You notice I've never been asked. :D

On Feb 18, 7:55 pm, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> wrote:
> Shouldn't be posting since I should be studying.  Just wanted to say,
> Neil is not a moderator, he has been invited to be, but never took up
> the invitation.
>
> On Feb 18, 8:23 pm, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Since all bannings are discussed among moderators, Neil should be
> > privy to details of the case.
>
> > Neil, you do not seem to be in favour of banning Chaz. So, have you
> > broken the collective responsibility norm ?
>
> > On Feb 19, 5:43 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I was replying to Slip Disc's "crime" assertion, above. << Nominal9
>
> > > Crime assertion?  I merely pointed out the obvious which is well known
> > > concerning Chazwin's forum demeanor.  Fact is, if I were to address
> > > you in Chazwin style you most likely would be "offended" by all the
> > > expletives directed towards your misinterpretation of my post, which
> > > could also be considered effrontery.
>
> > > Again I reiterate: Chazwin was vulgar and out of line with Minds Eye
> > > decorum. (that is not a dictum of criminal activity)
>
> > > However, if that is not enough for you,  I will cite some pertinent
> > > points from the Minds Eye Posting Guidelines.
>
> > > From Posting Guidelines
>
> > > 5. Bannings
>
> > > All decisions regarding disciplinary actions up to and including
> > > banishment from the group are discussed thoroughly among the
> > > moderators before any decision is made. None of the moderators take it
> > > upon themselves to discipline a member of the group.  Disciplinary
> > > actions include, but are not limited to: warnings, return to moderated
> > > status, banishment from the group, and ETERNAL DAMNATION.
>
> > > **************************************************
> > > In other words Nom9, don't crimp on me because I didn't ban anyone!
>
> > > 3. Etiquette & Principles
>
> > > Aggressive/bullying posts are unwelcome. If you've had a bad day, go
> > > and take your stress out elsewhere.
>
> > > (Chaz has gone elsewhere and so should you take your Slip attack
> > > elsewhere too, it's baseless)
>
> > > Avoid swearing/cussing, unless it is absolutely pertinent to the
> > > discussion at hand. Sometimes it happens naturally in the flow of a
> > > sentence -- and I'm guilty of it -- but there are many far more
> > > creative ways to express yourself.
>
> > > (I've never found any of Chaz putrid verbalization to be pertinent to
> > > any discussion.)
>
> > > It's not up to me, I'm just an observer!
>
> > > On Feb 18, 11:18 am, nominal9 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Owners of groups determine the standards by fiat. Start your own
> > > > group
> > > > with your standards if it is important to you or find one that
> > > > matches
> > > > your tenets. There is no true democracy in a Google Group. /
> > > > ornamentalmind
>
> > > > I agree with you, Orn.... I was replying to Slip Disc's "crime"
> > > > assertion, above. As to Google's policies... well that depends on
> > > > Google and on the "consumer" rights and responsibilities that it
> > > > grants to its "users".... but that includes the Group Owners, I would
> > > > think... Point being, if Goolgle happens to be a bit more
> > > > "enlightened" (my view of it) that the Group Owners as to any or other
> > > > censroship issue, then Google can make it's own countervailing
> > > > judgement....
> > > >  But ultimately it does get down to a question of the "company you
> > > > keep"... I've been keeping company with Chazwin, over on that other
> > > > Group....
> > > > nominal9
>
> > > > On Feb 18, 10:54 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > nom, it is neither a right nor a wrong issue. It is a what/where
> > > > > issue. What sort of group do you want to be a member of? Where on the
> > > > > internet do you want to join?
>
> > > > > Owners of groups determine the standards by fiat. Start your own group
> > > > > with your standards if it is important to you or find one that matches
> > > > > your tenets. There is no true democracy in a Google Group.
>
> > > > > On Feb 18, 7:46 am, nominal9 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Vamadevananda,
> > > > > > I appreciate and respect both your own as well as Slip Disc's rights
> > > > > > to your own opinions on this issue. I myself make a distinction
> > > > > > between words and deeds when it relates to questions of freedom of
> > > > > > speech, I think that I have said this before. I have had to put up
> > > > > > with more than my own share of verbal abuse, in many instances, and 
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > have never asked for the censorship of the, in my opinion, abusers. 
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > have tried to either refute or sometimes, if it got to that point,
> > > > > > even reply in kind to such, in my opinion, verbal abusers. I come at
> > > > > > it from a "literary" and "historical" perspective.... censorship has
> > > > > > muzzled scientific speech, artistic speech, political speech,
> > > > > > religious speech, satirical or humorous speech, and even "bad taste"
> > > > > > speech. In some cases (most I would say) the censorship was, itself,
> > > > > > more harmful or ill-intentioned than the actual expression censored.
> > > > > > You are all fairly intelligent and probably aware of this in your 
> > > > > > own
> > > > > > regards... You, Vamadevananda, want censorship  and "social 
> > > > > > decorum"?
> > > > > > I would think that you have more than enough of a bad case example 
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > where it can lead with the Indian Caste system....As for Slip
> > > > > > Disc....crimes of speech???? Show me the law or legal statute that
> > > > > > outlaws any speech that Chazwin or anyone else may have used? 
> > > > > > Unless,
> > > > > > of course, you are talking about some "political" law from some sort
> > > > > > of "authoritarian" regime....among which I , myself, would include
> > > > > > some of the so-called politically correct laws promulgated by the 
> > > > > > so-
> > > > > > called enlightened eEuropean or other (U.S. & Canada) 
> > > > > > democracies....
> > > > > > Nah, you are both wrong on this....
> > > > > > nominal9
>
> > > > > > On Feb 17, 11:09 pm, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Chazwin, the person, or his thoughts and ideas were never the 
> > > > > > > issue
> > > > > > > here, Nom.
>
> > > > > > > It was his verbal " behaviour," which was grossly disparaging of
> > > > > > > others at times, including intolerance of other people and their
> > > > > > > beliefs. If members of this forum have their rights, then Chaz
> > > > > > > frequently committed crimes against other people's rights and
> > > > > > > priviledges.
>
> > > > > > > On Feb 18, 3:57 am, nominal9 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Proof Positive... Gabby and Francis.... here's the link to
> > > > > > > > Epistemology Group and Chazwin's own 
> > > > > > > > words...http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/browse_thread/thread/7913...
> > > > > > > > Maybe Kierkegraig or (I suspect) Chris Jenkins (more than 
> > > > > > > > likely,the
> > > > > > > > censor) will give their side of it in explanation... I would 
> > > > > > > > like to
> > > > > > > > hear it, as well as perhaps some avenue to a mediation or a
> > > > > > > > reconciliation of the matter.... Chazwin's is an especially
> > > > > > > > intelligent voice to stiffle, under any circumstances. 
> > > > > > > > Although, as I
> > > > > > > > said, I despise censorship under all circumstances.
> > > > > > > > nominal9
>
> > > > > > > > On Feb 17, 1:21 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Thanks for sharing this information with us. It is much 
> > > > > > > > > appreciated at
> > > > > > > > > least on my side. Any sheep counts. Please keep us informed.
>
> > > > > > > > > On 17 Feb., 18:23, nominal9 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > I just read a statement on another board by Chazwin... I 
> > > > > > > > > > reproduce it
> > > > > > > > > > and my own reaction below:
>
> > > > > > > > > > "Maybe I'll avoid getting a summary
> > > > > > > > > > banning, as I have with Mind's Eye. / Chazwin....
>
> > > > > > > > > > Say what? Chazwin....
> > > > > > > > > > banning?.... My Hackles are starting to rise....
> > > > > > > > > > nominal9"
>
> > > > > > > > > > I haven't gotten any explanation from Chaz, maybe it is all 
> > > > > > > > > > a big
> > > > > > > > > > misunderstanding on someone or other's part....Hope so... I 
> > > > > > > > > > would hate
> > > > > > > > > > to see good friends, fellow posters, over some 
> > > > > > > > > > misunderstanding...
> > > > > > > > > > I despise censorship...., myself.
> > > > > > > > > > nominal9- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" 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/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to