At 10:25 PM -0700 10/16/05, mayur bora wrote:
>Hi Mahanta da
>
>I think I don't have a jaundiced vision.


*** From your note, I, just as well as anyone who has a minimally 
functioning brain, can assure  you that you are correct :-).

Not that I had a doubt. But sometimes these things need clarified, 
lest it goes over the feeble-minded freaks. That is why I asked for a 
response.

Take care.

cm






>   I don't have
>the audacity to claim that I have a vision which may
>be acceptable to all. I try to see things as they are.
>Occasionally in the past, I remember having seen some
>stupid remarks about Sankardeva in different
>newspapers and magazines. I never responded as they
>did not deserve any rebuttal or refutation due to its
>poor quality. I ignored them as barking of mad dogs.
>It would be extremely dishonest on my part if I say
>that I have seen anything insulting or derogatory
>about Sankardeva on assamnet in the past one month or
>so after I joined it. I am always for healthy debate
>on any issue based on facts and reason. Either I will
>try to participate or watch with interest.
>
>I think this will explain my position clearly.
>
>Bye for now.
>
>Mayur
>Chandigarh
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--- Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>  At 9:54 AM -0700 10/16/05, mayur bora wrote:
>>  >Hi Mahanta da
>>  >
>>  >I am not aware of the earlier comments on assamnet
>>  by
>>  >Deka/Kakati. I don't know whether they are two
>>  >separate individuals or not. I think basic issue is
>>  >much more important than that. As regards the last
>>  >point of your mail, both are inextricably linked.
>>  >Promoting, propagating, popularising and most
>>  >importantly practising Sankardeva's philosophy in
>>  our
>>  >day to day life is the best way of paying tribute
>>  to
>>  >him. But at times, singing praise is also required.
>>  >
>>  >Bye
>>  >
>>  >Mayur
>>
>>
>>  *** Thanks for the reply Mayur. I hoped for the
>>  answer you gave. And
>>  I am pleased.
>>
>>  >  > But at times, singing praise is also required.
>>
>>  *** I can live with that :-)
>>
>>  But you did not respond to the previous question:
>>
>>
>>  >Or was there a determination on your part that
>>  someone indeed has
>>  >made disparaging or or baseless charges against
>>  Xonkordev, and thus
>>  >the comments were directed against him/her/them?
>>  And if you did see
>>  >such comments, which were those?
>>
>>
>>  cm
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  >Chandigarh
>>  >
>>  >--- Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>  >
>>  >>  Hi Mayur:
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>  >  >I am of the view that if
>>  >>  >someone says something on the basis of reason ,
>>  >>  there
>>  >>  >is no harm in analysing it.
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>  *** You are right. I agree with you.
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>  >  > But if a person puts forth
>>  >>  >irresponsible and disparaging views about
>>  someone
>>  >>  >which is based neither on facts nor on reason,
>>  then
>>  >>  we
>>  >>  >should ignore it without wasting our energy and
>>  >>  time
>>  >>  >on that.
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>  *** I agree with you here too.
>>  >>
>>  >>  And since no one has made any disparaging
>>  comments
>>  >>  or baseless
>>  >>  charges against Xonkordev or what he tried to do
>>  for
>>  >>  the people of
>>  >>  Assam that *I* have noticed here, would it be
>>  >>  reasonable to suggest
>>  >>  that your comment was really directed at Bidyut
>>  >>  Kakati, who is none
>>  >>  other than Rabin Deka in disguise ( in disguise
>>  >>  because he was thrown
>>  >>  out o account of a persistent and long record of
>>  >>  making stupid
>>  >>  personal attacks against a number of netters) ?
>>  >>
>>  >>  If so why can't you say it like it is?
>>  >>
>>  >>  Or was there a determination on your part that
>>  >>  someone indeed has
>>  >>  made disparaging or or baseless charges against
>>  >>  Xonkordev, and thus
>>  >>  the comments were directed against him/her/them?
>>  And
>>  >>  if you did see
>>  >>  such comments, which were those?
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>  And finally a question for you and all others
>>  here:
>>  >>
>>  >>  *** What is more important to note, to protect,
>  > to
>>  >>  uphold, to
>>  >>  promote, to expend one's energies on:
>>  >>  Xonkordev's  message, or his persona? If you were
>>  >>  Xonkordev, what
>>  >>  would your advice to your followers be?
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>  cm :-)
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>  At 9:22 PM -0700 10/15/05, mayur bora wrote:
>>  >>  >Hi Mahanta da
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  >Please refer to the quotation of my earlier
>>  mail.
>>  >>  You
>>  >>  >will find the rationale. I am of the view that
>>  if
>>  >>  >someone says something on the basis of reason ,
>>  >>  there
>>  >>  >is no harm in analysing it. But if a person
>>  puts
>>  >>  forth
>>  >>  >irresponsible and disparaging views about
>>  someone
>>  >>  >which is based neither on facts nor on reason,
>>  then
>>  >>  we
>>  >>  >should ignore it without wasting our energy and
>>  >>  time
>>  >>  >on that.
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  >Mayur
>>  >>  >Chandigarh
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  >--- Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  >>  Hi Mayur:
>>  >>  >>
>>  >>  >>
>>  >>  >>  I presume this is the same 'seraa-paagol'
>>  Rabin
>>  >>  >>  Deka that was kicked
>>  >>  >>  out of Assam Net, but has returned like the
>>  >>  'nirgot'
>>  >>  >>  he is. This
>>  >>  >>  moron has a habit of
>>  >>  >>  picking out words and phrases or comments
>>  out of
>>  >>  >>  context to
>>  >>  >>  personally attack others personally in Assam
>>  >>  Net.
>>  >>  >>  Therefore, in the
>>  >>  >>  public interest, I will forward those
>>  exchanges
>>  >>  for
>>  >>  >>  those who might
>>  >>  >>  be interested.
>>  >>  >>
>>  >>  >>  >This is not meant for any individual.
>>  >>  >>
>>  >>  >>
>>  >>  >>  *** Then why did you post it :-)? The net is
>>  >>  made up
>>  >>  >>  of many
>>  >>  >>  'individuals' Mayur. Did you forget that? Or
>>  are
>>  >>  you
>>  >>  >>  trying to have
>>  >>  >>  it both ways?
>>  >>  >>
>>  >>  >>
>>  >>  >>  >But if anyone is disrespectful to
>>  Sankaradeva,
>>  >  > we
>>  >>  >>  should ignore it.
>>  >>  >>
>>  >>  >>  *** May I ask you WHY you or WE should
>>  ignore
>>  >>  it,
>>  >>  >>  instead of dwelling
>>  >>  >>  on it or going to war over it? I would be
>>  very
>>
>=== message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
>http://mail.yahoo.com

_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

Reply via email to