M.P. Glad you brought this up. Let me answer this in the usual straightforward way. CURIOSITY about the group in TIME PERIOD 1 is one thing. It's natural for any regular columnist to be TEMPORARILY curious about what his readers are saying or not saying in any forum, whether closed or open, about his own publicly, freely and openly available article. [Once the author saw the a part of the the discussion via a forwarded email, he sent -- in a straightforward way -- a short customary 'thank you' email to Nepe for initiating the discussion based on the author's article , WITHOUT expressing any desire to join the group. Nepe can easily back up this assertion.] BUT Such curiosity need not implyu the author's desire to join one of those forums permamently from TIME PERIOD 2 onward. Curiosity therefore does NOT equal desire, in case you are dying to ascribe a motive for all these discussions here. The discussion is about PRINCIPLEs, not about personalities and pettiness. The author had no desire to join permenently because when you have a front-row seat to witness pretty much everything that's going on in Nepal at the moment and have -- much to the chagrin to some -- access to pretty much all of Nepal's leading political and civil society figures, why would you want to join some closed cyber forum composed of people too far from the action? Doesn't make sense, right? Sort of like -- to put things in perspective -- your visiting Kathmandu recently for two weeks and asking around about me, without, of course, meeting me. To me, your asking around about me ONLY implied your curiosity about me, without necessarily the desire to meet me. I hope the distinction between curiosity and desire is crystal clear to you. That said, let the group call itself "Anti-King Group", and leave it at that. Such a name would be both honest and courageous and -- to use Nepe's favorite word -- UNAMBIGUOUS. Then again, honesty and courage are in short supply in most things Nepali, hai na ta? oohi ashu