I wrote: ">..The Nepali Times, arguably Nepal's most influential weeky print-newspaper,.." Nepe asked "So what are the arguments that might convince The Nepali Times as the most influential weekly ?" ******* Disclosure: I do NOT work at the Nepali Times, though, for what it's worth, I have been writing a fortnightly column for that newspaper since March 2003. Aside: I don't know what readers get out of my pieces (though many I have met say they like my pieces even when at times they do not necessarily agree with the conclusions -- and that's fine), but I can say confidently that writing regularly has been an excellent way for me to think and learnabout a lot things about Nepal. But that's my little story. *** Now, as for that statement: No hard evidence, really. Hence, the qualifier: "arguably". The statement was intended as a bit of a provocation, to be sure . . . but then, if Sajha postings are not provocative once in a while, where's the fun in reading them? In any case, the statement is based on my own informal observations about what the heads of embassies, donor agencies, and heads of Nepali business community appear to be reading and quoting. I am not sure whether high-ranking Maoist netas-- surely another influential group in Nepal -- read the Nepali Times . . . No doubt, and quite honestly, there's an element of self-serving bias somewhere in that statement-- but hey, we live in an imperfect world :-) ********************** Sardarsingh wrote: "could you be able to spare some good words about your far to the left friend Khagendra Shangraula." I think he should stick to writing novels and short-stories. He is a wonderful writer with an ear for the vernacular. In that sort of thing, there is no one like him in Nepal. I enjoy talking with him and reading his stuff, and have absolutely no trouble with his politics. I have trouble when he routinely appears to insert "blatant fiction" (read: verifiable lies) into his short non-fiction prose -- and that sort of behaviour gets me, a reader, all upset. I mean, it's one thing to write opinions that turn out to be wrong eventually (and that's the nature of writing for public), but it's another to put in embellished lies upfront about events and people just to score some old-style political points. As a reader, one can excuse that behaviour once or twice -- but when the writer keeps on doing the same thing, respect for him as a non-fiction writer erodes REGARDLESS of what his politics is. oohi ashu