Posted by: no_quiero November 22, 2010
Login in to Rate this Post:
0 
? 
?
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??
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??