The whole idea of democracy is that people get to choose who they are represented by. The current procedure for the nomination of the InsIghT editors clearly lacks this vision.
Saying that opening up this post to elections will result is election of biased editors is flawed; the view of the editors will then truly be representative of the view of the junta. I believe that it will result in a greater accountability of the work done by Insight.
I also think that this shall do insight more good than harm. Most of the people in the insti, who are not involved in any kind of Polt do not take insight seriously, just because they don’t believe that they are appropriately represented by the insight team. If it is open to election, I think Insight will get the backing of more people, and this will lend it greater credibility.
That being said, the article is very biased and inappropriate. The editors have promised to put up a post about with the ideas of the opposite theory; I shall be waiting to see it.
Infact, given that your reputation is already tarnished, it might be better to let someone write up a post rather than you cut out pieces from the responses received.
– Kovid Kapoor