I wanted to write this fourth and final part before I left Toronto for an
outing, but time did not permit me to do so. I reserved the best part for the
last. I have read that some netters have pointed out that I have only written
about the "negatives". Read my previous post and I have said that Wendell, Dean
and Alexyx brought their home-based experiences to the fore and that some
workshops and presentations were of good quality. I know holding conventions
takes lot of time -- and money -- and that the some members of the organizing
committee worked hard. I need not mention their names as they have been
acknowledged by some other netters. I particularly like to thank Mervyn for
giving me rides to the convention venue and for arranging a ride back from the
Grand Ball.
What I wrote is a "story behind the story". Such stories make "good journalism"
as any journalist on this forum will tell you. It is often an unpleasant task
to write about people and groups that one knows on a "personal" basis and not
as professional subjects. Such stories do not please everyone and with more
than 30 years in journalism I should know. I was nobody's "plant" or "puppet".
I cut short my trip to Germany to come for the convention. I was saying to
myself if it was going to worth it. I don't really regret coming for the
convention as I met some new people and reconnected with old ones. When the
convention unfolded I heard a lot of stories about and I myself became a victim
of Kevin's arrogance. I am, therefore, surprised to read that I was "offensive"
from the start. I only opened my mouth to ask one question of Dean on the issue
of his professional job and his social activism. Then I asked Andrea the
question on whether she expects us to "feed" her research and if the workshop
was the place to do so.
As for the pre-registration and post-dated cheque, let me clarify that I
arrived in Toronto on the eve of the convention. I gave a post-dated cheque
(Aug 1) to the treasurer. He did not object to it.
As for the "woman visa", a letter from a Canadian MP helped. I cannot ascertain
whether the letter from GNAT president also helped. Since the woman first
secured US visa, she changed her travel itinerary to make US her first stop.
After getting Canadian visa, she tried to change again to make Toronto her
first stop but there were no seats available.
I find it strange that the Toronto Goanetters Association is composed of
members who are NOT subscribers to Goanet. I asked Francis to explain the
criteria of becoming a member of GNAT as I believe he drew up the constitution
and got the association incorporated in Toronto.
I said that the first qualification should be that they are "subscribers" to
Goanet. That is where Goanetters' allegiance lies. Francis said that if that
rule is laid down that the association would have only five to six members. If
that's the case, so be it.
It has been mentioned here that I have disclosed things said in "private
conversations." I had lot of "private conversions" such as with George Pinto,
Cornel (to give but two names) and I have not "disclosed" what I talked with
them. I can only say that I gave more details on Aloysius Vaz instead of just
briefly saying that he was diagnosed with cancer and that he has fully
recovered.
I was aware of his health condition but the reason I mentioned Al at all was
Kevin stated that (although there were other equally deserving candidates) the
award was given to Al considering that he was as good as terminally ill. I have
apologized to Al saying I meant no harm and that it was just "incidental" that
I had to mention him to lend force to a point I was making regarding the
awards. When one gets a public award, the person comes under public scrutiny.
I have been called lot of names following my posts. The one that takes the cake
is from Floriano Lobo. As someone who himself has dabbled in journalism or
still does, Floriano should know better what separates "gossip" and "analysis."
JC calls me "fukot" and Floriano has added another word to it, though I am not
sure if it is a Hindi swear word. If so, I am surprised it passed the
moderator.
Let me say that I paid for an extra copy of the convention souvenir. I got one
copy as part of the welcome bag given to each delegate. For another copy, Ben
said it would cost me ten dollars. I duly paid. I have a piece in the souvenir.
Ben distributed FREE copies at the Grand Ball, leaving one copy at each table.
Was the souvenir worth ten dollars?
There are already rumblings about the next convention. I too feel it should be
a bi-annual event. After being allotted the next convention, Rene reminded me
of what I had told him during our meeting in London in the early 1990s. He told
me that I had said that London was an ideal place to hold a convention because
it is centrally located. Toronto is at one end of the world and Goa is at
another. This subject of "allotments" and future conventions can await another
day.
I wish to end the convention issue. It was just that the journalist in me
sprung forth when I found that there were too many undercurrents at the
convention and how the two principal organizers showed "we care a damn for you"
attitude. I won't answer Gabe's question whether it was a "success" or
"washout". I leave it for each goanetter to judge for him/her after reading
all the stuff that has gushed down from the convention. All I can say is that
it could have been organized better and that GNAT could have given itself two
years to organize the convention. If it is true that GNAT was formed in
November 2007, it is less than a year for its existence. With no "solid
foundation" and no "track record", GNAT seemed ill-equipped to host the
convention. That it did, to whatever measure of success it claims, is to its
credit.
Eugene Correia
