BR Forum Piskology Thread

[ShauryaT]

I disagree with ldev. This is not moderator bias. It is a BRF blind spot. I have stated my views on this and will continue to state them. You have excluded yourself from all involvement in defining this blind spot and that is fine. But the blind spot still exists s i will demonstrate in days to come.

That simply tells us about our demographics and the attitudes of this demographics. Not acknowledging this reality is being blind, not accepting this reality is being deaf and not to realize the implications of this reality is being dumb!

[shiv]

That simply tells us about our demographics and the attitudes of this demographics. Not acknowledging this reality is being blind, not accepting this reality is being deaf and not to realize the implications of this reality is being dumb!

Correct. This statement has deep implications and knowing you shaurya - I am sure you understand the deeper implcations.

Assuming Indian attitudes reflect BRF attitudes the demographically more numerous Hindus actually do not like Muslims and would like to exclude them and their viewpoints. We need to accept that and not protest when Pakistanis and Steven Cohen point that out. It is true, to an extent at least. That says something about Hindu attitudes.

At the same time a significant percentage of the demographically more numerous Hindus dispute this and wish to accommodate. It is the viewpoint of these accommodationists that are disputed hotly on BRF although their numbers are higher on the ground in India (in the current political climate). To that extent it is BRF that is being deaf and blind.

[arnab]

[
Sir I think you have made a good suggestion. In fact I think you have shown your Indic (or is it young Hindootwawadi) penchant for giving away space to someone you don't like - just like India gave away Pakistan.

After all you are asking that a special space be created for seculars over 50 and that young Hindootwawadis will not interfere or enter that space. Yes sir - you are reminding me of how space was given away in 1947 and I am happy that you admit that this is a Hindootwawadi tendency to shove problems away in a separate space and try and forget about them. I respect your right to be a young under 50 Hindootwawadi. May you remain that way forever so that older (and more astute) people who need to carve out any space for themselves will have that space given away voluntarily by young under 50 Hindootwawadis whom you represent so forcefully. It is a pleasure to meet you online sir. I am looking forward to seeing you score more own goals against your own young Hindootwawadi side.

But Shiv sir, Saraff has also made a cowardly choice. Possibly, what he really wanted was a 'hindustan khatrey mein hain' or 'muslims are traitors' thread, however he chose to hide behind the anonymity of the forum at large and make secularism the perjorative term here That is not how you create your own space.

[negi]

I accept this criticism as perfectly correct. But what is not mentioned here is the fact that those "few posts" made by a "few posters" in "some remote thread" have become the de facto standard on BRF for the reasons I stated earlier in this thread.

I would say de facto standard of the said member/members for the views in question are not binding to the rest of the members at least not me .And if an individual is gonna and whine about as to how everyone on BRF is 'XYZ' because of what a few people have posted then I think the said individual is obliged to at least substantiate his allegations .

My point is if people have so much to and bitch about as to what happens in some other thread then why don't they confront the individual then and there and rip him a new one specially when they think they are right and have the facts on their side.

Ldev suggested that this de facto standard is because of moderator bias.

This has got nothing to do with Ldev , he has merely latched upon RayC's comments and pushed his pov . I mean for a start does he even know what RayC was complaining about in the first place ?
And if he knows it then why not counter the so called objectionable posts in question , I for one would like to see them for a start , hell after all I wish to know what is that I or anyone on forum is being blamed for under the rhetoric 'BRF is Hindutwavadi/Rightist'.

I think Archan had made a post on feedback thread about the whole episode which was later deleted by N^3 , and feedback amplifiers have only pumped in more noise since then.

Just like the post above.

[arnab]

My point is if people have so much to and bitch about what happens in some other thread then why don't they confront the individual then and there and rip him a new one specially when they think they are right and have the facts on their side.

This has got nothing to do with Ldev , he has merely latched upon RayC's comments and pushed his pov . I mean for a start does he even know what RayC was complaining about in the first place ?
And if he knows it then why not counter the so called objectionable posts in question , I for one would like to see them for a start , hell after all I wish to know what is that I or anyone on forum is being blamed for under the rhetoric 'BRF is Hindutwavadi/Rightist'.

I think Archan had made a post on feedback thread about the whole episode which was later deleted by N^3 , and feedback amplifiers have only pumped in more noise since then.

Just like the post above.

Er.. Negi is it our problem if you suffer from - lack of comprehension or an attention deficit disorder? Possibly you come to this watering hole with an 'aal is well' attitude - so be it. If you think that you are accomodating and secular (the 'speak no evil', but also 'see no evil' and 'hear no evil' variety) what is your angst?

[shiv]

My point is if people have so much to and bitch about what happens in some other thread then why don't they confront the individual then and there and rip him a new one specially when they think they are right and have the facts on their side.

In fact that is what I have started doing. This thread is about other threads. You are caught in the crossfire on this thread and are busy protecting yourself from being hit. That's all.

I am now going to stop posting on this thread unless I have anything new to add. I have had my say.

[shiv]

make secularism the perjorative term

arnab - not for this thread. Maybe some other time some other thread. But you have raised an interesting issue.

[negi]

Arnab

If all is not well I for one will be interested to know and indicated to what,where and who is that causing so much takleef to the types ?

And if you know the problem/culprit why don't you counter the said tripe ? why here and more importantly paint everyone with an 'adjective' which you cannot qualify.

And how do you wish to resolve the mess by ASSUMING stuff and posting stuff like

Possibly, what he really wanted was a 'hindustan khatrey mein hain' or 'muslims are traitors' thread, however he chose to hide behind the anonymity of the forum at large

[shiv]

Er Isn't

types

an adjective that you cannot qualify?

an 'adjective' which you cannot qualify.

[arnab]

Arnab



And if you know the problem/culprit why don't you counter the said tripe ? why here and more importantly paint everyone with an 'adjective' which you cannot qualify.

And how do you wish to resolve the mess by ASSUMING stuff and posting stuff like

Possibly, what he really wanted was a 'hindustan khatrey mein hain' or 'muslims are traitors' thread, however he chose to hide behind the anonymity of the forum at large

Sorry, where have you seen 'everyone' being painted with the same brush? (Though Shiv sir has raised the point of 'complicity by silence' when he mentions that a positive stament on muslims is usually challenged while a positive statement on hindus is usually not). However, this is a general observation and it is true for me as much as it is for you. So why the bother? Also do read Sarraf's post once again .... slowly.

[negi]

Of course I can

people have so much to and bitch about what happens in some other thread then why don't they confront the individual then and there

[RayC]

arjun, there is no confusion among mods.

let me re-post the 'rules' from the now locked thread to which all mods agree in general.

BR always has and as far as I can see, always will uphold some RoE. while people are free to hold any views, their posting the same on BR is subject to
a) relevance to BRF e.g politics and religion is not allowed
b) even-handedness and no discrimination in comments on the basis of religion/ethnicity etc etc. you can choose to call it 'secularism' or 'pluralism' or PC-ness. that's not our concern. just that it shouldn't be violated.
_________________
NOTE : there is no specific rule against people wanting to call India a hindu-rashtra or a muslim rashtra BUT god/bhagwan/allah save you musharraf if even an iota of bias against any community is detected in your post.

now please understand what archan says.
if rules have to be applied, they need to be interpreted and that is up to the mods.
got my point ?

This is like the Fundamental Rights of the Constitution. Desirable, but not attainable given the circumstances. Ideal, but not real.

Archan's guidelines are closer to the truth!

It has always been the Moderator's discretion and comprehension and that is universal in any forum.

One has to live with this fact!

[AdityaM]

Heed supreme courts advice: Free to criticize religions but not with hate: Court

[arnab]

Of course I can

people have so much to and bitch about what happens in some other thread then why don't they confront the individual then and there

possibly sometimes because a thread is fast moving, sometimes for fear of going off-topic, or other people jumping in to say 'move on move on' or 'take it offline'. This in my opinion just provides a bandaid rather than a long-term cure. Discussions in the 'feed back' forum will hopefully lead to a more holistic and uniform approach. It has already been correctly stated that moderation in every thread all the time is impossible. So we should indulge in self-moderation. For that you need a dedicated discussion thread or feedback.

[RayC]

Something interesting for note:

Criticism of religion OK but not malice

Mumbai, Jan. 6 (PTI): Every religion is “open to criticism” but malicious writing aimed at promoting communal hatred is not permissible, Bombay High Court ruled today.

The judgment came as a full bench of the court upheld a ban on a book, Islam — A concept of Political World Invasion By Muslims, authored by advocate R.V. Bhasin.

The book had been banned by the Maharashtra government in 2007 on the ground that it contained derogatory remarks about Islam and the Prophet Muhammad and insulted Muslim sentiments.

Bhasin, who in his book argues that Islam encourages terrorism and does not tolerate other faiths, had challenged the ban, saying it violated the right to freedom of speech.

“In our constitutional set up, everything is open to criticism and religion is no exception.… Every religion, whether it is Islam, Hinduism, Christianity or any other religion, can be criticised.… Even if the author is wrong, he has the right to be wrong,” the judges said.

“But what needs to be seen is whether the author has done this exercise bona fide.”

The court said an author had the “right to put forth a perspective that a particular religion is not secular” but, in Bhasin’s case, the criticism was “not academic” as he had “gone on to pass insulting comments” about Muslims, particularly Indian Muslims.

“If writing is calculated to promote feelings of enmity or hatred, it is no defence to a charge under Section 153-A of the IPC (promoting enmity between communities) that the writing contains a truthful account…” the court said..................

Note

Tricky, what?

[Prem]

Shiv Ji,
Since generalisation are being made .
If i may ask from you, Why the onus of compromise on Kuffar only? Keeping in mind the price paid in last 800 years and as recent as 47 , the big burden ought to be on the otherside. Bet my last penny, if any one over here will have any issue with any variety of Indian who hold Indo-centric views. The change you ask, or we all hope for cant be one sided and must be very obvious. Trust and respect is earned not demanded , so far all we have seen are demands . No one can deny the fact that there are many loved , honored and respected people of Non Indic faiths here and all over India . Sad part is these Indians get to be despiiced by their own co- religioists for showing their Indianness . How do we reconcile the dichotomoy of some Indians that becoming more Indians will undermine their primary identity? Its indeed a real dilemma. If you are Doc Guru , put up some solutions for dissection.

[Arjun]

Assuming Indian attitudes reflect BRF attitudes the demographically more numerous Hindus actually do not like Muslims and would like to exclude them and their viewpoints. We need to accept that and not protest when Pakistanis and Steven Cohen point that out. It is true, to an extent at least. That says something about Hindu attitudes.

Ok, lets analyze this logically.

Statement A: Person X has an unfavorable opinion of Community Y.
Statement B: Person X is against the right of a law-abiding member of Community Y to life, liberty and the unhindered pursuit of happiness in India.
Shiv, your last 100 odd posts in various threads assume that A implies B, which is patently absurd.

Fyi, there are regular PEW surveys in the US and across the world on various religious attitudes - including the percentage of Americans and other nationalities that hold unfavorable opinions of Muslims. In each such survey there are signficant percentages that come up holding unfavorable opinions of Muslims (and for that matter of various other communities in keeping with socia-political developments). However, the point to note is that a person might hold an unfavorable opinion of the Muslim community, but still be willing to lay down his life to defend his nation's ideal - i.e. that every law-abiding citizen (including those of the Muslim community ) has full rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

One might have various unfavorable attitudes towards different religons - including thinking of Islam as a violent religion, Hinduism as casteist, and Christianity as a rabidly evangelical / proseletyzing faith, but would that be extended to conclude that Muslims / Hindus / Christians don't have the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness - I believe that assumption is a huge logical fallacy which you have been consistently making in your posts.

[arnab]

Ok, lets analyze this logically.

Statement A: Person X has an unfavorable opinion of Community Y.
Statement B: Person X is against the right of a law-abiding member of Community Y to life, liberty and the unhindered pursuit of happiness in India.
Shiv, your last 100 odd posts in various threads assume that A implies B, which is patently absurd.

Fyi, there are regular PEW surveys in the US and across the world on various religious attitudes - including the percentage of Americans and other nationalities that hold unfavorable opinions of Muslims. In each such survey there are signficant percentages that come up holding unfavorable opinions of Muslims (and for that matter of various other communities in keeping with socia-political developments). However, the point to note is that a person might hold an unfavorable opinion of the Muslim community, but still be willing to lay down his life to defend his nation's ideal - i.e. that every law-abiding citizen (including those of the Muslim community ) has full rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

One might have various unfavorable attitudes towards different religons - including thinking of Islam as a violent religion, Hinduism as casteist, and Christianity as a rabidly evangelical / proseletyzing faith, but would that be extended to conclude that Muslims / Hindus / Christians don't have the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness - I believe that assumption is a huge logical fallacy which you have been consistently making in your posts.

Arjun, your point is well taken but in my opinion, for some posters the 'causality' in BRF attitudes is subtley different. On Pew Research the question asked might be: 'Do you have an unfavourable view of islam?' and the respondee might answer 'yes' (because according to him they are violent, stone women, praise terrorists, deny holocaust etc). On BRF (for some posters) - the causality runs the other way. For e.g If the question is: Why does YSR / Sonia do this? (ans: because he / she is an EJ. Note the negative perception (rightly or wrongly) already exists and these are used to reinforce arguments).

[RayC]

Shiv Ji,
Since generalisation are being made .
If i may ask from you, Why the onus of compromise on Kuffar only? Keeping in mind the price paid in last 800 years and as recent as 47 , the big burden ought to be on the otherside. Bet my last penny, if any one over here will have any issue with any variety of Indian who hold Indo-centric views. The change you ask, or we all hope for cant be one sided and must be very obvious. Trust and respect is earned not demanded , so far all we have seen are demands . No one can deny the fact that there are many loved , honored and respected people of Non Indic faiths here and all over India . Sad part is these Indians get to be despiiced by their own co- religioists for showing their Indianness . How do we reconcile the dichotomoy of some Indians that becoming more Indians will undermine their primary identity? Its indeed a real dilemma. If you are Doc Guru , put up some solutions for dissection.

Those who do not suffer from insecurity do not feel that they can be isolated. The Hindus, because of the number do not have a sense of insecurity, more so after the Independence, where those who went to Pakistan demanded a separate state and did so owing to acute insecurity, leaving India with a sizeable and unassailable majority of Hindus. The fact that India has done better than Pakistan and that we are not dependant on others or did not have any insecurity even after Partition has aggrandised their insecurity and hence do not spare any chicanery not to upset India. It upsets them further since we take it in our stride and even with all pinpricks march forward with all confidence and dignity.

In so far as our internal issues, indeed it takes two hands to clap. But then those with insecurity are always slow in participation more so when a large majority of them are the illiterate masses and who can be manipulated by vested interests, be they the politicians or the clergy to suit the laters’ purpose and have the illiterate masses in their stranglehold and be used as puppets. The same insecurity is not displayed by other minority groups since they are educated and strive to make a better life.

Yet, interestingly, as has been observed here, there is an outcry amongst what is euphemistically being termed as Indic faith, over evangelism. This is not because of any serious dislike for the evangelist religion, but because it brings to the fore amongst the majority faith, a sense of insecurity and fear of dwindling numbers and evangelists, it has been observed, have the wherewithal to achieve their goal. One may wonder why such evangelism is not so with the other minority group. Could it be the historical aversion?

Therefore, the onus is not on the majority religion as such. For one minority group there is a sense of deep insecurity over the majority group, and yet with the other minority group, the majority faith has a sense of insecurity as they are uncomfortable with evangelism that is threatening to dwindle the number of the majority and more so, they have the wherewithal to pursue their aim successfully!


JMT

[Sanku]

One of the things I am asking over here is "How sure are we that our thoughts and beliefs on BRF are exactly right".

Well Shiv, in all the many words posted here, the above is the only thing which caught my eye, in the sense of being a valid issue, I would like to put few points here

1) The feedback on how BRF is turning chaddiwala does not remotely get there, by far, this may be a perception issue but goes to say a lot on how the worthies are putting their thoughts across
2) Any one with some remote sense of maturity on the board will never think that they are "exactly right", or BRF is exactly right, folks will sense will see it for what it is "a place to share opinions, view and thoughts" and then proceed to make their own judgment call on it.
3) Considering that this is NOT a SRR where their is a editorial board to expect a PoV from a forum itself is BADLY flawed. A forum does NOT have a PoV. Attempts to ascribe PoV to a forum are malicious.

IF some views have been considered correct it is because those who made it
a) did it well
b) the views were logically coherent.

I would say for example Arun_S was a poster (chased away under what I consider thought policing) whose words caught the attention of many here. Do I know Arun_S personally? Does he have a hold on me? Then why do I accept what he says?

You can go on about bias yada yada yada or accept a simple fact

In a open market place of idea the logical thoughts win

Ascribing the above as bias, group think, "onlee we are right" etc is simply misinformed at best and malicious at worst.

---------------

RayC; how is your discussion on religion above forum feedback? You used to get rather hot under the collar for much less disconnected issues on other thread? Please move it to an appropriate thread.

[RayC]

---------------

RayC; how is your discussion on religion above forum feedback? You used to get rather hot under the collar for much less disconnected issues on other thread? Please move it to an appropriate thread.

It is a delight to find that you have assumed the role of a Moderator and ordering me around to move my post. Now, isn’t that exciting and maybe a secret dream?

My post upsets you? Why? Does not conform to your strategy/ areas of interest? Have I to conform to your desires and points of view; and pray, if so why? May I remind you that I have the same status as you and it is only those who run this Board can order me around? Do be good enough not to display pomposity since you are a mere poster and sooner you understand your station, the better.

The interpretation of my post lies in the issue of the word ‘onus’ as I have quoted in the post of mine. I am afraid I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain each and every word to people like you. It is in simple English and requires comprehension of the language and the syntax. I am afraid the onus to teach you so is not my job! If you don’t like what I have written, then overlook it and maintain your peace of mind and quit baiting me. I assure you that if you feel that the Moderators have some animosity against me that you can exploit, then think again. We have parted as colleagues in spite of our different points of view.

I should report your audacity to order me around as a mere poster and that too with a less post count than me!! But then, I would demean myself troubling the Moderators with trifles.

Why I got hot between the collar when I was a Moderator? I don’t think I need to explain. However, I will do just to put you at peace. Have you counted the threads that are active and how quickly they move? I am sure you don’t, since you live in your own ivory tower. Unlike your popular perception that Moderators are little Maos banishing folks for ‘Thought Reforms Through Labour’, they are not. They are immensely overworked and have to divide their time between this forum, family and their real job! There is enough on this very thread that indicates the harrowing time the Moderators have to moderate and they are always at the end of the stick and if they moderate, wherein if they are damned and if they don’t, they are still damned; and there are good people like you, who maybe sinecure (I don’t know for sure) but who are ever ready to nitpick unless it goes their way! Who has the time? Or do you feel that being a Mod is a full time paid job and they have had nothing else to do? Please understand their hearth and home is fuelled by our real profession and we do Moderation as ‘extra’ and because friends have asked us! Therefore, there will be times when they will get hot behind the collar! It maybe unfair, but then take it or leave it. Shape up or ship out!

So, do be good enough to understand your station and not assume grandiose illusions!

Insecurity is the cause of the issue! Like it or not.

If I were insecure, I would not be here. I am here since I don't find the Mods are wrong in not having me as a Mod. It is their view. But if I were insecure and did not know my station, I would have sulked, gone elsewhere and run a hate campaign. Catch me doing it. I know who I am, what is my position in society and so it does not matter! Got that chum. It is people like you who are insecure and find fault with anything that does not go your way.

Even Pullekeshi got 3 warning from me which is a ban. I did not. My aim was to caution and bring someone to line and not to ruin him! Check my statistics of ban or warnings.

So, no big talk please!

[Sanku]

RayC, you are welcome to your paranoia of finding a devious motives in my simple statements.

I have a simple issue, please stick to topic -- I have noticed that YOU are the first to bring in externalities and when people respond to that (to not let errors go uncontested) you complain about how discussion is going OT and call for all kinds of fire and brimstone (and locked threads in past)

Most recently the National agenda thread got locked because you and Rahul Mehta took it on discussion of how we can not have same treatment for all Indians irrespective of caste.

Again in the FORUM FEEDBACK THREAD -- you are bringing in Hindu insecurities and what not.

I consider it TROLLING and as such as a fellow poster request you to cease and desist.

[RayC]

RayC, you are welcome to your paranoia of finding a devious motives in my simple statements.

I have a simple issue, please stick to topic -- I have noticed that YOU are the first to bring in externalities and when people respond to that (to not let errors go uncontested) you complain about how discussion is going OT and call for all kinds of fire and brimstone (and locked threads in past)

Most recently the National agenda thread got locked because you and Rahul Mehta took it on discussion of how we can not have same treatment for all Indians irrespective of caste.

Again in the FORUM FEEDBACK THREAD -- you are bringing in Hindu insecurities and what not.

I consider it TROLLING and as such as a fellow poster request you to cease and desist.

You are the Troll with inane stuff.

Nothing devious. Quite straightforward!

I have no paranoia. I wrote a very balanced post!

I was replying a post on 'onus' and it was so worded that none could take offence and so it discomfited you, right?

Check the High Court order.

Show malice and you have a case going and you can't hide behind your e mail ID. There is a thing called RTI!

[RayC]

Most recently the National agenda thread got locked because you and Rahul Mehta took it on discussion of how we can not have same treatment for all Indians irrespective of caste.

Sanku,

Are you talking of this thread being closed because of me?

National Agenda for India, 2010-2050

To all posters.

Please check.

This is the type of blatant falsehood purveyed to defame and purvey falsehood!

I sure expect the Moderators to take action!!

I am outraged!

And they are honourable gentlemen who hector others about the goodness of their Indic past!

Is this the Indian civilisation that many of us are proud of? Or is it purer than that?

This is the hypocrisy that I have battled against!

Hot air and a gas balloon punctured when confronted with reality.

Note the falsehood that is the forte and bottomline to defame others!

[Sanku]

RayC -- at the heart of the matter my request is very simple --
1) please stick to the topic -- and
2) dont assign motivations and words to what others have not said

Can you please follow these? These are my only two requests to you and to the mods to please keep a eye for the above two behavior since it takes many threads off course which end up getting locked.

And too see where the national agenda thread was derailed where a perefectly good debate on need of caste census and its relevance was added this twist

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 55#p801055

Can't be done.

Indic values.

Manu.

I am sure every one is perfectly capable of seeing whats happening here.

[RayC]

RayC -- at the heart of the matter my request is very simple --
1) please stick to the topic -- and
2) dont assign motivations and words to what others have not said

Can you please follow these? These are my only two requests to you and to the mods to please keep a eye for the above two behavior since it takes many threads off course which end up getting locked.

And too see where the national agenda thread was derailed where a perefectly good debate on need of caste census and its relevance was added this twist

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 55#p801055

Can't be done.

Indic values.

Manu.

I am sure every one is perfectly capable of seeing whats happening here.

Don't whimper.

I have left it to the Mods to decide!

Don't act cute!

You are a LIAR to state I had the National Agenda thread closed. It speaks much of your character to accuse falsely and whip up the delusional coterie who will short shrift facts!

Your integrity or credibility requires no elaboration and so don't act as if you are the Immaculate Conception!

Or Sati!

[RayC]

RayC -- at the heart of the matter my request is very simple --
1) please stick to the topic -- and
2) dont assign motivations and words to what others have not said

Can you please follow these? These are my only two requests to you and to the mods to please keep a eye for the above two behavior since it takes many threads off course which end up getting locked.

And too see where the national agenda thread was derailed where a perefectly good debate on need of caste census and its relevance was added this twist

And you are pure as the driven snow?

How megalomaniac can you be?

You accuse me of things I have not done. I closed the National Agenda, old chap? You are a LIAR and you pretend to moralistic and a new little Mahatma Gandhi or the second coming of Christ or the last Prophet Mohammed?

How much more of a hypocrite can you be, old boy?

Please desist from making a fool of yourself and exposing what a hypocrite you are!

Please explain to the BRF as to how my action closed the National Agenda thread!

Got the guts or the facts?

Shameless and brazen LIAR to push your agenda!

Fallen angel trying to fool all of purity!

I hate to say it, but I am reminded of Lucifer!

Prove that I was responsible for closing of the thread National Agenda. And if you are a man you asked me to move my post. I ask you to move yourself from BRF as a proved liar and a deceiver!

[Gaur]

RayC Sir,
I say this as someone with great admiration and respect for you. It is unbecoming for a person of your stature to engage in such public bickering. If some people on this forum are behaving in a way which you feel inappropriate, could you not just ignore? You are no longer a mod for that to be your problem. Considering your vast experience, you would have met with numerous people with whom you disagree on various matters. Will it be practical to argue with them all? You have been part of matters much larger than these trivial issues. I think you are taking this too seriously. This is just an internet forum and I would hope you would understand that. Internet forums are filled with all kind of people. Some have opinions, beliefs and manners to your taste and some have not. You can argue all you like but that is not going to change. I hope you would desist from taking part in such arguments and instead use your energy to share your vast knowledge with us. And please do not take offense at my preaching. I know you are far experienced than me and know better what is right. But please consider my plea. I never take part in such discussions and I made an exception only because of the great respect you command.

[RayC]

I am aware.

But to be accused of something that I have not done, is it acceptable?

Is one's honour and integrity saleable to third rate people?

When I have not done anything wrong, should I lie down accept such nonsense?

This man accuses me of doing things that I have not done. Others will believe that I have done.

Must I not protect my reputation, even if they are no standard to equate to my station?

[Tanaji]

RayC, perhaps you should put Sanku in your ignore list? That would sort out things.

[RayC]

RayC, perhaps you should put Sanku in your ignore list? That would sort out things.

And have this ignoble person slander me?

I am a soldier and I face all these type of chaps face on.

If he tells lies and slanders me, there are many who will believe him since I have been adequately vilified by these very chaps. He want me to attack the Mods in a divide and rule while criticising the British for what he is up to himself. Sneaky rat! Third rate element!

Have I not right to defend myself and should I ignore them and get my reputation further in mud.

This bloke was stupefied that he could not attack me on the 'insecurity' post and sneaky that he is, tried to bait me so that he could vilify me further and I did not rise to it and so his bile.

Please control this man.

I am well aware that notwithstanding what has happened. I have well wishers.

I ask them to please not ask me to not to defend my honour, but to wake this chaps to reality!

Gaur,

I have commanded 30,000 people. Do you really think being a Moderator here is more honourable? I came here because I have some loyalty to the forum and since friends invited me!

[Gaur]

RayC Sir,
Again I feel you are taking this too seriously. This is just an internet forum. People will throw all kinds of accusations. You cannot stop that. You have done and achieved far greater things in real life to be perturbed by such accusations. I feel your respect does not depend upon what one writes about you on an internet forum. Everyone knows your station and accomplishments in real life are beyond to be tarnished by some accusations on an internet forum. IMHO, the only person who can possibly tarnish you reputation is you by continuing such public spats. I personally think that tanaji's suggestion is a good one.
Anyways, this will be my last post on this matter. I do not want to go OT and you are wiser than me and know better regarding what is best.

ADDED LATER:

I have commanded 30,000 people. Do you really think being a Moderator here is more honourable? I came here because I have some loyalty to the forum and since friends invited me!

Exactly what I am trying to say. You have done far too important things in real life to be bothered by such trivial things as an internet forum. Why lower your dignity with such public bickering? Why not just ignore and take part only in things for which you joined the forum in the first place, ie; to share knowledge.

[RayC]

I don't like punks who are LIARS!

I expose them for what they are worth so that they don't go running around as D Company!

Gaur,

You seriously believe that I lie quite as they wipe my nose in the mud?

Would you?

ADDED LATER:

I sure am here to learn and then share knowledge.

But LIARS I have never been comfortable with.

If I have done wrong. I have atoned! But slander and liars I am very sensitive to. Been so before and continue to be so. Sanku has LIED as he possibly normally does! I am await this despicable person to show me how I was responsible to close the National Agenda thread!

I feel the Moderators should do something to indicate false accusation is not allowed on the BRF!

I am proud to state that in the Army I am known for honesty of thought and action even if it was not comfortable to many. I live by that perception. I will be damned if some incognito cyber warrior slanders me. I am ready to use RTI to ensure my reputation is not brought to disrepute.

Am I angry?

Yes I am.

Take me on for my posts. But don't hit my character without cause! If I am wrong, I will be the first to agree.

If from fighting against slander by LIARs is wrong, tell me how!

Let this despicable man prove I was responsible for closing the National Agenda thread, I will recant and openly apologise!

Right now, he stand as a LIAR!

Though for peace, I am am ready to be proved wrong.

I will have no hesitation to apologise as any gentleman would do!

[RayC]

And this despicable man pretends to be purer than the snow of Mt Etna and driven snow, and is that Indic to be telling lies? Shows what Indic means, right?

My dignity come first and cannot be soiled in night soil that are familiar with!

It is a coward who runs away from reality!

I am awaiting what the Mods are at, if they are indeed fair!

If my lawyers use RTI, the BRF has to give them the details!

I am tired of these wild cards who use the BRF as a platform to slander to bring to disrepute people who have served their nation well. I dare say BRF contributes to such a theory!

If the BRF does, then they will be equally accomplice, which I like to believe they are not!

[RayC]

Sanku.

Any comments?

Brave under a burqa?

Trying to bring the BRF down?

I am loyal to the BRF even if you feel I should be aggrieved!

Sorry. I am soldier.

I accept orders!

[shiv]

Shiv Ji,
Since generalisation are being made .
If i may ask from you, Why the onus of compromise on Kuffar only?

There is nothing that says only Kafirs must compromise. But you are talking of in flight entertainment when I have not even spoken of which terminal the flight will leave from.

But not for this thread.

[Devesh Rao]

I sure am here to learn and then share knowledge.

http://www.britishempire.co.uk/article/castesystem.htm

Quoted from the article

The word caste is not a word that is indigenous to India. It originates in the Portuguese word casta which means race,breed, race or lineage. However, during the 19th century, the term caste increasingly took on the connotations of the word race. Thus, from the very beginning of western contact with the subcontinent European constructions have been imposed on Indian systems and institutions. To fully appreciate the caste system one must step away from the definitions imposed by Europeans and look at the system as a whole, including the religious beliefs that are an integral part of it. To the British, viewing the caste system from the outside and on a very superficial level, it appeared to be a static system of social ordering that allowed the ruling class or Brahmins, to maintain their power over the other classes. What the British failed to realize was that Hindus existed in a different cosmological frame than did the British. The concern of the true Hindu was not his ranking economically within society but rather his ability to regenerate on a higher plane of existence during each successive life. Perhaps the plainest verbalization of this attitude was stated by a 20th century Hindu of one of the lower castes who stated: "Everything lies in the hands of God. We hope to go to the top, but our Karma (Action) binds us to this level." If not for the concept of reincarnation, this would be a totally fatalistic attitude but if one takes into account the notion that one's present life is simply one of many, then this fatalistic component is limited if not eliminated. Therefore, for the Hindu, acceptance of present status and the taking of ritual actions to improve status in the next life is not terribly different in theory to the attitudes of the poor in western society. The aim of the poor in the west is to improve their lot in the space of a single life time. The aim of the lower castes in India is to improve their position over the space of many lifetimes. It should also be borne in mind that an entire caste could rise through the use of conquest or through service to rulers.Thus, it may be seen that within traditional Indian society the caste system was not static either within the material or metaphysical plane of existence. With the introduction of European and particulary British systems to India, the caste system began to modify. This was a natural reaction of Indians attempting to adjust to the new regime and to make the most of whatever opportunities may have been presented to them. Moreover, with the apparent dominance exhibited by British science and medicine there were movements that attempted to adapt traditional social systems to fit with the new technology. Men such as Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Dayananda, and Ramkrishna started movements that, to one degree or another, attempted to explore new paths that would allow them and their people to live more equitably within British India. Roy in particular sits this description with his notion that the recognition of human rights was consistent with Hindu thought and the Hinduism could welcome external influences so long as they were not contrary to reason. While it is granted that the present paper is not the appropriate venue to explore such movements, they must be noted so that an impression of Indian submissiveness in the face of British intrusion may be avoided. There was a dynamic interplay between the British and Indians that had a profound effect on both societies. More appropriate to the task at hand, however, are the reactions of various groups within India to the census itself.

The article deserves to be read in full, anyways this post does not belong in this thread but in the locked one, the moot point being, the topic covered in the article is the root of all the the haranguing going on

[Tanaji]

I believe that we are currently discussing just one of the many uncomfortable facts we will have to confront. And that fact is that on BRF it has been easy to diss Islam and Muslims, but dissing aside Muslims are part and parcel of India and a deeply involved with India and its society and economy. After having thoroughly dissected Islam, it was easy to demonize Muslims and make them an alien race except for a few whom we would "pardon" (at our pleasure) - like Abdul Kalam. But there is a serious problem with this situation - a very serious contradiction.

On BRF Hindus are criticised for being "fooled by Islam" and consensus on BRF is happy with all Hindus who understand Islam a particular way. I will not expand on that because it is OT. Whatever the truth about Islam, Indian Muslims are Indian and even if they do not live anywhere near where some BRFites may live - they certainly live near me and I interact with them every day.

I dont think you are saying anything wrong here. As you said, it is human nature to believe the other party is wrong. You are saying that you only posted what most of the BRF ites secretly believed in, and you were "cheered on" by them. Your point is now that you try to do the same with Hindu religion, you get massive opposition and "Hindu cognitive dissonance" is at work (your words). Fair enough.

What I still dont get is if your objective is to make BRF ites face their own biases head on and hold a mirror to them and ensure more Christian and Muslim participation, your actions have been confounding to say the least. You yourself have stated on many occasions that BRF is a gathering of exclusive and elite sections of India that are 99% Hindu with sizeable NRIs, and you must have been aware of this 2 years ago as well. So if you wanted to hold a mirror to them, would it not have been better if you had dissected Hinduism first, given that majority of BRFites are Hindu? Would it not have made better sense to have a post that went "Inside the mind of a chaddiwala" rather than a "Inside the mind of a mullah"? Your chances of success then would have been far greater , especially given that you were a mod at the time.

Instead you dissected Islam, alienated at least a section of Muslims that made BRF even more exclusivist thus exacerbating the very same problems you complain of now. Additionally you also claim that the mods and members are not to blame, which is even stranger. Hence my "Sau chuhe maarke billi chali Haj Ko" comment.

Anyways, best wishes for you sir in your efforts.

[Sanku]

Sanku.

Any comments?

Brave under a burqa?

Trying to bring the BRF down?

I am loyal to the BRF even if you feel I should be aggrieved!

Sorry. I am soldier.

I accept orders!

Actually I had typed a response and then deleted it so as not to muck the thread up further.

I can post it once more (it is saved) -- but in short I think ALL the fact of the matter are ALREADY on the table and they speak for themselves.

I am not responding because there is nothing there worth responding to frankly.

[SSridhar]

RayC & Sanku, please layoff. You are not adding any value to this thread but only indulging in mudslinging at each other. Take heed of my words. Anymore posts along the same lines will be unpleasant for both of you.