[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: SRH Reorg: Vendetta : Proof!
Namaskar,
On Fri, 5 Jan 1996, Vivek Sadananda Pai wrote:
> In article <4ciih8$lu1@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
> Ajay Shah <editor@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu> wrote:
> [ entirely snipped an article which mentions SRV more than SRH]
Why Vivekji? Perhaps because you could not answer any of the points
raised in there?
>
> It seems that this discussion comes back more to SRV than
> than the reorg RFD for SRH, so let's make it simple:
It is simple:
1. You and other proponents of SRV/SRH re-org did not like my personal
opinion espousing the sense of Hindu unity and an opinion that the
Vaishnava newsgroup should have the word Hindu in the name of the newsgroup
2. Some of the proponents of SRV (and SRH re-org) then posted a message
on several newsgroups expressing the sentiments of ravange for my
opinions and stated that a call for SRH re-org should be made to "hit me
in my home territory"
3. A whole list of charges were fabricated, which have long been proven wrong
e.g.,
a. there is a moderation delay. Now, proven to be a matter of skewed
statistics
b. not enough posings because moderation delay. Also incorrect, as
proven by comparision with other newsgroups, after all we have now
exceeded 1000 posts in about 4 months. Just right for a newsgroup such
as SRH.
c. Moderation bias: Proven wrong because you and others could not produce
a single unfairly rejected SRH post, with a rejection note.
d. Not enough "progressives" posting on SRH (Maniji said this): We posted
Parthaji's articles and pointed out that Alt.India.Progressive itself has
a low volume.
e. You want to rewrite the charter to keep out "Calls For Action", but
then the proponents could not justify why should a call for action be
banned from a Hindu newsgroup if the ISKCON temples in UK or Armenia are
unfairly treated or if Hindu temples in Fiji or Kashmir are burnt.
f. You could not properly explain why there are no provision replacement
of software/hardware maintainer in SRV charter. You put in no guidelines
for the behavior of SRV software/hardware maintainers. Why?
Perhaps because you want to keep control over SRV and destroy/control SRH
as it exists today?
g. You post the SRH re-org RFD to AIP and Indoloy list, but post SRV RFD
to several India related lists. You also skip the Sanskrit list. When
pointed out, you claim some 80 char limit. But never convincingly explained
why the distribution list for SRH and SRV were different . Perhaps you
think that these would be better allies in destruction of existing Hindu news
group?
Perhaps you want to add all this to the FA(ke)Q that you have prepared,
or perhaps post it once again. I am sure, there are still some people
who have not read the version x.y.z of it :-)
And so, my contention remains, SRH re-org is driven my petty politics
and personal vendetta. And nothing less!
regards,
ajay shah
ajay@mercury.aichem.arizona.edu
editor@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu
References:
