Dear christy,

Happy to see your First post on Greenyouth list. but i feel you are
mistaken in a lot of your arguments. I need to reply to this post 
because it address me than the list & theorising the issue without a 
proper study on list

carmel christy wrote:
> Friends,
> 
> Anivar's moderation and censorship is a good example of how some 
> sections are branded as 'rowdy-sheeters' and how even after bloody 
> violence some are given clean chits by the mainstream intelligentsia.

Moderation & Censorship are totally different terms. Censorship is not
at all possible to work in the age of internet. The list seems to be
completely unaware of the the meanings of moderation in online spaces.
http://www.thehoot.org/story.asp?storyid=Web210214166221Hoot72410%20PM935&pn=1


In this list all mails i moderated will upload to files section every
week in a zip format (to prevent search indexing). So what are you
talking about?

> If moderation is to ensure democracy (?), then why is it differentially 
> distributed? Why the violence of some is considered to be so natural and 
> some others 'violent'? 

  This list is not at all a trial project to experiment the possibility
of democracy in online spaces. ICT's cant do anything like that. They
are working in a system of various vertical power structures, including
the power of internet access. For a list with a purpose there is a need
of a clear moderation policy.  But in Greenyouth we Trust people will
use this space in a positive way and they are unmoderated after posting
  3 posts worth for the list. While someone uses this list continuously
to show their power to thrash individuals without any thing to
substantiate their arguments,and hijacking the context of discussion
which is offtopic to list, moderator needs to intervene.  Remember
Ranjit is moderated not after "hijack+abhayam tharoo ark? " comment. It
after the hate mail after his 4 mails (he got enough time to place his
position).

> It is not a good practice to moderate somebody when one does not 
> comprehend (or pretend so) what she/he says. We have been listening to 
> the shouting created by Ranjit and I think he has theoretically given 
> the context of his 'masculine, violent' (in the mainstream imagination) 
> language.

Look at the posts first, which are moderated & which are  posted to the
list after moderation.All mails at least with point is posted to
list.(even though some of them have lot of FUD & hate) As you say I feel
Ranjit is hijacking the context of sugathakumari's visit to athirapally
to shout his agenda of bashing individuals.

> The effective use of polemics has been theorized by various 
> scholars including Kancha Ilaiah whose so called 'violent' speeches and 
> writings gave a new impetus to Dalitbahujan politics not only in Andhra 
> Pradesh, but also in the whole country.

"The effective use of polemics"  is also a marketing tactic even before
kancha.  It will openup a lot of possibilities for the new brand. On the
political sphere Sangh parivar is efficiently using it for a long time
(they have a lot of Management experts to feed ideas). Sethusamudram &
ramsethu is the new example.  It gave a lot of new possibilities to
parivar not only in Karnataka but also in the whole country. It also
gave a lot of possibilities for DMK in Tamilnadu

So it is a good way to raise issues in a campaigner perspective. But
this forum is not the apt place for that

> And I think some members in the group feel 
> threatened to hear these voices. 

This is a normal self-boosting claim to ally with or to find some other
reason for moderation

> We rarely see any discussion on the forwards as mentioned by somebody 
> else. It is not Anivar's forward on Chitralekha issue to the group which 
> created debate, but Ranjit's provocative expression which opened up a 
> discussion which eventually became a battleground of egos.


Discussion must be started by its participants. You are in this list
atleast from July 2006. While saying the absence of discussions please
note that the even your post on chithralekha is appeared in greenyouth
is appeared as a forward from me . As in free software practice there is
no pointing in blaiming an online space which , in which you are also a
member without

A lot of discussions are happened in this list before "samskarika
nayakan/nayika discussion"( i prefer to name it like this after gone
through all those posts) in the context of  my forward of your 3rd post
for sarai fellowship on Chithralekha issue. All who look on the archives
can easily found that It  is a false claim that discussions in this list
is stated with chithralekha issue. discussions on Smartcity, Munnar, etc
are active discussions on this list much before the discussion on
samskarika nayakan/nayika.

I feel Samaskarika nayakan/nayika discussion happened in greenyouth in
the context of  my forward of Chrisy & jenny's 3rd post on Chithralekha
issue in readers-list as a part of sarai fellowship progamme is the
starting point of out of context discussions in this list.


> I think this is an occasion which you yourself created to re-think about 
> your own notions of 'violence' and democracy. Otherwise be there with 
> your control rod to keep away fresh and new assertive voices. Forums are 
> abundant in the cyberspace and you can keep this forum as your sacred, 
> traditional place of worship where there is no need of rethinking.

You are not addressing the list christy. Also this is a mailing list, 
not a forum, Both terms & its meanings are different.

What I prefers to say is the hacker ethics "If you cant not agree with 
the policies & methods of a project split it create a new world and show 
how it must look like". Google groups gives you enough freedom to do it.

> We never knew that your commitment to cultural leaders is so sincere! 
> Keep it up!!!

One of the trends which is very active from the starting of this thread 
the "Traditional" tendency of changing the contexts

in malayalam we say ആടിനെ പട്ടിയാക്കുക, എന്നാ പിന്നെ പട്ടിയെ പേപ്പട്ടിയാക്കാം 
അപ്പോ തല്ലിക്കൊല്ലാന്‍ ന്യായമായല്ലോ . It is is justification experienced in 
this list yet.

The name "greenyouth" helped you to portray it as "Environmental 
Brahmanism", There are people in this list to build grounds for that in 
the name of Sethusamudram project. It is also easy to portray bhakthi to 
sugatakumari is the issue, since male ego wounded by moderation needs a 
some points to satisfy. A lot of other people used this time to express 
their  issues with sugata by celibrating an "applied victimhood" on ranjit.


 > This arrogance and exercise of power is hegemonic and this is what
 > forums like greenyouth if they really mean to be progressive should
 > counter. If this is how you make your forum a forum for forwards, well,
 > keep going!!!

The group does not have a self claim that it is "progressive".


Anivar

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
 To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to