Nepali Chankaya, Look, let me make myself clear: I welcome the "student's contribution" WITHOUT Nepe's commentary. As I said, I am taking my time to think more deeply about game theory, and see how it applies to various Nepali situations. Since I am published regularly, keep on reading my columns and other writings. My attitude is: It's more useful to PUBLISH something, in this case, get people thinking about using game theory as a tool as a way of thinking about Nepal than to engage in ANONYMOUS kich-kich over who's right and who's wrong over this on the Internet. So, yes, I was NOT upset by criticisms of my ideas; I was far more irritated by how Nepe tried to reduce this whoe thing to the level of "Ashu versus the rest of us" for no reason. That was needless and stupid and utterly unbecoming someone who professes a scientific temperament. When I publish anything -- I expect criticisms, both for the right reasons and for the wrong reasons. If my ideas are not challenged and criticised and commented upon, how the hell am I going to learn anything by myself in today's world where nothing but relentless self-learning matters? So, hold your fire. On a larger note, if you read history, you will see that those who have made remarkable contributions to advance our collective knowledge have been MORE wrong than right. It's just that DESPITE their being wrong so often, they developed the emotional strength/persistence to process the lessons, figured out what went wrong, and tried 100s of different ways to eventually go on to be spectacular successes in whatever they did. And, of course, once they were successful, no one cared how many times they failed before. This is how knowledge advances, and I totally buy this. That is why, you do NOT need to be a chanakya to understand that being right one time or being wrong two times and being criticised will have little effect on my whatever productivity. oohi ashu