I am also a victim. Alas! Regards, Nikhil Mehra
Advocate, Supreme Court of India Tel: (+91) 9810776904 Res: C-I/10, AIIMS Campus, Ansari Nagar (East) New Delhi - 110029. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Gayathri R <[email protected]> Date: Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:33 AM Subject: Re: India beat Pakistan To: [email protected] Hello Nikhil: You must not presume to know what Anand has going on in his head when he posts something\ . By calling the email irrelevant, you are being a bit presumptive. One can safely assum\ e that there is a motive for the post - there is at least one very, very obvious possibl\ e motive for the post, something that doesn't seem to have occurred to you. You are rece\ iving this email because you have called one of Anand's previous emails as showing "indi\ gnance". But it was not the case as he pointed out. You seem to be repeatedly misunderst\ anding the tone and the tenor of the posts. The aim is to produce a more thoughtful disc\ ussion. Perhaps you could prove me wrong? Could you maybe translate this post into Hindi\ or preferably Sanskrit, so we at least know that you understand the posted comment inte\ rms of tense and mood. Sanskrit would be preferable since tense and mood tends to come o\ ut very weel in that language. There is a pretty good and obvious reason for making the \ Subramanian Swamy post as well. Anyway, Anand has a certain fondness for people who serve the public interest in India a\ nd would not like to get into a very public disagreement/spat/quareel with you. I hope t\ his is not prompted by any of his previous remarks on legal systems, calculus, et cetera\ . Sometimes, tone can be misunderstood. It is very hard to know what people mean unless \ there is some back-and-forth. Public spats don't help anyone. Theysimply create unnesces\ sary ill-will. These are important matters that affect India and hence this special effort to reach out\ . On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 7:41 PM, ss <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Gayatri > > I don't know who you are. I don't know if you are a member of Silk List. I > prefer to continue silk list discussions on the list and do not encourage > any > off list discussions unless they are private, personal issues. I am > therefore > going to forward this reply to silk list as well for comments. As a long > term > member of the list I find this email and the topic odd, but am willing to > discuss anything on the terms that the list has always followed. > > I am not interested in getting inot a spat with anyone but will not back > down > easily if I am pulled into a spat for no reason. I am fully capable of > defending my viewpoint and have the reputation of being called a frothing > RSS > chaddiwala by some people and a pseudosecularist by others.I do not say > things > lightly and say the same things everywhere without special modification for > the > intended audience. I am me and will remain that way. > > Thanks if you understand > > shiv > > > On Friday 05 Aug 2011 10:43:40 am you wrote: > > Hello Shiv: > > > > You must not presume to know what Anand has going on in his head when he > > posts something\ > > . By calling the email "India-Forum" quality, you are being a bit > > presumptive. One can s\ > > afely assume that there is a motive for the post - there is at least one > > very, very obvi\ > > ous possible motive for the post, something that doesn't seem to have > > occurred to you. > > > > You seem to be misunderstanding the tone and the tenor of the posts. The > > aim is to produ\ > > ce a more thoughtful discussion. Perhaps you could prove me wrong? Could > > you maybe trans\ > > late this post into Hindi or preferably Sanskrit, so we at least know > that > > you understan\ > > d the posted comment interms of tense and mood. Sanskrit would be > > preferable since tense\ > > and mood tends to come out very weel in that language. There is a pretty > > good and obvio\ > > us reason for making the "India beat Pakistan" post as well. > > > > Anyway, Anand has a certain fondness for people who serve the public > > interest in India a\ > > nd would not like to get into a very public disagreement/spat/quareel > with > > you. I hope t\ > > his is not prompted by any of his previous remarks on Pakistan, et > cetera. > > Sometimes, to\ > > ne can be misunderstood. It is very hard to know what people mean unless > > there is some b\ > > ack-and-forth. Public spats don't help anyone. Theysimply create > > unnescessary ill-will. > > > > These are important matters that affect India and hence this special > effort > > to reach out\ > > . > > > >
