[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Towards a peaceful compromise
In article <4di8m0$fq3@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
Ken Stuart <kstuart@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>
>Well, the status quo is definitely unacceptable to me.
>
>If we allow the following post which was just posted (not by Singam):
>
>>I am interested in any information about Sai Baba which exposes him as a fraud.
>
>then what exactly is it that the moderator is doing? Not any more
>than an auto-moderation bot, it seems to me!
>
>(The post didn't ask what people's opinions are - it started out with
>the assumption that he is a fraud.)
>
>Note that I am NOT a follower of Sai Baba, just someone who respects
>his work, such as building schools and hospitals in India that are
>available free of charge, etc.
i, too, am not a follower of Saibaba, nor do i criticise the critics. but
the said post was in bad taste, since it is not an academic discussion
or spiritual debate based on any scriputure or logic, but rather bad
direct personal attack, seeking info to substantiate such an attack.
but, i do not blame the moderator since it all depends on the *charter*
srh has.
(i would not have criticised if the post was a genuine *discussion* on why
Saibaba is a fraud or not a fraud)
it is good idea to divert such articles to a talk.religion.hindu group.
>( Not to mention that the poster is so ignorant of Hinduism, that
>they're obviously not aware that there are 2 Sai Babas, Satya Sai Baba
>and Sai Baba of Shirdi, both of whom have many followers, irregardless
>of the mahasamadhi of the latter. )
it seems there is some third younger saibaba too.
