[QUOTE=Dr.G.AsgharMemon]AoA ,

Those who think css is without corrupting influences, and is entirely blameless institution have based their argument on a premise that they themselves are selected via rigourous code of written and oral examination, They also base their argument that many with lower socio-economic status have made it to top notch slots,without aid of beauracrat or politically tilted support,therefore fpsc policy is without errors. keeping their view point, they are not 'wholly' wrong.
whereas those who consider that human beings run the system therefore like all other humanly run institution fpsc is at faults have some good examples under their belt.with example of a many people scoring good in written portion and flunking oral examination.... They too are not wholly wrong, because it seem that there are sporadic examples of people managing top slots in css, and few unlucky competitive souls seeing doom before their eyes.
I think every system has flaws, so does fpsc!. But the problme arises when we 'generalize' for example if u should say that two apples that fall on ground are rotten,therefore every apple of apple tree is bad. but we would definately say if 98 of out 100 apples do turn out be rotten, that particular tree bears rotten fruits...
in the case of css, many candidates are where they are because of their individual efforts. and as that, the system does demand applause, for howsoever we belittle worth of fpsc yet even those who got rewarding score and faild it prove that system is inherently good, since they themsleves strived with pure heart,that they would succeed.
it can be expected by candidates that merit is essential attribute of the system... perhaps tis is the only reason why most people go for it and many more r in queue.
{i m neither favoring this system nor saying anything to belittle it. cos i know even tho merit is prime policy,even then people in their slots are not specialized to the field in which they are chosen.A qualified candidate is selected in any field depending on his merit as though he was fit in every profession depending upon merit.}

Sir, in your narative, although you give a generally agreed upon version of FPSC's mechanics, you are just contradicting yourself in your last statement. A system that choses people to serve in diverse fields based on their merit rather than taking into view thier holistic faculties is something i understand, from you description, you oppose. Then how can you be ambivalent in your opinion regarding its operation. For it may make you or me work hard and diligently, it seems that it does not really produce the end product, which i agree with you has to be individuals geared to be specialists or at-least resembling such specialists by virtue of their capabilility to be the 'right personel for the job' and not just cerebral in their outlook. And once we agree that the final outcome is a far cry from the very objectives of having the system how can it even justify its existence? let alone its capacity to perform?


Just some observations. Though im quite aware that this discussion is going to lead nowhere in terms of the problem being discussed since neither you nor me can as yet influence how it operates, though by critiquing the process we might in time be able to convince enough people that the process is really only as good as its output and the day our bureaucracy gets up on the rails again there shall be no need for some mindless idiot like myself to ramble on in a friday afternoon when there are better things to be done.

Have a good one.