[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Administrivia : Questioning Of Identity
In article <Pine.ULT.3.90.960402021546.13785A-100000@mercury.aichem.arizona.edu>,
Ajay Shah <ajay@mercury.aichem.arizona.edu> wrote:
>Dear SRH Readers,
>
>Saprem Namaskar!
>
>Here is a relatively trivial Administrative issue, which I have
>decided to post publicly about, so as to give you an insight into
>the moderation process, and also inform you first hand about one
>of the issues Vivek Pai has raised.
First-hand?
Do I even get a voice to represent myself on this issue?
More importantly, why this sudden urge to present a "summary" of one
of the "issues Vivek Pai has raised" - why not allow me to raise the
issue, and then you can answer it to your heart's content?
Your summary of the situation is basically a blantant lie.
What I asked is that since Jai Maharaj posted a heavily edited
statement from me and claimed that I apologized for lying, and since
you allowed _that_ post, don't I get to answer that issue?
>Vivekji sent me a message, saying, in essence, that I am not allowing him to
>defend himself (this article was also supposed to be cross posted to
>alt.flame.jaimaharaj newsgroup)
I find it appalling that in your little summary, you don't even
mention _what_ I asked to defend myself about - namely, the heavily
edited post that Jai Maharaj claimed was my "apology".
>I am certainly hopeful, that SRH will be used for more constructive purposes
>fulfilling its mission to be a forum where ideas about Hindu dharma, and
>Hindus can be discussed, rather than settling personal scores.
Then please tell me why you allowed that message about
"Vivek Sadananda Pai Apologizes for Publishing Lies"
in the first place?
_That_ is the reason I asked to defend myself.
-Vivek
