[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Administrivia: Explanation for Rejecting Two Articles
I think SRH Editor is the victim of a major misunderstanding here. Earlier in
this thread, he stated publicly that he would not post the article "What Is
Maayaavaadam?" because it contained personal attacks. At nearly the same time,
he sent me a message regarding a reply I sent to Ramakrishnan Balasubramaniam
under the title "Animal Killing and Soul Merging Condemned"; in this latter
case the moderator suggested to me that I rewrite certain parts of the post
that might be considered as personal attack. He conceded that there was
nothing in there of the form "X is a Y," which is his criteria for determining
if something is or is not a personal attack. I responded that it was bogus for
him to take such an interest because the thread had become very offensive long
before I submitted my reply. Furthermore, I asked him to post the article as
is, since he did not say at that time he would reject it.
When I asked why my posting was being rejected, I was referring to "What is
Maaayaavaadam?" It was clear to me that "Animal Killing and Soul Merging..."
was not being rejected; it was only suggested that I rewrite it which I
decided not to do.
Regarding the former post, I request the moderator to explain what elements
therein are personal attacks. There can't be any personal attacks in the
Maayaavaadam post, because the same moderator approved it for posting to
alt.hindu some time ago. On the other hand, since the moderator has stated
that "X is a Y" is the form that a personal attack takes, he can't reject my
reply to Ramakrishnan because no such statements were found in there.
I request that both articles be posted, because neither contain personal
attacks. Previously, the moderator allowed articles to be posted which were
nothing more than extended personal attacks, and one of them even referred to
me as "a complete ass." He did not complain at that time.
In article <4fvvid$r76@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
SRH Editor <srh@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu> wrote:
>On Wed, 14 Feb 1996, Hari Krishna Susarla wrote:
>
>>
>> I request that the moderator explain to me, at least in private, what
personal
>> attacks he supposedly found in my posting "What is Maayaavaadam?" I would
then
>> like to know why it was accepted for posting to alt.hindu previously, but
>> suddenly now it is deemed as having personal attacks. This is a perfect
>> example of what I mean when I say the moderator is inconsistent in his
>> treatment of personal attacks.
>>
>
>I find these statements rather intriguing, especially in the light of the
>fact that a detailed and clear explanation was indeed sent to
>Shree Susrala, and he responded with two messages.
>My message to Shree Susrala
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>
>>From srh@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu Tue Feb 13 01:40:52 1996
>Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 01:40:50 -0500 (EST) [Note : I am in PST, so it
>was on 12 Feb for me]
>From: SRH Editor <srh@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu>
>To: Hari Krishna Susarla <susarla.krishna@studentserver1.swmed.edu>
>Subject: Re: Animal-killing and Soul-merging condemned
>In-Reply-To: <4fk4bn$r6t@swsu65.swmed.edu>
>Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960213012424.11622B-100000@rbhatnagar>
>
>
>Namaskar Hari Krishnaji,
>
>May I please request you to reconsider portions of this post that may be
>considered as personal attack and revise this post. I have also sent
>back a posting by Ramakrishnaji on this topic for the exact same
>reasons. I hope that we may all benifit if the personal attacks are
>removed from this thread.
>
>I recall our previous communications on the personal attacks. However I
>must admit that although your post does not have "X is ..." type of
>statement, IMHO, the implications of "X is ..." are there, which is why I
>am making this request.
>
>It is generally my philosophy to allow maximum freedom, and in that
>spirit I accept many borderline posts (the chest beating post from you
>and the response to that from Ramkrishnaji were accepted in that
>spirit). However, the two posts I got today, reflect a lot more personal
>attacks.
>
>Specifically, I would like to point out the following from this post
>which you may consider revising prargraphs containing :
>
>"accumen to perceive"
>"foolish generalization"
>"nothing intelligent"
>"dish it...take it"
>
>Please note that I am not being bias in my approach. And I would
>appreciate your cooperation.
>
>regards,
>
>ajay shah
>
>----------------------------------------------
>end of excerpts, HKS responded with 2 messages to that.
>---------------------------------------------
>My message to Shree Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian
>
>
>>From srh@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu Mon Feb 12 22:18:18 1996
>Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 22:18:16 -0500 (EST)
>From: SRH Editor <srh@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu>
>To: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <rbalasub@ecn.purdue.edu>
>Subject: Re: What is Maayavaadam (Advaita)?
>In-Reply-To: <199602122022.PAA26296@lambert.ecn.purdue.edu>
>Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960212221420.11454A-100000@rbhatnagar>
>
>Namaskar,
>
>May I request you (and I am writing a similar message to HKS) to keep
>this discussion on a positive note without personal attacks etc.? The
>equating of Srila Prabhupada's teaching to comic book etc. may be
>offensive to many and could be considered a personal attack.
>
>Also pt. 3 below can be construded as personal attacks.
>
>I would really appreciate your cooperation. As always, your posts are
>welcome on SRH
>
>regards,
>
>ajay shah
>
>--------------------------------------
>
>Comparision with alt.hindu is not applicable, since the alt.hindu
>personal attack policy was implement precisely because of posts such as
>these...
>
>I once again seek everyone's cooperation in keeping the newsgroup clean
>.... free of personal attacks
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Ajay Shah
>
>Moderator, SRH
Follow-Ups:
References:
