[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: SRH Reorg FAQ
In article <ghenDuKtr4.7ID@netcom.com>,
Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <rbalasub@ecn.purdue.edu> wrote:
>
>And in such a way that he can defend himself later, I might add. If I remember
>right, he said something like "is a lingam worshipping lingayat homosexual a
>hindu" or something like that. Note that he can defend himself by saying that
>he was giving an example if questioned later and also feel satisfied about
>insulting shaivas. It's not very surprising given the history of feuds between
>lingayats and vaishnavas (sometimes violent) in Karnataka.
why this speculation as to what Vivek has in his mind, unless you want
to *use* this opportunity to make disparaging comments about him?
>
>I voted YES for srv and hardly care if some vaishnavas consider themselves
>hindu or not (though the mind boggles at such a possibility). However, I am
>against the RFD for other reasons I have already cited, for which I received
>no satisfactory answers.
>
>Rama.
it is understandable if you are against the reorg proposal, since
*any* proposal can not satisfy *all* the readers. it would be naive
if any of the proponents consider the proposal to be *without*
some level of opposition. and i am not aware of any proponent being
so naive.
what bothers me is that instead of deciding whether *majority* of
readers consider the proposal as useful to the group, through a
usenet vote, the proposal is being killed because the current
moderator does not consent it.
Follow-Ups:
