hinted (or even stopped before that) some of my fears/concerns without going into some specific dark doubts that I have illustrated in this comment.