[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: INFO : Artificial Justification for Info Group
Giri wrote:
> kstuart@mail.telis.org (Ken Stuart) writes:
>
> >It seems clear from this post and the ones entitled:
> [snipped]
> >and the ones that were approved by the moderator with the titles:
>
> >INFO : Bow to the Sun! (suuryaashhTaka)
>
> >that the moderator does not understand the purpose of an "Info" newsgroup, or
> >in this case an "INFO:" posting.
>
> And I am glad that you informed the moderator and the group about
> the definition of the INFO poster.
Actually the Bow to the sun is also an INFO posting, since it gave the info
about a particular date which is special for surya.
> It is my turn to confess that I was ignorant of the above, just
> like I was ignorant of the fact that Hanuman is NOT a hindu God. Godspeed,
> I will call my family who don't have access to the group and inform of this
> since they call themselves Hindus and worship Hanuman.
Don't dare to tell this again and again. You may suddenly find yourself
censored in certain ngs.
> I titled my article as INFO : vajrasuchi upanishad and the word INFO was not
> added on by the moderator. The moderator rejecting the article because
> of the word and me reposting it would have consumed both of our time
> un-neccessarily but seeing how Ken has pointed out this, we all should have
> wasted 10 min or so, for the benefit of the group.
Ofcourse, the moderator is here for the express purpose of serving the
news-group and satisfying each and everyone of the readers all the time. If he
does not and makes a small mistake, we can start threads abusing him and fill
up the newsgroup that way.
> Considering that the moderator wrote on July 1st, why wasn't this
> error pointed out earlier before the moderator approved any postings in
> this category? Or should you complain only after the moderator
> has committed an oversight ?
Ofcourse, how else can we gloat? See, I told you so, the moderator is
in-competent. Ha, Ha! I know everything and Ajay Shah does not, so on and so
forth.
> Moderator : Is there a separate category you can open for nitpicking
> you only ? You can call it NITPICK
> That article can contain this :
> **
> Subject : NITPICK : Moderator does not read WWW fully.
> 'In an article approved by the moderator, the poster mentions a site. Though
> the site has over 1 Megabyte of information, there is a link to some material
> which can be construed as sexual. Is this how a family group of SRH managed
I am being serious here, can the moderator include this idea, i.e., for all
posts about re-org please give the title NITPICK?
Also this for Vaishnava is/is not/may be/may not be Hindu thread can you give
the header ATWRTD? (Asinine Thread Which Refuses To Die). We'll find it easier
to kill these threads then.
I again request some of the newer readers of srh to stop responding to the
re-org and hindu/vaishnava messages. Please refer to the archives and you'll
find enough material for a life time. I see that the signal to noise ratio has
improved some what today. Let's make it better. If any of the re-org people
still have problems with the moderation, they can form a mailing list for
themselves and nitpick to their heart's content. Other people can join that if
they want to. Thanks.
Ramakrishnan.
--
Two monks were arguing about a flag. One said, "The flag is moving." The other
said, "The wind is moving." The sixth patriarch happened to be passing by. He
told them, "Not the wind, not the flag; mind is moving." - The Gateless Gate
http://yake.ecn.purdue.edu/~rbalasub/
