[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: SRH Reorg FAQ
In article <4shp90$bmm@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <rbalasub@ecn.purdue.edu> wrote:
>Nice. But why the speculations about my intentions?
Because you keep making charges against people based on what you
claim, but you fail to back up those claims with actual quotes?
Do you think it's fair to state that I hate group X because of
statements I've never made? I've asked you several times to provide
proof of your claims, and I've still never seen you provide any.
Here's another example:
First you have the statement making the smear:
>Vivek Pai has regularly shown his antipathy for shaivas in this group.
And then, to try to suggest it's not a smear, you state something which
never occurred:
>In another post some time back, he claimed that brighu
>muni delivered polemics against shaivas (in the bhagavatam) because they were
>meat eaters and wine drinkers, conveniently implying that all shaivas do so.
Of course, at this point, I'll ask you again for proof, but I don't
expect that you'll provide any.
_That_ is why I think it's reasonable to conclude that you're on a smear
campaign.
More importantly, the question is - why are you trying this smear job?
>That's between you and the moderator. I couldn't care less. Ofcourse I find it
>funny that some of the proponents want to shove their opinions on talking
>about religion+politics etc in srh down other people's throats and then talk
>about democracy in the USENET.
Actually, the proponents want the matter to come to a vote. That
sounds pretty democratic, doesn't it? Look at what we have right now
instead, and then see who is and who isn't being democratic, and who
is and isn't trying to shove things down people's throats.
-Vivek
