There are several ways of dealing with this . Provide a facility of 'PRIVATE MESSAGING ' whereby a member can communicate directly with another member .
Keep a hawk's eye on who is posting what, and in case of someone violating the Forum rules, in the first instance, a private warning be issued, public warning in the second instance, and removal from the list in the final instance . We are here to learn and contribute , to promote the RTI awareness and concept, we are not here to make comments on behaviour of the members which does not concern anyone . I do not recommend the idea of moderation. At the initial stage, it looks good to be the boss deciding what to allow and whether to allow it in an edited version or not to allow, but then that moderator would become a slave of the computer with the members howling at him for not approving the posted messages quickly . Dr Arun Agrawal ________________________________ From: COL. SHIVRAJ KUMAR <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, 21 July, 2009 5:28:25 Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Hearing - Disclosure I.T. returnsof NGOs Dear All, There is a way wherein in the yahoo group, a setting can be made so that whenever a member hits the reply button, the reply goes to only the sender of the message and not to the entire group. The moderator can get in touch with me and I can advise the same or the owner / moderator can make me a moderator and I shall do the needful. This will avoid the mud slinging mails coming on the group. regards Col Shivraj New Delhi Phone: 9810433842 On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 2:51 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1...@yahoo. com> wrote: > > > Dear Arun-ji > > There was a slight miscommunication, and that matter is resolved - sort of. > > Per your remark "RTI Act provide or require any applicant to state the > reason for filing the RTI , nor to what purpose the information so obtained > wil be put to." > In the instant case of Mr. Rakesh, or indeed wherever a 3rd party is > involved or 8(1)(j) is invoked, then the *purpose* of obtaining information > in context of "larger public interest" definitely comes into play at appeal > stage. In Rakesh's case (from what little I know of it) the "internal > squabbles of NBH.org" are the subject of the RTI request and shall doubtless > find mention in the order. > > On this group, we take "defamation" / personal attacks very seriously, and > offending messages are removed from our group records although they continue > to be lodged in the group's archives at nabble.com > > Believe me sir, it is very difficult to have an unmoderated forum with 900+ > members and yet maintain the group's focus, decorum while not allowing it to > be hijacked by vested interests. > > Sarbajit > > --- In rti_in...@yahoogrou ps.com <rti_india%40yahoog roups.com> , arun > agrawal <arun_agrawal@ ...> wrote: > > > > Rakeshji: > > > > I am very concerned to read all this . > > > > How is this mud being splashed in the open ? > > > > I thought S Roy was an ethical and knowledgable person . > > > > Rakesh : * You are much younger to me in age so I take > > the liberty of addressing you as such .* > > > > Whatever the internal squabbles of NBH. ORG be , > > no one has the right to comment on internal matters . > > > > RTI Act provide or require any applicant to state > > the reason for filing the RTI , nor to what purpose the information > > so obtained wil be put to . > > > > Quite often , more particularly in case of NGOs , personal interests > > and public interests are inter related . > > > > The reason for all this messy business is that this seems to be > > an unmoderated portal where anyone can us his constitutional right > > of expression to denigrate anyone ( at the same time one could consider > > defamation if aggrived ) . > > > > On 14 July, Punjab Kesari in its NCR edition, published some defamatory > > remarks against me in respect an international NGO I am associated > > with and my transactions with it . > > > > I gave them hell threeatening to take them to Press Council > > and now today they have published my version . Another (bigger) story > will > > come tomorrow . > > > > You must not take such things lying down and be satisfied with some > comments > > on a portal , which not many take seriously . > > > > Earlier also I had noticed that some other groups were entering this > forum > > and using it to air their own grievances . > > > > I put the entire blame at the door of the moderator , I believe Sarabjit > Roy, the > > person whom you thanked in adbance for agreeing to come > > for the hearing on 15th July before IC (MLS) . > > > > Dr Arun Agrawal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rom: Rakesh Agarwal <rak...@...> > > To: rti_in...@yahoogrou ps.com <rti_india%40yahoog roups.com> > > Cc: Wajahat Habibullah <whabibullah@ ...>; shaileshgandhi@ ...; aruna roy > <mkssrajasthan@ ...>; aruna roy <aruna...@.. .> > > Sent: Tuesday, 21 July, 2009 0:29:32 > > Subject: RE: [rti_india] Re: Hearing - Disclosure I.T. returnsof NGOs > > > > > > Mr. Roy > > > > You have a remarkable quality of putting your foot into your mouth - the > > mouth that does not even wait for the hat to drop before expletives gush > out > > of it like muddy water out of a broken sewer line. > > > > Yes, I am using RTI to settle private differences inasmuch as to serve > > public interest. You object? > > > > No, I am not "formerly with" NyayaBhoomi. The so-called third party is, > and > > his son is ashamed of him. Let the court decide where the matter rests. > > > > No, the IT Dept did not make out a convincing case, let alone a "very". > They > > are making a laughing stock of themselves, much like you do of yourself. > > > > You have accused everyone from God downward - including Wajahat, S. > Gandhi, > > Aruna Roy - of being a CIA agent. It has now been conclusively proven > that > > you are the only CIA - Certified Idiot of Asia. > > > > Rakesh > > > > From: rti_in...@yahoogrou ps.com [mailto:rti_ in...@yahoogrou ps.com] On > Behalf > > Of sroy1947 > > Sent: 17 July 2009 13:41 > > To: rti_in...@yahoogrou ps.com > > Subject: [rti_india] Re: Hearing - Disclosure I.T. returnsof NGOs > > > > Has this order come up on net? The buzz on another egroup is that IT Dept > > made out a very convincing case during arguments that Rakesh Agrawal > > "formerly with" NyayaBhoomi was misusing RTI to settle his private > > differences. Hope the final order does not f*** up the scene even more. > > > > Sarbajit > > > > --- In rti_in...@yahoogrou ps.com <mailto:rti_ india%40yahoogro ups.com> > , > > Sidharth <sidharthbbsr@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Rakesh ji & Sarbajit Roy ji, > > > > > > Pls do your best at the hearing. Best of Luck. > > > > > > Dear Rakesh, > > > > > > Please raise the issue of 35AC exemptions. Much bigger moollah is > > > invloved there. > > > > > > Best rgds, > > > > > > Sidharth > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Rakesh Agarwal <rakesh@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Exactly, Sir. Thank you. So are we meeting on 15th at 2:30 p.m.? Your > > > > presence will be of great help. > > > > > > > > Rakesh > > > > > > > > From: rti_in...@yahoogrou ps.com <mailto:rti_ india%40yahoogro > ups.com> > > [mailto:rti_ in...@yahoogrou ps.com <mailto:rti_ india%40yahoogro ups.com> > ] On > > Behalf > > > > Of sroy1947 > > > > Sent: 07 July 2009 11:02 > > > > To: rti_in...@yahoogrou ps.com <mailto:rti_ india%40yahoogro ups.com> > > > > > Subject: [rti_india] Re: Hearing - Disclosure I.T. returnsof NGOs > > > > > > > > If information "relating to" an NGO is held by a public authority > WHICH > > THE > > > > PIO INTENDS TO DISCLOSE IN RTI (there being no section 8 bar) a > section > > 11 > > > > notice is issued to the NGO concerned to oppose disclosure. > > > > > > > > On the other hand if the PIO ON HIS OWN feels that a section 8 > exemption > > > > applies to bar disclosure then where is the question of section 11 > > notice, > > > > because the PIO alone must defend his denial. This is especially so > in > > cases > > > > where the Govt has granted financial concessions (like 80G) on the > basis > > of > > > > material available to it. It is crucial that any citizen of India be > > allowed > > > > to examine the material (records) on the basis of which such > > administrative > > > > concession was given ON DEMAND - the non-disclosure of which shall > only > > > > foster / perpetuate a regime of corruption. > > > > > > > > Sarbajit > > > > > > > > --- In rti_in...@yahoogrou ps.com <mailto:rti_ india%40yahoogro > ups.com> > > <mailto:rti_ india%40yahoogro ups.com> , > > > > "Rakesh Agarwal" <rakesh@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > A hearing is scheduled for 15.07.09 at 2:30 before Information > > > > Commissioner > > > > > Sh. M.L. Sharma, Delhi. I request presence of those who may want to > > > > present > > > > > their views before the Commission. > > > > > > > > > > Three hearings have been conducted into a matter involving > disclosure > > of > > > > > income tax returns and other documents that the NGOs submit with > the > > > > income > > > > > tax authorities to claim exemption u/s 80G. > > > > > > > > > > The public authority is seeking to deny information on the ground > that > > it > > > > is > > > > > personal information whereas I am arguing that all NGOs, especially > > ones > > > > > seeking exemption, grants and subsidies, claim to work for the > welfare > > of > > > > > public which is clearly a matter of public interest. NGOs cannot > claim > > > > > protection from disclosure of information which is held by the > > Government. > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > Rakesh Agarwal > > > > > > > > > > Secretary, NyayaBhoomi > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
