[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: SRH Reorg: Why Bring In Political Biases?
Mani Varadarajan (mani@srirangam.esd.sgi.com) wrote:
: In article <4ba3e5$j8o@babbage.ece.uc.edu> editor@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu (Ajay Shah) writes:
: > I find it intriguing and sad that one of the proponents of SRH Re-org (Shree
: > Mani Vardarajan) has now sought to interject politics in this debate.
: I will respond to the rest of your article at another time, but you
: are completely missing the point.
: The reorganization proposal is designed to COMPLETELY DETACH
: all politics from this newsgroup. This newsgroup should discuss
: aspects related to religion, and *NOT* the invasion of some obscure
: Muslim hordes. I wish to depoliticize the group. Please don't
: misread my intentions.
: There is a need for discussing invasions; that should go into
: the proposed talk.religion.hinduism. However, we want to disallow
: political posts in soc.religion.hinduism because it is an
: inappropriate place for them to be posted.
: Like it or not, SRH is viewed by most net surfers as a mouthpiece
: for one political ideology. This is the reason why traffic
: is so low; otherwise, why would the progressive crowd not post
: more? Other than Partha Banerjee's occasional post, naught
: else is seen. You have stifled all debate by your obvious
: bias and terrible delays.
Your post is self contradictory. The post of Partha was pretty
political. It explicitly blamed the cow belt and VHP politics for issues
related to dowry. YOu somehow think that such type of mix of religion and
politics is good, and is fit enough to be posted in s.r.h.
But when Rajiv Varma posts something similar (like the invasion of Islamic
warriors) and explores the impact of that on the Hindus, you get pissed
off. Things like these are obscure, and fit enough for talk.religion.hindu.
And so you come out with the notion of kicking out Ajay. And then, out of
sheer political expediency, you and your friends ask Ajay, (the person
with a jaundiced eye) to be one of the moderators.
That is your sense of balance. YOur notion of fair play. Very Gandhian.
In fact, if I were the moderator, either, I would have rejected posts of
both types, or would have permitted both of them. Ajay chose the latter
option. I do not see any sense of imbalance in such a moderation policy.
Lastly, you complain that s.r.h DOES NOT have enough posts, which are
like those posted by Partha. (read anti-VHP). You think that posts like
these on s.r.h are a good thing. But they are not there in large nos.
And there rarity is all beacuse of Ajay. What a line of argument?
It is the job of the 'progressives' to ensure that their views are
adequately represented on the s.r.h. If they mail articles, and Ajay
rejects them, then he would be a bad moderator. But if the progressives
do not mail articles to him, then why should Ajay face the blame. And
looking at the activity on a.i.p, it is hardly surprising that only one
Partha posted on s.r.h. The progressives are hardly active on their own
ng. So, why should it surprise you that they will be active enough on
s.r.h.
--
Nachiketa Tiwari
=====================================================
750 Tall Oaks Drive 118 Patton Hall
Apt. # 3600 I Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA 24060. Blacksburg, VA 24061.
(540)-951-3979 (540)-231-4611
=====================================================
