Quorum and Freedom

I am sitting in my room, no. 425, and contemplating over the elections that took place a couple of days ago here in XLRI. These were for the secretaries of the various committees we have here....

They say that in here you can start any committee provided that there is an 'X' at the end of it (e.g. MAXI, FINAX). I came to know only yesterday however that it requires backing of at least 40% of the batch (which happens to be about 72 people).....the fundamental principle being that when you can have the support of these many people, then the committee is supposed to be for the good of student community as a whole. What happens in years that follow....if people are interested or not....if committee really adds any value or not......this are the questions nobody thinks of once the existence is established.....however I am not debating that here.

Now that these committees are in existence, there needs to be 'leadership' for that and the most obvious thing to do is having a secretary....and follow the elections....just the way we had them 2 days back. Again the elections are valid only if there is attendance of 40% of the batch (don’t jump to conclusion that if the required number is not present then the committee is scraped.....we are too altruistic for that.....). If the required number is not present then the elections are held again....now the people who are standing for the position of secy, use their network and gather the "janata" to reach the number 72. This we call a quorum....which if not present then elections do not take place.

But a thought keeps on bothering me that is this the way the processes are to run?.....by achieving the number of 72 is no big deal (given the friend circle of a person and fact that the elections for various committees are held together....so if there are elections for 6 committees then all each committee candidates have to do is gather 12 people.....)

I am assuming here that at this stage in life all of us are mature individuals and know what we want from life. So making me attend the election of the committee I am not interested in is in a way forcing me. The argument in favour of such process is that in this manner at least I know what those committees are up to. But if an individual is not interested in a particular committee, making him attend the election and making him vote does not make sense. Also, not only is it the question of attending an election, but also vote.........(say committee A and B are going for elections at the same time....I am interested in A but not in B....then making me sit for the election of A and forcing me to vote is not the way it should be)

Of course all this is my personal opinion and I know that there are too many people to challenge me saying you are being too individualistic and cant think of a batch as a whole. I have nothing to say to them. The only principle on which my thought process is based is that, if a person is really interested in a committee then he will attend the elections.....he will make an informed choice.....and he will create some value out of it.....irrespective of the fact whether the number of people present are 72 or just 7 and in the process student community can just be benefited !!