Hi Pranay, I am 2 years late to respond to this post. But, I had to... and hope you get a chance to see my comment. Your method of inequity score and merit score seems good, but it assumes that these are 2 independent variables. My argument is the various inequities a candidate has gone through will result in a poor merit score. So, supposing an underprivileged candidate scores high on inequity score, she may also score quite score low on merit score and nullify the advantage of the inequity score. What do you think?
Hi Anoop. Thanks for going back and reading this article. Totally agree that these might not be completely independent. That's why, the weight given to the two scores should be left to an independent commission at state level. There will of course be corner cases, but the aim is that a broad inequity score will be better than the current situation, where every single group and individual is left dissatisfied.
Excellent insights on such a complex and sensitive topic. Many thanks on the dispelling the urban myth, don't know how many times have heard it quoted in conversations and vote bank politics being cursed, never saw it being challenged, nobody seems to know about it!!
For a long time, I thought changing caste-based quota to income-based seemed like the only plausible solution. Your proposed alternative seems quite effective, something definitely worth more thought and attention. Thanks!
Hi Pranay, I am 2 years late to respond to this post. But, I had to... and hope you get a chance to see my comment. Your method of inequity score and merit score seems good, but it assumes that these are 2 independent variables. My argument is the various inequities a candidate has gone through will result in a poor merit score. So, supposing an underprivileged candidate scores high on inequity score, she may also score quite score low on merit score and nullify the advantage of the inequity score. What do you think?
Hi Anoop. Thanks for going back and reading this article. Totally agree that these might not be completely independent. That's why, the weight given to the two scores should be left to an independent commission at state level. There will of course be corner cases, but the aim is that a broad inequity score will be better than the current situation, where every single group and individual is left dissatisfied.
Excellent insights on such a complex and sensitive topic. Many thanks on the dispelling the urban myth, don't know how many times have heard it quoted in conversations and vote bank politics being cursed, never saw it being challenged, nobody seems to know about it!!
thanks, glad it was useful :-)
For a long time, I thought changing caste-based quota to income-based seemed like the only plausible solution. Your proposed alternative seems quite effective, something definitely worth more thought and attention. Thanks!
Also, thanks for dispelling the urban myth :)
Neha, thanks. Glad you found this post useful.