Candidate Proposal Reviews – Sreyansh Jain ll G.Sec Technology


You can find his proposals here

*All proposal reviews are based on TSA’s assessment of the proposal document provided by the candidate. We crosscheck all facts mentioned in the proposal and give feedback around three parameters : 

  1. Need & Impact of the proposals; we attempt to assess the value of the proposal for the students.
  2. Feasibility; whether the proposal ever see the light of day or not.
  3. Originality; if the proposal been implemented before in some form or another.
The views mentioned in the proposal critiques below are TSA’s alone and are meant for a more holistic sharing of information about the candidates and their ideas. This, we believe, will lead to fairer and more impactful selection of candidates for the various positions of responsibility.*
Proposal 1 : Technical Week

Candidate claims that despite the high level of competition in the General Championship, the ‘technical output’ is not that significant, and hence, in light of the larger intake of students into the institute in recent times, he wishes to introduce a series of workshops to encourage further participation from students and enhance their skills.

The candidate has provided a detailed description of his proposal – however most of the details are redundant and the idea itself is severely overplayed. The Scholars’ Avenue is used to seeing several proposals much like this every year, and while some have been implemented, the participation is usually less. The candidate wishes to increase participation by including the reward of a “certificate of participation”. The idea seems rather redundant on first glance, judging by the sheer number of workshops already being held annually on campus and the fact that this idea is often suggested by candidates.

The idea can easily be implemented, and in fact, it has been implemented by several societies on campus. The certificate of participation may appeal to some, but The Scholars’ Avenue feels that this could simply lead to forced participation by most, just for the sake of the certificate and with no inclination towards the workshop.

There is no significant impact of this idea. It is thoroughly overplayed and is already implemented by societies, such as KDAG. Fleeting memories of last year’s ”Women’s Workshop” flashes in our minds.
Proposal 2: Model Village

This idea is not particularly needful, as several such initiatives by IIT Kharagpur, NCC and NSS already exist. One may argue that a completely student run body for the implementation of such social problem alleviation competitions is new and revolutionary, but we have many such societies on campus that often do the same, such as GYWS. There is also a competition in Spring Fest where such ideas our presented.

The candidate has given little information about this proposal, it is likely that he himself knows that this idea is completely unoriginal.

Competitions are easy to implement. Implementation of the winning ideas that arise from the competitions could require
significant funding, and will most likely end up not being implemented.

If implemented perfectly, the idea could have significant impact on the KGP society as a whole. That said, the idea is still
completely unoriginal and overplayed.
Proposal 3: Participant Ranking Mechanism for KTJ

An interesting idea that’s often seen in website ranking softwares. The candidate aims to identify higher calibre participants
for KTJ by using a user-rating algorithm. Applying them to the KTJ database may aid in selections, however, it may also lead to screening out of participants from regions in India with limited internet connectivity.

The candidate has described his idea in detail, however we can’t help but notice that this seems to be more of a job for a KTJ
web team developer than for a tech GSec. However, the candidate seems very enthusiastic about this idea (probably because of his prior work with KTJ) and the details of implementation including the algorithms
provided are lucid. His idea also involves notifying participants about related events that could be of interest to the participant – a simple implementation of user recommendation algorithms.

The idea is easy to implement, requires only the development of a rating system and a chrome extension. However “Chrome
Extensions to track websites visited by the person” seems like a downright violation of privacy – hence we shall simply exclude this part from his proposal, as it is ridiculous.

No impact on the KGP community as a whole. Useful for KTJ participation.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.