[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Tale and the SRH-reorg (Was: Re: Charter changes?)
In article <ghenDuGMAE.Aqu@netcom.com>,
Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <rbalasub@ecn.purdue.edu> wrote:
>Vivek Sadananda Pai wrote:
>
>> What the "appeals committee" doesn't address at all is the issue
>> of what posts _should_ be relevant to SRH. I don't want to see more
>> of the "hate the Pakis because they hate Hindus" posts, and the
>> appeals committee does nothing to address this issue.
>
>Well, don't read the posts then.
If you feel that it's OK to have posts encouraging hatred of the
Pakistanis on a Hindu religion newsgroup, then I'm afraid that we'll
never reach any sort of agreement. Likewise, if you feel that the
communal politics in India is a proper topic for a Hindu religion
newsgroup, then we probably won't reach agreement there either.
My point is simple - there are other groups where you can spread the
anti-Muslim or anti-Pakistani hatred, and soc.religion.hindu shouldn't
be used for that purpose. If you wish to claim that it's of interest
to Hindus, then you still have to explain why it's on topic for a
newsgroup theoretically discussing religion. There are a lot of things
that are of interest to Hindus - computers, sports, Jethro Tull, etc.,
etc., but that doesn't mean that they belong in soc.religion.hindu.
>If you use netscape it's particularly easy to
>ignore these threads. Personally, I don't like seeing (as many others) threads
>attacking Vivekananda either.
Even if your repeated accusations were true, at least it would be
discussion of something related to Hinduism directly. However, you are
really stretching things here.
-Vivek
