Friday, September 30, 2016

How did that company get my info?

Are you getting calls or emails from a company you’ve never heard of? Wondering how they got your name or number — or how they know what you’re interested in? The reason might be lead generation. Here’s what you need to know.

What’s lead generation?

It’s when companies gather information that people submit, often from online forms or applications. Lead generators sell that information to other companies offering products or services those people might be interested in.

Why should you care?

It’s your information getting collected and sold, and it might pass through a lot of hands along the way.

What’s the upside?

You might find out about products or services you’re interested in, and get deals you wouldn’t have heard about otherwise.

What’s the downside?

Even if you know you’re giving information to a lead generator — like a site that matches people seeking loans with lenders — you might not realize your info could be sold and resold. If it’s sold to anyone willing to pay for it, you might be contacted by all kinds of companies you’ve never heard of.

Sometimes, lead generation also results in deception or outright scams. Last year the Federal Trade Commission sued a company that got people’s information from online payday loan applications, then sold it to non-lenders who raided people’s credit and bank accounts for millions. In another case, a company settled charges that it used fake job ads to get leads for colleges and career training programs.

What can you do?

Before you fill out forms or applications on a site, find out more about the company — on the site itself, and by doing an online search for the company with words like “complaint” or “review.”

How will they protect your information? And think long and hard before you give out your SSN or bank or credit card information. In the wrong hands, they can lead to identity theft.

You can also opt out from many marketing calls and mails. To know how to do this, read this article How to Put an End to Prescreened Credit Card Offers, Unwanted Marketing Calls, and Interest-Based Ads on Your Web Pages 

Reference: Federal Trade Commission

Saturday, July 9, 2016

Board Members Election of The Tibetan Community of New York and New Jersey Inc.

I have written a number of times in the past on how important the Tibetan community of New York and New Jersey (TCNYNJ) plays a role in the struggle for the preservation and promotion of Tibetan culture, tradition and identity in a country where the notion of melting pot is widely seen and accepted by many. The solution to this melting pot lies in accepting selective adaptation and avoiding total assimilation. To successfully work on this solution, TCNYNJ not only provides a structural body but also represents a single largest organization that every Tibetans in New York and New Jersey associates with.  Thus, good leadership team (board members) in the TCNYNJ is a must.

More importantly, according to a reliable source, the construction of TCNYNJ community hall (Phuntsok Deshi) will be completed by at the end of this year or beginning of next year. How this community hall is planned and utilized to bring in more revenues will be another key strategic area to consider when voting for board members on July 9, 2016. If not profit, the community hall should bring enough revenues to at least pay off the monthly mortgages, property taxes and administrative and operating expenses. The hall should be at least self-sustaining with in the next two years.  Also, it should generate employment and business opportunities for eligible Tibetan entrepreneurs.

Who should be eligible to vote?

  1. Must have paid green book dues till 2015
  2. Must be a resident of New York or New Jersey: Evidence include State ID, NYC ID or any other acceptable proof of address such as most recent bank statement or postal letter.

Who should you elect?

Balanced Composition:

When electing board members, everyone should pick from a diverse group of age, profession and educational backgrounds. Age group should range from young professionals to experienced elders to represent the growing population of Tibetans in these two states.  The existing problem of TCNYNJ lies in its failure to make a connection with the growing number of youth and young Tibetan population.  

Innovative and Visionary:

Board member must be a change agent who shows no hesitation in bringing new programs and initiatives for the community.  For instance, new educational programs to help build the life skills of Tibetan community members is in high need.  Moreover, s/he should have a vision to draw a plan at least for the next ten years.

Team Player: 

S/he should be someone who have the potential and knowledge to embrace and respect difference of opinions.  Yet, able to work as a team.  Personal opinion matters but it should not be at the cost of disrespecting team effort/decision.  For instance, many Tibetan meetings end up in personal biases and self-inflicting accusations.

Supporter of CTA:

Tibetan Community or Association in North America is a unit of Central Tibetan Administration of Dharamsala.  Any instructions or notices from Dharamsala has to be respected and followed up.  TCNYNJ is a bridge between local Tibetans and Dharamsala.  Thus, board members should be able to respect the position and instruction of Dharamsala irrespective of personal viewpoint.  Henceforth, in order to avoid the repeat of RTYC NYNJ's recent episode, it would be wise to elect someone who respects the wishes of Dharamsala.

In order for eligible Tibetan voters to know the standing nominees, it would be highly beneficial if each nominee for board members are given 5 minutes to introduce and share their vision for the Tibetan community in NYNJ.  Moreover, the president must be elected by the people and not among the elected board members.

Please note that these are just my general suggestions and does not reflect my support for one or more candidates for the board member position.

Wednesday, June 1, 2016

Interesting Tale of Two RTYC NYNJ?

Recently, it's not uncommon to hear on the streets of New York on the existence of two inevitable groups of Tibetan immigrants: one group supporting the Rangzen (independence) and another supporting Central Tibetan Administration's official stand of Middle Way Approach.  However, unlike other Tibetan immigrant communities, New York and New Jersey carries an important weight when it comes to the Tibetan politics in exile.

New York is not only the city with the largest group of Tibetan immigrants outside India but also share an important geopolitical space with United Nations Headquarter to help work for the betterment of Tibetans living in Tibet.  As such, any organizations or activities in New York has a potential to generate domino effect in other parts of the world.

One such big organization is Regional Tibetan Youth Congress of New York and New Jersey (RTYC NYNJ hereafter).  Irrespective of what happened with RTYC NYNJ in the past couple of years, everyone agrees with the importance of its existence.  But the question I am raising here is on its existence.

RTYC NYNJ conducts all its activities including facebook page in the name of Regional Tibetan Youth Congress of New York and New Jersey or RTYC NYNJ.  However, its legally incorporated name in the state of New York is TIBETAN YOUTH ASSOCIATION INC, registered on March 17, 2005. A snapshot of its entity information at NYS Department of State's Division of Corporations is attached below.  If you have a problem viewing the snapshot, click here.

To use DBA (Doing Business As) or Assumed Name such as RTYC NYNJ, it has to be approved by NYS Department of State.  However, the problem with DBA or Assumed Name is that you are not allowed to use existing corporation's name.  RTYC NYNJ is exactly using an existing corporation's name.

If you see the next snapshot, you will find that The Regional Tibetan Youth Congress of New York and New Jersey Inc was already a registered organization in the state of New York.  It was first registered on October 16, 1998 and the current entity status is ACTIVE.  The organization address with NYS Department of State is 97-12 40th Road, Corona, New York 11368.  If you have a problem viewing the snapshot, click here.

According to New York Not-For-Profit Corporation Law Section 202(f), "No corporation shall conduct activities in New York state under any name, other than that appearing in its certificate of incorporation, without compliance with the filing provisions of section one hundred thirty of the general business law governing the conduct of business under an assumed name."  Please note that corporation here also implies to non-profit organization. 

What does this mean to RTYC NYNJ aka Tibetan Youth Association Inc?

First, they may be conducting its activities and programs against New York Not-For-Profit Corporation Law by using other entity name as DBA or Assumed Name.  

Second, RTYC NYNJ may need to figure out who were the three founding members at the time of the incorporation of The Regional Tibetan Youth Congress of New York and New Jersey.  This information could be helpful for several reasons for which I will not speculate here. 

Third, RTYC NYNJ should immediately stop conducting its activities or programs in the name of Regional Tibetan Youth Congress of New York and New Jersey or RTYC NYNJ until this issue is resolved.  


Sunday, May 15, 2016

Indians Are Not Allowed: Hotels in Majnu-Ka-Tilla

When Tibetans were not allowed to stay in Hotels in Beijing after the 2008 Beijing Olympic, Tibetans in Diaspora raised eyebrows and used different mediums of press and media to inform the world about this racial and ethnic discrimination against the Tibetans living in China. When Africans (black) were not allowed by a Chinese restaurant in Nairobi, Tibetans shared it on social media to support the local Africans against this race and color discrimination. But did Tibetans ever shared about how Tibetans treat Indians in India? Or did Tibetans ever care about how Tibetans (mis)treat Indians in India? This piece is not about China or Chinese but its about our own Tibetan people in diaspora. Of the two, the first purpose of writing this article is to provide a mirror that helps to reflect on the self.

The story begins almost a year ago. One of my American friend (hereafter Joe) who has a dark skin travelled to India for the first time with my another friend who is a Tibetan American (hereafter Tenzin). Since Tenzin was already in India, she booked another room for Joe at a well known Tibetan hotel in Majnu-Ka-Tilla (MT hereafter). When Joe landed and tried to check in at the hotel, the Tibetan receptionist told Tenzin in Tibetan language, "We don't rent rooms to Indians." Tenzin was completely shocked and told the receptionist that Joe is a US citizen and not Indian (though he looks like an Indian). After showing Joe's US passport, the receptionist allowed him to stay at the hotel.

Though there are certain behavior of Tibetans in Diaspora that raises question on the treatment of Indians such as keeping Indian minor as a household helper, this racial discrimination of Indian people by a group of privileged refugee in the capital of India was a heartbreaking experience. It's not only unlawful but also against the principle of equality and justice. At that point, I was hoping that it is just a handful of Tibetan hotels in MT.

Out of frustration, I did some inquiry and realized that no Indians are allowed to stay in any Tibetan hotels in MT. However, it seems there are exception to Indians who are well connected to Tibetan freedom movement or who comes with a group of foreigners.

After a couple of days, I inquired with the Tibetan Welfare Office in MT. I know that they will not respond to a straight-forward question. So, I created a scenario where one of my Indian friend from Bangalore is having a hard time to get a hotel in MT. The email response from the Tibetan Welfare Office confirmed that Tibetan hotels in MT do not allow Indians to stay (except Wangden Guest House). Below is the email response dated May 12, 2015.

"Regarding hotel booking issue Indian may be not allowed by the hotels because this colony is under land case issue since long and it is not regularized. However, Wangden Guest house will allow both Indian and foreighners to stay in their hotel. So in future, if you have such booking, do contact Wangden Guest House, you won't face any problem."

As far as I know, MT was regularized after it was named New Aruna Nagar in 2013.  However, the question is not about regularization.  It's about accommodating the people of India who owns the country.  When foreigners can stay, then why not Indian people? When Wangden Guest House can accommodate Indians, why not other hotels?

Some readers may find this piece uncalled for or unworthy for the wellbeing of Tibetan people as it highlights a darker side of the Tibetan Diaspora.  However, the piece is written with the hope that Tibetans can change before it is too late.   If an Indian media finds this discrimination in their own land by a select group of refugees, it will be a breaking news.  Indian media might use analogies such as how Gandhi was discriminated in South Africa and how Indians were not allowed in certain places by British with a display board, "Dogs and Indians are not allowed."

On a final note, Tibetans must treat everyone equally if they expects the same.  Tibetans cannot be telling the world about Chinese discrimination against Tibetans in Tibet and China when Tibetans themselves are a part of this discrimination. 

Thus, the second purpose of this article is to pass on the core message that sometimes it's necessary to clean our own houses first before telling others to do so.  The leadership in Dharamsala needs to wake up to initiate this house cleaning drive.

Update: A couple of days after publishing this article, I was informed by the Tibetan Welfare Office of MT that, "...we would like to inform you that we have called a meeting in July 2015 with the Hotel managers and staff along with Gyakpon in this matter that they should allow every one with proper id proof and not barred other nationals from booking in. Since then the hotels and Guest houses in the Colony are allowing booking from all people without condition. So we hope you are clear with this matter and would explain to your friends on this hotel booking issue."

Also read: 

Saturday, April 30, 2016

Eleven General Observations from the Sikyong's Election


"The rise of UTsang-Pas is as much condemnable as the collective and open show of regionalism/provincialism from Khampas for a long time in exile."


"Lobsang Sangay was a stronger candidate who can speak to what the public wants to hear while Penpa Tsering struggled to make a connection with the less-educated masses."


"The laws that govern Tibetan elections must be re-written in its entirety. At times of the need to interpret rules, logic and reason must prevail."


"Lobsang Sangay has the most loyal supporters while Penpa Tsering had the better campaign team."


"Prof. Samdhong Rinpoche's boycott of the general election could send a wrong signal to the people of Tibet. Not casting a vote may not be the best choice for the vibrant growth of nascent Tibetan democracy."


"Wechat is proving to be the China's greatest information gathering tool from exile Tibetans. Now, China need not have to look for information. Information comes to her at no cost."


"One of the biggest disappointment is the total silence from the Private Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. This silence could be equivalent to the denial of the rights of Tibetan people to know the truth."


"With the dirty, demeaning and dangerous election campaigns on social media network and ugly public discourses on Wechat, Tibetans in Tibet might be having a second thought on the values of having a democratic form of government."


"Voting is just the first step. If your Sikyong candidate wins, you now have a bigger share of responsibility in the next 5 years to ensure he lives up to his promises as well as your expectations."


"This election was all about finding a better and bigger reason to drag His Holiness the Dalai Lama's name and title to support his argument. Sadly, it's a wild race that shows no sign of stopping in the future."


"The open endorsement from two sitting Kalons helped to uncover a disturbing case of existing elite power and culture in the CTA. They themselves (Kashag) are the ones who instructed Tibetan officials around the globe to refrain from participating in any election related matters. Rule-makers cannot be Rule-breakers."

*See Kashag's instruction dated June 15, 2015 below

Monday, March 14, 2016

5 STEPS to Choose Your 2016 Sikyong

Step One: Pick Your Top Priorities
Everyone have a different set of priorities. To ease your selection of right Sikyong, pick top three or five issues that best fits as your Top Priorities. This will help you to narrow down on what you are looking for in a Sikyong.

(Issues could be Negotiation with China; Viability of Tibetan Settlements in India; Education; Unity in Diversity; Visit of His Holiness to Tibet; Economy; Preservation of culture and language)

Step Two: Listen to Both Candidates
Many just listen to their own biases, meaning they only listen to their preferred Sikyong candidate. In reality, this should be the opposite. You should listen more to the candidate you do not like or approve. This will help you to understand both candidates equally. When you listen, don't just listen to video or audio clips.  Listen to the entire video, audio or read the entire document.

Step Three: Verifiable vs Non-Verifiable Facts
During the election period, there will be a number of speeches from candidates as well as from their supporters. However, many of these speeches, talks and statements fall under two categories: verifiable facts and non-verifiable facts. You should completely ignore non-verifiable facts as it will not help you in the decision making process. Rather, it will create more confusion. 

(Verifiable facts are those that can be traced to its sources such as trustworthy individual,  documents, videos, etc. Non-verifiable facts are those that can not be traced such as anecdotes, hearsay, slanderous remarks, rumors and gossips)

Step Four: Analyze Thoroughly
Once you listen to both candidates and identified verifiable and non-verifiable facts, it's your time to analyze both candidates thoroughly. When you analyze, analyze as a Tibetan and not as Dho-Toe-Wa, Dho-May-Wa or UTsang-Pa. 

Also, don't listen to anyone else when you are analyzing. It's important that your analysis is unbiased and free from influence such as intellectual, son, daughter, brother, mother, father, uncle or neighbor. 

Step Five: Rank Your Priorities
After thorough analysis, it's your task to look back at your top priorities i.e., Step One.  Based on your analysis, rank Sikyong candidates with numbers such as 1 to 5, where 5 being the highest and 1 being the lowest.

Then, sum up your ranking and see who is the right 2016 Sikyong for you. The candidate with the highest total should be your 2016 Sikyong.  Finally, don't forget to share your analysis with other Tibetans to help them begin their own 5 step process. 

You are now done. CONGRATULATE yourself on this achievement and treat yourself a good food and drink. 

Also read:

Friday, March 11, 2016

Who is Your 2016 Sikyong? Results and Analysis


The purpose of this online survey was to provide eligible Tibetan electorates with scientific and unbiased opinion poll designed to measure their choice of candidate for the 2016 Sikyong's final election on March 20, 2016.

  • The poll opened on March 2, 2016 and closed on March 11, 2016.  In other words, the poll was kept open only for 10 days.
  • The poll was created using Google Forms to collect the raw data and shared via Facebook wall posts and group posts.
  • No participants were required to identify themselves to participate in the poll. 
  • Per survey administrator's understanding, these Facebook groups represent a larger section of general public.
  • On the survey administrator's Facebook wall post, "Poll Updates" were frequently shared to reach out to a larger number of participants who may not have participated in the poll thus far. 
  • The online poll carried only 5 questionnaire items with two on participant's vote and three on participant's demographic. Response to all items were compulsory. 


Figure 1. Percentage of participants by gender 

Of the 1291 valid responses, 68% of the participants were male and the remaining 32% were female.

Participation from "female" remains low.  It is beyond the scope of this poll to analyze the reason behind the low level of participation from our female voters.  However, the figure 1 helps to identify an important question for further investigation or research.

Figure 1.

Figure 2. Percentage of participants by location 

Of the 1291 valid responses, 43% of the participants were from North America, 29% from India, 20% from Europe, 4% from Nepal and 4% from Others. 

The biggest challenge with this scientific poll was to reach out to many potential participants from India as majority of the electorates reside in this country.  One of the reason for low participation in India could be a lack of fast internet service.  For instance, the Tibetan colony where I am staying does not even have 3G internet.  Other reason could be the reluctance of this survey administrator in terms of using WeChat for political discourse - WeChat is very popular among Tibetan electorates in India. 

Figure 2.

Figure 3. Percentage of participants by age group 

Of the 1291 valid responses, 41% of the participants were in 36 to 45 age group, 36% in 26 to 35 age group, 10% in 46 to 55 age group, 8% in Under 25 age group and 4% in Over 55 age group. 

If we look at participants who are younger than 46 years of age, the percentage will be at a high of 85% which is a healthy sign for the nascent Tibetan democracy.  Young Tibetans are taking active interest and role in choosing the best candidate for the highest executive post in exile i.e., Sikyong.

Figure 3.

Figure 4. Percentage by vote counts

When asked participants who will you vote for, of the 1291 valid responses, 48.7% (red color) of the participants responded with Penpa Tsering, 47.8% (blue color) with Lobsang Sangay and 3.5% (orange color) with None of the Above. 

According to the poll, Penpa Tsering is slightly leading ahead of Lobsang Sangay by 0.9 percentage.  This tiny difference of percentage could be insignificant as the poll's margin of error could be + or - 5%.

Though 3.5% of "None of the Above" seems too small of a percentage, these small group of eligible voters may have the potential to swing the final votes in favor of one or the other candidate.

Figure 4.

Figure 5. Percentage by change of candidate's choice since the preliminary election

The questionnaire item of "Did your choice of candidate changed since the preliminary election" was primarily asked to analyze the shifting of votes due to EC's disqualification of other three Sikyong's candidates from the final election. 

For this item, of the 1291 valid responses, 60.9% (blue color) of the participants responded No Change to their choice of candidate from the preliminary election, 22.5% (red color) changed from Lobsang Sangay to Penpa Tsering, 8.9% (orange color) changed from Penpa Tsering to Lobsang Sangay.  From this poll results, it is evident that Penpa Tsering largely succeeded in changing the minds of Lobsang Sangay supporters

Among Lukar Jam (Sikyong candidate during the preliminary election) supporters, 2.1% of the participants changed to Penpa Tsering while 2.3% changed to Lobsang Sangay.  With the disqualification of Lukar Jam, Lobsang Sangay has gained slightly more supporters of Lukar Jam than Penpa Tsering.

Among Tashi Wangdu (Sikyong candidate during the preliminary election) supporters, 1.9% of the participants changed to Penpa Tsering while 0.4% changed to Lobsang Sangay.  With the disqualification of Tashi Wangdu, Penpa Tsering has gained sizable supporters of Tashi Wangdu as compared to Lobsang Sangay. 

Figure 5.


Key findings and discussions are summed up in the following bullet points:

  • Comparing the actual preliminary election results with that of this poll results, Penpa Tsering has greatly succeeded in convincing the Tibetan electorates that he is the right candidate for Sikyong. His month-long campaign and endorsements might have also helped in garnering more public supports for his candidacy. 
  • On the similar front, Lobsang Sangay seems to have miscalculated the power of Tibetan electorates.  After a very high win percentage in the preliminary election, Lobsang Sangay might not have felt the need to campaign.  And when he did come out on a campaign trail, it might have been too late to make an impact.  
  • It is evident from the result of this poll that Penpa Tsering did very well when compared to his actual preliminary election results.  However, the question is - did Penpa Tsering succeed in gaining enough supports to win this election?
  • Seeing the dismal performance of Lobsang Sangay in this poll, did he lose a large chunk of supporters because of his late jump in the election campaign? Did controversies surrounding Lobsang Sangay made an impact on the hearts and minds of voters? Answers to these questions to be seen on the election day. 
  • Looking at the success of this survey administrator in closely predicting the winner of 2015 preliminary election, this race for 2016 Sikyong is now too close to make a call. Any of the two candidates could WIN.   


During the preliminary election round in October 2015, more than one-third of the Tibetan electorates did not come out to vote.  Which candidates have succeeded in wooing these voters will make a huge difference in the final election.  Based on this poll, it seems Penpa Tsering did a lot better than Lobsang Sangay in terms of winning more supports for his candidacy.

Due to the nature of Tibetan electorate in diaspora, it is near to impossible to conduct an accurate online opinion poll. Nonetheless, this poll have succeeded in providing some dimensions to the upcoming final election on March 20, 2016.

On a final note, please do come to VOTE on March 20.  No excuses will be enough to miss this important day.  It only comes ONCE in five years.

Also read:


7 MORE To Do List: For the Growth of Tibetan Electoral Process

Note: Due to the poor internet connection at my current location, it is impossible to do more statistical analysis. If any qualified Tibetan professional is interested in doing further data analysis, please contact me with your short qualification bio and brief description on the intent of analysis. 

Monday, February 29, 2016

7 MORE To Do List: For the Growth of Tibetan Electoral Process

1. Voluntary Candidate for Sikyong:
In EC rules that governs the Tibetan parliamentary and Sikyong elections, there is an option for independent candidate to run as Voluntary Chitue. However, similar option is not provided for Sikyong.

2. Introduction of Tibetan Voter ID Card:
In India, citizens are provided voter ID card to avail their voting rights. At the time of voting, they are not required to provide any documents to satisfy their responsibility as a citizen such as tax documents. However, for Tibetans, the right to vote is tied to individual responsibility to pay their green book dues. This is a fundamental flaw in the Tibetan electoral process in particular and Tibetan democracy in general. If nothing changes, many future Tibetans in exile will turn unTibetan just because they did not pay green book dues.

3. Result Declaration at Local Election Center:
Local election committee and its officer should have a right to count and declare its results to their public (seems this right is provided in the EC rules). Counting of votes at one centralized location involves not only the risk but also the unnecessary high cost. For instance, Office of Tibet in Washington DC asked its local election committee/officer to send their ballot boxes to its office. If we look at the preliminary election in North America, the taped ballot boxes from its local election centers should have been voided. EC rules requires that the ballot boxes must be sealed. Moreover, who will take the responsibility if these boxes are tempered or lost in transit?

4. Polling Dates and Campaign Expenses:
After the result declaration of preliminary election by EC, there is only a couple of months for candidates to campaign as well as for the electorates to analyze and pick their right candidates. There should be more time for the public to assess their candidates. Moreover, the EC should make it mandatory for candidates to declare their campaign expenses periodically.

5. Strict Implementation of EC Rules:
Election Commissioners and its local commissioners should strictly enforce the set EC rules that governs the electoral process. They should keep a close watch and investigate any issues that relates to the non-adherence of any EC rules. Moreover, candidates use of His Holiness the Dalai Lama's portrait during their election campaign is a gross negligence of EC rules.

6. Introduce Social Media Code of Conduct for Candidates:
At the time of filing nomination by candidates, they should be made to declare their presence in the social media network. They should be made a part of EC's own social media network to keep a watch on their activities. Moreover, if there are any other profiles or pages that identify or represent themselves as individual candidates, it should be reported to Facebook Inc. for deletion or other necessary actions. Moreover, having a social media code of conduct for candidates will be helpful to curb the outflow of negative and demeaning election campaigns.

7. Different Dates for Sikyong and Chitues Election:

One date for Sikyong and Chitues election fails to garner the interest and debates required from the general public to identify, understand and pick their candidates for Chitues.

Note: I tried to keep these seven list short, simple and easy to understand. If you need more elaboration, please feel free to leave a comment. Wrote this piece at Kacheguda railway station while waiting for my next train to Mysore.

MUST READ: 7 To Do List: For the Growth of Tibetan Electoral Process

Friday, February 12, 2016

7 To Do List: For the Growth of Tibetan Electoral Process


Private Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama has a responsibility to clarify the reason behind the postponement/cancellation of 2016 Kalachakra initiation at Bodh Gaya. They cannot be just a mere spectator in this entire episode of Kalachakra being used as an election tool. 


Election Commission should monitor the social media presence of Sikyong candidates. There should be no gross negligence of EC rules. 


Also, EC should watch the social media to make sure no CTA or election officers participate in the electoral process via their private social media profile such as announcement of election-related information and declaration of election results. 


Tibetan in diaspora should move away from their public display of love and affection only for a candidate who comes from their own province or region. Recently, a few people from UTsang has resorted to unifying UTsang-pas in the wake of upcoming election. If provincialism or regionalism prevails, the future Sikyong will only be UTsang-pa. This will be a huge blow to the nascent Tibetan democracy. 


Individual holding public position should refrain from supporting or disapproving any candidates for Sikyong or Chitue.


Current Sikyong and Speaker should not stand at the podium this coming March 10. Instead, their representative should deliver the statement. Candidates should not receive even a slight advantage because of their current position.


Debate between the two Sikyong candidates is a must. The general public will always be sandwiched between two truths or two lies propagated by these two candidates. The only option is sharing a single platform to put candidates face to face.