[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: SRH: Improvement of Hindu newsgroups is the goal
In article <4dksf7$kmc@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <rbalasub@ecn.purdue.edu> wrote:
>vri@tiac.net (Arun Malik) wrote:
>
>>Vivek Sadananda Pai <vivek@cs.rice.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>Overall, I'm baffled by the amount of energy you've expended to try to
>>>defeat SRV and now this reorg of SRH, and the amount of energy you've
>
>If the energy Vivek spent in getting together srv and reorganizing srh is
>justified, so is opposing it.
By trimming my quote, you've removed the context entirely. Recall that
this thread started when Mr. Malik claimed that Vaishnavas would be in
control of the Hindu newsgroup if this reorg passed, a false
assertion. I then compared his positions on this group and SRV versus
his comments praising the neo-Nazi group, so by clipping that part of
my statement, you remove quite a bit of context.
Even if we take your statement at face value, I think most people
would find its consequences absurd - if I spend a lot of energy
getting together a campaign to stop child abuse, for example, do you
really think it's justified for someone to spend an equal amount of
energy opposing it? Your logic seems to indicate that equal energy
being spent on pro- and anti- viewpoints is always a good thing, and
that to me seems absurd, specifically because you mention the energy
spent in "getting together srv". Mr. Malik opposed SRV entirely, not
just on a name issue. I don't find that reasonable.
[...]
>This is clearly a threat. It cannot be construed as anything else.
I gave a rather full explanation of it already twice. Please read that
explanation, and you'll see that the "threat" and the "retaliation"
claims don't hold water.
>Please, guys can we forget what has already happened and work towards
>a reasonable solution?
I am all for a reasonable solution, but remember where this started -
Mr. Malik used an obvious lie to create fear - that some group of
Vaishnavas was going to "control" the Hindu newsgroup. Had he even
bothered to read the articles in the SRH/AH archives by the proposed
moderators, he would've found that his assertion was blatantly false.
I am more than willing to work towards a reasonable solution, but let's
make it clear that these sorts of false claims aren't reasonable.
-Vivek
Thu Jan 18 09:57:24 CST 1996
