Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 05:34:58 +0000 (GMT) From: edward desilva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To, Mario: > In which Century are you living in? > Mario responds: > One minute. Let me check on Google. OK. Here it is. It says I live in the 21st century - on a planet called Earth. > Edward writes: > The World leaders ignored Hitler because it did not concern them. Look what happened. People like Bandare are slowly creeping into Goanet forum with their RSS ideology akin to Hitler's SS. Recently he has come up with a slogan saying, 'thou shall not take a cheap shot at RSS for a laugh on Goanet', are we to ignore it? And, he has got the cheek to say READ MY MAIL CAREFULLY. > Mario responds: > Edward, I believe in minimal moderation on this worldwide forum, mainly to control personal abuse, so as to allow as much free speech as possible. Some members want to impose their will on everyone else, for example, by wanting to restrict religious evangelizing, political opinions, or any subject not directly and narrowly connected with Goa. I believe we should allow any subject that is of interest to any member and let the chips fall where they may. > Mmy suggestion to Kevin was to not take selective umbrage at some posts while ignoring far more inflammatory and uncouth posts by some of his friends. It was just a suggestion. He is free to get apoplectic at religious posts if he wants to, and support his friends by tacitly ignoring their comments if he wants to. > What I did not suggest was that a member of Goanet should take another poster's words and twist them and make them unrecognizable, as you have done with Bhandare's comments by insisting that YOU know what he MEANT, regardless of what he said. > Referring to Hitler must mean you are living in the 20th century. Comparing Hitler with the RSS means you are also living in an alternative universe. > Let me show you why I say this by reference to your following post: > http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2007-November/065533.html > Here is what YOU quoted Bhandare as saying: > "1. Posts whose sole purpose is to ridicule others by using witless slurs should be deleted..examples of such witless slurs include but are not limited to insinuations that many people are posting under the same id, calling other posters fakes as well purposely confusing gender of fellow posters to elicit some cheap laughs. (yours truly is also guuilty on this account, but only in response to others)" [end of excerpt by Bhandare] > In the quote you referenced, Bhandare made no reference to the RSS. He made no mention of any politics. The subject Bhandare was addressing was "Moderators' responsibilities". However, your surreal response was as follows: > "Your suggestions are bordering on politics, this is not a political forum. What you are saying is that only serious political RSS dogma can be discussed here and any one making a cheap joke of RSS or BJP should be beheaded (metaphorical) publicly on Goanet. I always knew that there is something wrong with your RSS ideology, it is slowly comming out as we scratch beneath your skin." [end of Edward's comments] > Your response had NO CONNECTION WHATSOEVER to anything Bhandare had written. Besides, it was YOU who introduced politics into this subject while claiming that Goanet is not a political forum. > Now, take a look at your following post: > http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2007-November/065594.html > Bhandare had very patiently asked you to re-read what he had written. YOU responded that you had "read and re-read" his post "very carefully". Anyone else who read his post would have found no mention of politics or the RSS. If they re-read his post they would have still found no mention of politics or the RSS. Yet you insisted that he was talking about politics and the RSS. You said you KNEW exactly WHAT what he had "meant" and HOW he had meant it, even though he had said nothing that even hinted at politics and the RSS > Is it possible that you have been reading and re-reading some other post, in some other newsgroup? > Then you added another comment I found curious. You said that YOU were right because no one had come forward to correct you by defending Bhandare. > I don't need to defend Bhandare - he is quite capable of defending himself. My guess is he is still trying to figure out what the heck you are talking about. > However, I have shown quite clearly that your response to Bhandare had no connection whatsoever with what Bhandare had written. > BTW, let us see if anyone will come forward to defend your comments regarding what Bhandare MEANT. >
