While I did not expect much discussion from my original post, afterall it was an informational piece rather than an opinion piece; I expected some healthy criticism of ANA and its conventions, and some questions regarding ANA. Unfortunately the only question raised was my nationality and ironically by a person who uses pseudonym himself. Anyway Nattu it is none of your business, and is irrelevant to the discussion. I won?t answer your question on principle, unless you give a persuasive argument why it is important for this discussion. Shirish has given some suggestions and I agree with most of them. I have tried to list some of these with my responses: 1. Late starts: this is partly a cultural problem. Phoenix handled it pretty well, and some of the forum moderators in Dallas did stick to time allotted, but I agree that in the future speakers should not be allowed to go beyond their allotted time 2. Converting forum into poster sessions: I personally think Forums should exist as they are, except of course better time-controlled. One of the goals of these conventions is to provide platforms for Nepalis in the Americas to share their expertise/concerns etc with their own community and this is the only chance they get. It is just like giving local artists a chance to show their talents to the community. So in that sense these forums serve a useful function. Not all of these can be of interest to everybody, but that is OK. 3. Children running wild: Well I wish I could think of a way controlling this problem. Baby-sitting services have been provided in the past, but very few used it and what was worse most of the parents abused the system. 4. To start the cultural and concert on time convention organizers must book separate room for these events. Right now, the hotel takes too much time to convert Banquet and Forum rooms into concert room. 5. Hiring professional event manager: This may be too expensive but may be useful for concert/cultural program. 6. Sale of Liquor: It is tempting to divert some of the liquor profit to ANA but selling liquor on our own comes with a huge liability and ANA cannot handle that. Additionally liquor sales come with a lot of regulatory controls, which are too cumbersome for ANA to get into. eNeka has provided some criticisms of ANA, some valid some not in my opinion. Let me tackle these issues: 1. Web is bizarre: I don?t know about that. We changed the web-master (a student volunteer) a few months ago and admittedly there were some problems especially with the membership application. Otherwise it seems fine to me, certainly we can do better and the new Executive Committee is considering many changes in the ANA homepage. 2. Newsletter: Even with on-line editions, hard copies are necessary. As a personal example: none of my family members will go to ANA web-site to read ANA Newsletter, whereas when I leave the hard copy at the coffee table, everyone reads it. Not only the family members, every visitor to my home gets to read it too. Hardcopies have some inherent advantages and should be reduced but not eliminated. We are already doing that. 3. Transparency: Transparency, accountability, corruption etc have become the buzzwords to throw around without any evidence. I do not know when you say ANA is not transparent. What do you mean by that? Give some specific example. As for election, the nominating committee was announced a few months ago, members were informed of contacting the nominating committee if they were interested to run, and the Nominating Committee provided final list. What part of this was not transparent? As for the same family nominating the same person, what is wrong with that? Each family member has two voting rights and it may come as a surprise to you that the husbands and wives do not always agree! 4. ANA Exec Committee members want to be in control etc.: this is the most laughable comment I hear from people who have no clue. Can somebody explain to me what power does an ANA Executive Member has? Poweror control over whom, what? You would be surprised to know how hard it is to recruit members to serve in these positions. 5. Portraying ANA as poor: Again I don?t know where one gets this idea. I presented the fact as it is. ANA is neither poor nor rich: It is a non-profit organization and as long as it function without going into debt, it is not poor. Surely more money would be nice in that we could hire paid professionals for doing some of the tasks, but at present it seems unlikely. 6. ANA is not open: This is another bizarre charge. Can you sincerely look into the six new EXCOM members and point out what ulterior motive they may have or how they form ?current? ANA ring? Most of us hardly knew each other until fairly recently. Thanks for your interest in ANA. Shailendra Shukla