Arunima G wrote:
> Recently someone posted a mail characterising this entire discussion
> as "intellectual masturbation". Now I personally respond to that as
> one should to someone who is onanistically challenged - but why is
> that language not objectionable? The moderator must respond to this,
> and to all other instances where he has allowed some people to post,
> but has blocked, or "moderated" others.

It is not his first post & so it directly enters the list. moderator 
have no voice in it. And it is a response to the discussion here,

no response to the discussions here is moderated yet. I dont think there 
is a need for putting him under moderation. Personally I feel there is 
nothing wrong with masturbation.


> Finally, I am not at all convinced about this "policy" of checking the 
> first 3 mails (the argument about why Geedha wasn't allowed to post) and 
> then "opening" up the space. Many of us were added to this list by 
> Dileep, and at least as one of the people who wrote only in response to 
> a similar incident earlier in the year, I don't think any of my mails 
> was "moderated" even though I was 'new', and had not ever posted 
> anything before?

Dileep may be invited you. Any member can invite anyone. Your posts 
where also moderated at that time. I approved it and put it to lit 
because it was relevant for the discussion here.

Moderating means the mails will be temporarily kept in queue for 
approval before entering to the list. It is a way to avoid OFFTOPIc & 
spam in this list. I felt geedhas mail on velayudhan nair's artcle is 
not relevant to the list  Other than exposing geedhas face.( I dont know 
who is he, After i came to know he is her husband i feel it is not at 
all relevant) Same for her new mail on abhaya report.

If you look at kerala magazines(Especially Manorama Dily & weekily, 
Grihalakshmi, vanitha & various film magazines, crime fire etc) the view 
in velayudhan nairs article shares on most of the publications. So what 
makes special with velayudhan nair ? so geedha's point is clear as bindu 
said. SK needs to be responsible for husbands positions.

Thanks for mensioning the "extraordinary pain" of moderator. A lot of 
times here it will marked as a  personal attack and may be portrayed as 
"An idiot green jackal who self-procalim to be an "activist" but pimping 
for green mafia of Kerala. He moves around in his republic of whims and 
fancies. One day you will see him grown like another Sugatakumari!!" ( 
The new testimonial written by Ranjit at my Orkut profile)

I like to know the current status of various  portrayals like  GREEN 
MAFIA, Environmental Brahmanism(all in capitals),

I feel there is a conscious effort to attack me personally offlist to 
build POWERFULL GREENYOUTH vs RANJITH ( a dalit assertive voice)  to use 
the substanciate the typos of ENVIRONMENTAL BRAHMANISM, fascism, COUNTER 
HEGEMONY. I agee that i was immature at  this point to deal with 
personal attacks.

These efforts denied my opportunity to involve in discussion as a list 
participant & constantly pushed to participate in the role of a list admin

When I Pointed Ranjits Egoistic masculine identity with all privileges 
of 24/7 Internet access, with proper references, He succeeded in 
exploiting that possibility well, which is resulted in listing me on a side.


> The enabling possibility of cyber-communities is that they have the 
> potential to be infinitely open and inclusive. One wishes that the 
> moderator would bear that in mind, at least once in a while.

Totally agree with you.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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