There has been a huge hue and cry over voting for Anuradha Koirala. Even Nepali news channels were running scrolling text promotions to encourage people to vote for her solely because she is Nepali. Unfairness seems to be the running trend whenever it comes to voting be it Prashant Tamang or Anuradha Koirala.

In the western world, voting is a basic expression of democracy, but alas Nepalis are still centuries away from learning the true meaning of the word. If CNN finds out the extent Nepalis went to get her voted such as advertisement on national nepalese TV, they would without a doubt disqualify her.

In no way do I have any disrespect towards Anuradha Koirala and I have the utmost pride and respect for her. It's just the way Nepalis play out unfairly in international contests that I find ethically questionable.

Are we Nepalis so destitute and desperate that we have to employ unethical means to put our country's name in the map? No wonder Nepal will always be centuries behind in democracy.

This Rameshwor might be affiliated to the sex-trafficking ring in Nepal and Anuradha's humanitarian work seems to be becoming "haddi" in his kabob.
What a moron!

We should salute for the actions that Anuradha Koirala did to stop human trafficking. Being CNN Hero and Getting awards are the by product of her ongoing contribution to the human society. In the future, she may get other special awards, felicitations as well..if her contribution transforms to the worldwide campaign and gets a color of success, then she can be nominated for Nobel Prize also.

Going through the comments dropped in Sajha kurakani, Rameshwor ji should have thought once before commenting harshly. Its the time to celebrate for the achievement of one Nepali who really deserves this. Anuradha Koirala has spread Nepal's positive image throughout the world and repeated advertisement on CNN Heroes 2010 has also contributed on this.

"If CNN finds out the extent Nepalis went to get her voted such as advertisement on national nepalese TV, they would without a doubt disqualify her."

Multiple voting is ALLOWED on online polls; this feature is disabled if necessary...

That she was selected among top ten heroes speaks volumes of her. For her service to thousands of Nepalese girls who would otherwise live a very harsh life, she is a hero yes.

But the voting process? Not so heroic nor flattering. I am not blaming anyone I am only expressing my opinion that the voting process sucks. In this day and age, CNN allows multiple voting from same person unlimited times. That is not voting, that is a joke. If america elected their president through online voting, Prashant Tamang will become the next President of the US.

Think about it. Why doesn't America elect it's president like that? Answer is because President of US is not a joke but apparently electing CNN hero is pretty much a joke. It's like CNN throwing around some bones to decide which country has more free time in their hands. Bravo it's Nepal where people have all the time in the world to vote as much as 2000 by one person. Great stuff! Next time CNN has to count the hair on Obama's dog Bo's ass, guess which country is gonna get the contract.

I'm loving it though. The whole media psychology. The mob mentality of people with misplaced patriotism and lots of time in their hands.

Those dogs with sheep mentality who accuse me of not respecting her are dead wrong because I am very proud of Anuradha Koirala, what she does and for being chosen as top 10 hero. It just goes downhill from there because of the nasty game CNN decided to play with underdeveloped countries.

CNN allowed multiple voting. Why this a**hole had a headache.

RRRRRRameswor i will explain you why,

 you insult and praise Anuradha Koirala at the same time, you say that you agree that she is a hero but you sound like you mean to say that she won because of CHEATING and over voting by Nepali people. SO, to compare.This Indian dude Narayan Krishnan feeds the hungry homeless in India, Billion people from India and all over the world could have voted for him he was advertised by Indian media etc, they all had the same options as the Nepali voters, everyone had the same chance. Its the nature of this multiple vote system you see, India has close to a billion people but Nepal has about 27 mil NOW read very carefully  and compare the voting power of  that Indian man to Anuradha Koirala. See the difference?,do you think is it a fair voting if only one vote per person was allowed?????? that Indian man would win by a land slide even if every Nepali voted. AND your ignorant brain cannot connect the dots by comparing silly non related matters and expect us to understand.you that you support her  and YOU go on showing how DUMB you are by bringing prashant Tamang, how do you even get that idea? AND even if USA votes the same way, ratio from the supporters would be still same BOTH parties will click the clicker lake crazy,AND thats why the election is done the way it is done today, not a silly comparison to prove a stupid point. and  while we're at it, , lets blame the world for you lousy life and misplaced patriotism .

hope you understand the voting system now.

Not worth to Argue. CHEERS!!!! and Congratulation Anuradha Koirala...Make Me proud.

guys,

rameshwor has a point there. A sort of unbiased independent thinking. It's very hard to not favor our own. Who doesn't, right? ehehehhehe I mean who evaluates what work is greater among all those top ten? the more people or the more votes? or the capacity/status of the voting individuals? Lots and lots of questions to determine what's fair here. Well, i'm on my third bottle of heineken. I'll stop and enjoy. Lets congratulate the woman and celebrate for all the great workers despite the rankings. I'm off to another bottle. Cheers!

Brazzy Bro, one more beer jaos na ta, and while you drink, think about how is it fair to vote only one per person when Anuradha koirala is against countries with much much more population then Nepal? lets say all 27 Million Nepali voted VS almost a billion Indian votes for the Indian candidate. That would be no match right? just think and enjoy another beer and more. thats why multiple votes determines an equal field for who votes more becuase all these candidates have done good deeds to be called heroes.

think about how
is it fair to vote only one per person when Anuradha koirala is against
countries with much much more population then Nepal? lets say all 27
Million Nepali voted VS almost a billion Indian votes for the Indian
candidate.

====================================================================


@ terobaje,

your thinking is pathetic. I have American friend who actually voted for cambodian. Why he didn't voted for American candidate. People outside nepal actually look at the overall contribution. 

In noway this is a voting contribution of a country, rather it is voting competition to find out who has made much more contribution to the world.  I think there is  a point in rameswar saying that how ethical is to vote for someone based on its nationality (as CNN has made people the judge).


How would you feel if somebody favours somebody else and discriminates against you based on your nationality.  Actually we (the judge) did same thing. we voted without consience. If some kenyan was nepali and anuradha koirala was kenyen,   we would have voted that man to victory. But what does that prove.

Northing.  It is mere vain celebration for her being CNN heroes. We should have celebrated long time ago.

Secondly, it was completely unethical for nepalese televison, specially Nepali Television in middleast and Uk to promote voting for anuradha. We would never see BBC or CNN campaigning for their fellow countrymen .   As this is against the norm of whole competition .


I celebrated and rejoiced when anuradha was nominated in top 10.  Look at yourself... somebody is saying i voted 100 times, some saying 50 times... so what does that prove??

I went back to see all of those top 10s, and I am again convinced that she deserves to be the first on list for the contributions she has done and the global attention this issue of women trafficking is likely to get after this honor/recognition. This problem is not only in Nepal, it is widespread among many of the underdeveloped countries. I am optimistically waiting to see the a positive momentum

I also agree with rameswor and no-quireo about their view on most of the nepali's mentality in these kind of online voting. I believe they would vote anyone if  'nepali' or 'nepal' comes after his/her name. Prashant Tamang will obviously be the US president if there is an online voting to elect the US president.

No offense to Prashant hai. I also had voted Prashant, not because I liked his songs/voice but because I hoped that his victory in Indian Idol would boost up the confidence of all the Nepali people (nepali nationals and nepali origin indians) working in India and also that would give a small blow to indians who look down upon people of nepali origin. Vote to Prashant during Indian Idol was kind of expression to help raise the Nepali image among indian public. My vote for Anuradha Koirala was not for her being a fellow nepali, that was for the cause she has been working for such a long time and for the positive impact that is having.

I agree that voting just because someone is from Nepal shows we are biased. Is it unethical? Is it unethical to support someone, who is bringing changes in your community? We are not a developed country like America, nor are we as large - both factors contributing to a greater sense of community in us. Obviously, we and the Americans think differently - they make fun of their nationality, not most of us - we take this seriously. You say this is unethical? 

Oh, and just saw this headline.... Indian Army officer's daughter is Nepal's new global hero - http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Indian-Army-officers-daughter-is-Nepals-new-global-hero/articleshow/6969221.cms

Rameswor has a point and my answer to him is:

No we did not vote 50 or 100 times. Who has time to do all that? Very few people might have gone too crazy about the whole thing and exploited the flaw of voting system to vote as 50 or 100 times, but the majority voted once or maybe twice and nothing is wrong with that. Btw I did not vote even once which I should have.

Yes Nepalese people have some kind of mob mentality when it comes to online votings like this, but seriously, do u really think all these people voted for her just because she was a Nepali? Do you really think you could have won the prize if it was you instead of her, since you are also a Nepali (assuming)? It was her work that united all these people and she won.

I saw few threads regarding "a Nepali doctor who killed a American while driving recklessly and later killed himself in jail" and "Kaushal Niraula who allegedly conned many Americans in California" sometimes back in sajha. I was bit surprised to see how unsympathetic were the sajha users to these guys. Obviously, Nepaliness didnt matter at those instances and most people thought they should be sent to jail without mercy.

All I am trying to say is Nepali people are not senseless andthey can also differentiate between right and wrong, good and bad to some extent. So look at the positive side brother.

 

What I agree with Nepalilaure that if we genuinely believe that Anuradha Koirala was best amongst the 10 candidate then there was nothing wrong in voting. But what i saw was there was a hysteria among nepalese to vote her without giving damn to other nominees. Is this how we judge somebodys work? Based on the origin.

Somebody actually requested me to vote for anuradha koirala. I said OK. But when i went through the nominees my consience didn't allow me to vote for one. I saw many good candidates. So I replied to my friend and said that I will rather not vote because I can't do justice. He said ok, I will vote 20 times from your side to Anuradha koirala.

But when we see people actually voting over 100 times i tend to wonder what we are actually trying to prove. Lets be honest and celebrate her real success of Anuradha which is being one of ten nominated by CNN out of thousands of contestants. If CNN wanted to select any american for heroes they would have probably selected 10 nominees from US.

World will be a really bad place to live without philanthropist. My congratulations to all the nominees.  Humanity is means much more than nationality and it transcends all boundries.