எங்கே Sri Vaishnavam

[KRS]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Folks,

Looks like what I thought was a closed matter is again raised here. Since I was the one involved as a Moderator, let me try to explain again my actions and why things happened the way they happened.

Before that let me explain something. Anything I have done in this Forum is to foster unity, to minimze any 'mass' hurt. Have I been successful in doing so? Probably not in all cases. As one can see clearly from this instance, I have caused a hurt feeling where a valuable member thinks that I have acted in a dictatorial manner. All I can do is to restate my case again and reiterate the differences between this situation about Maha Periaval and that of Sri Sai Baba.

Let me also state again publicly, I am not a follower of Sri Sai Baba, nor do I pay any regard to him as a 'Godman'. I do not have a picture of him adorning the altar in my Puja room.

Having said all this, let me start the flow of events and reconstruct.

1. First of all, why edit/moderate information about Sri Sai baba and not any questions cocerning either the Mahatma or now the Maha Periaval?;

This is because, from the moderation's perspective there is a qualitative difference between the staements about Sri Sai Baba and the others. Questioning a person's policy/actions without using a bad language should be allowed. For example if a person questions the 'miracles' of Sri Sai Baba alone, without imputing from it he is a 'fraud', then that would have been allowed. But to question the very foundation of a 'Godman' as fraud, when he is worshipped in a large number of TB homes (I know this because I know within my family and friends' circle a large sampling of people do worship him), I made a judgement that it would affect a large number of such people's sentiment. Again we are questioning the very person that they worship as fraud. This is quite different from questioning a person's actions, without imputing that person's credentials. As I have said, if a person says that the Mahatma deserves to die or that Maha Periaval was not really genuine but a fake then those would have been edited out. Even between the Mahatma and Maha Periaval, there are differences - Mahatma can be questioned for his genuineness, while if the same thing is said about Maha Periaval, it would be subject to editing. The difference is the former while an exalted soul is not looked upon as a Saint and was involved in secular life, while the latter is seen by quite a few as an avatar of Lord Shiva, and by a large number as a real 'Godman'.

All I am requesting is to think about the the emotions that would accrue if someone questions the validity of Maha Periaval as a Guru, because some DK group publishes an article and some folks who do not follow advaitham bring it to the Forum? Should we allow such postings? Please put yourselves in the shoes of the large section of Sri Saibaba bhakthas in our Forum. Again criticizing some practices are one thing, but questioning the validity of one's existence is another. Is this hard to understand? Sri VR Ji agreed to not criticize the current Kanchi Periaval for unity sake. How come that sentiment does not apply here?

2. I deleted only those passages that questioned Sri Sai Baba's validity as a 'Godman' and described him as fraud. I did not do this to some others mentioned such as Kalki Bhagawan etc., because to my knowledge, their pictures are not in any of widespread puja rooms. But again, if someone have raised objection and asked for moderation, I would have done it.

3. The 4 day delay happened, because I was out of town. Only when I read the import of the postings, I realized the impact. My mistake here was not to talk to Sri Venataramani Ji first, before editing out. I have worked with him to curtail his sentiments about Kanchi Periaval once before, and it was my mistake in not consulting with him. I assumed he would be okay with the moderation in the interest of not hurting the sentiments of a large number of people, but I was wrong. To this I sincerely apologize to Sri RV Ji now as I have apologized personally to him over the phone the minute after I saw his response to my moderation. Looks like it was not enough. So, here I go again. If I had to re do it all over again, on a 20/20 vision, I would have contacted him first. I am sorry I did not think of it. I apolologize.

4. By the way, in the past we have always moderated on passages which would trample upon deep religious sentiments. Not encouraging the date of Adi Shankara or the origins of Sri Kanchi Matham are examples. There are no solutions to these arguments and ther only rehash information, resulting in a divided forum with hard feelings, rekindled. Same would apply to Sri Saibaba. Two old videos can never prove him as a fraud and a charlatan. Given the huge number of his followers, such discussions will have no conclusions and will only divide. I do not understand why no one sees this as a danger. Besides there was one posting (deleted afterwards) and another posted opinion expressing anguish on labeling Sri Saibaba as fraud.

5. On these reasons, I am against reopening the 'Godmen' thread if again Sri Saibaba as a fraud will be discussed. This will not foster unity. Just because a few of us think so, we should not say these things that would hurt the sentiments of a large number of people. People who are hurt on ther deep faith will not come back. You can question and discuss all the social/moral even spiritual issues. But if one questions the validity of one's God, one will shut that source off. This is my premise and opinion. Once you lose them this way, they will not be back. But if all of you decide that it is hunky-dory to do so, please go ahead.

6. Lastly, I do not moderate on a whimsical basis and I do have standards. Perhaps a few of you out there do not like those standards.

So, I don't know what else I can say.

I have always worked towards the unity of TBs in this Forum and in my limited capacity have been helping otherwise. I do not wish to broadcast to the world any of my activities to help our community outside of this Forum. Even in this Forum, a few people know of my contributions.

Having said all this, I work as a Moderator at your pleasure. This is a volunteer job. With such a deep rooted anger against my moderation, I do not wish to continue in the Forum anymore. I request Sri Praveen Ji and Sri Silverfox Ji to relieve me from this job.

What hurts me most is the fact that my sincerity, motivation and my judgement are questioned. Don't worry. You won't hear from me anymore.

Regards,
KRS

 

[kunjuppu]

Please note that this post is not addressed at KRS, but specifically at each and every one of us. In no way it is triggered by KRS as he is just as one of us, as the rest.

As a community, we have one thing in common ie a very low tolerance of criticism. Either top down. Or bottom up.

the reason i say this, is because, my dad used to belong to a TB dominated ayyappa sangham 40 years ago. every day he used to have stories of members quarelling, much to the amusement of myself and my mother. 40 years later, the last thing i expected, was to belong to such a cabal. times, sometimes, they have not changed

I have heard that the Japanese would go to extreme extent to be part of a group. They would often maintain a silence, than overtly challenging the boss, even when they know that the boss is wrong.

I think, we are the other extremes. No matter, whatever field we are involved, we take it that we are always right.

Should all of us always have to be always right? Why set ourselves with such a high target? Is it not a good feeling to feel inadequate once in a while? That makes more human and incidentally more likeable. I think so.

I am not talking about any one individual here or the process of moderation or the schema of being moderated.

I have found this phenomenon, in all of us, including myself. By and large, we find it to be leaders than followers. And by leaders, we mean absolute leaders. If my logic of leadership does not do you good, and if you disagree, what is the net result?

One has to quit the positon. Or both have to quit the forum.

How come nobody thinks of working in an environment where nothing is perfect, but operates at an acceptable mode. Just like our home.

Should KRS have to quit as a response to some criticism? Or earlier instance Venkat, Swami et al have to quit or operate under limited interest, because their views were scissored?

I do not have the answer. failing to talk openly all that we feel, will only keep us away from our full potential. We have to talk it out. But initially, we have to learn how to talk it out.

This is a skillset for life – not only here, but especially when dealing with our children. Most often, we do the same thing – if they don’t obey, we kick and scream.

Let us all learn to come back to the table and from now on, resolve, that our differences will be tolerated and will be sorted out or not, in a quiet and decent manner.

This applies as much to myself, as to KRS, Venkat, Swami, Pannvalan and everyone else. do we wish to take up this challenge?

Thank you.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Kunjuppu Ji,

You have said: "personally, as an ordinary member, i agree with your sentiments, that unless and otherwise objected by members, as far as possible, we should let precedence be the guide.

in this case, kanchi mutt was criticized by several folks. we did not bestow the same freedome when it came to saibaba"

Just to refresh your memory. If you go through Sr Nacchinarkinyan Ji's moderation posts during the time he was moderator here, you will find that when someone questioned the validity of Sri Saibaba as a Guru, he immediately moderated and shut that line of questioning. So, your assertion regarding Sri Saibaba moderation is not correct. A precedence in terms of this has been set long ago.

As I pointed out, we did not 'bestow' the freedom to express because of the difference between those criticisms. Please read my post above carefully. I delineated the same qualitative difference in my post at the time of moderation (please go back and read it carefully).

I appreciate your sentiments, but as you very well know that I do not moderate on the lines of promoting one ideology over another. My interest is only to protect the sentiments of ALL members of this forum.

Regards,
KRS

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Kunjuppu Ji,

I saw your above posting after posting mine. I can only speak for myself and I am very direct as most of you know.

It takes two hands to clap. There is no problem in agreeing to disagree if one does not want to. At the same time an understanding can be found if both sides agree. But I do not believe in, as I said 'peace at any cost'. Even Satyagraha is about making the enemy see the validity of your position.

I do not believe in this "வழ் வழா, கொழ கொழா" stuff. I give sincere direct responses and I would like the same from the other. I am not two faced, telling one thing to some and telling something else to some others. I hope people see me as honest and straight forward.

I did not quit this Forum on account of difference of opinion over the topics. I am quitting, because, it seems to me that my position has become untenable. A moderator, as you very well know, needs the trust of everyone who is valuable to the Forum. I thought I enjoyed it to some extent, before today's events.

Seems like the same things are repeated without nary an acknowledgement to what I explained before. This is okay and this type of anger only tells me that I am not wanted. Like everyone else, I do not want to be where I am not wanted, just to be kicked around over and over again on an incident that I thought was put to bed.

This is the reality.

Anyways, I wanted to set some records straight. Now I'll be silent. I'll work with Sri Praveen Ji and Sri Silverfox Ji to make sure nothing is disrupted in the mean time.

Regards,
KRS

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Raghy Ji,

I did not take your opinion as you questioning the validity of Maha Periaval's position as a Great Guru. In fact, your question/lament seems to be based on realizing His greatness? How can this be an affront?

But to answer:

1. Maha Periaval gave edicts to our society on not wearing silk sarees and not getting Varadhakshinai. How many of us followed His advice?

2. He wanted us to go back to our roots of following our Varna Dharma. How many of us are following it, 100%?

3. He often said, it was not his place to alter the traditions handed to Him. He lived in a most orthodox period, when Jathi customs were followed very vigorously. Even if He had advised the Jathis to be abolished (there is no record he wanted to do so), the community would have spurned Him.

His charter was not to change the foundations of the existing society, but to ensure the continuation of our religion and make our scriptures ever living.

Regards,
KRS

Sri VenkataRamani said :-

"Holding the position of Peetathipathi is probably a tough job of protecting the traditions on the one side and yielding to reforms on the other side. Paramacharyal has written lot of articles about the difficulty of the position he was holding at various places in `Deivathin Kural'. I wish no body criticise them."

Sri RV sir,

I humbly beg to differ with you, please. "Netri kannai thirappinum kutram kutrame!" Even God Almighty is criticised. Personally, I had a grievence with Paramacharyal; I still have a grievance with all the mutts. Paramacharyal's word was respected as the word of God. He wielded the power to bring a huge social reform in Tamil Nadu. He could have single handedly wiped out the castesim in Tamil Nadu. Just one announcement.. I can only lament that along with I don't know how many millions. I am sorry, but I am not able to help it.

 

[Nara]

Hello everyone,

Those who listen to National Public Radio in the U.S. probably know the Click and Clack brothers Tom and Ray Magliozzi, the car-talk guys. Many years ago they gave the commencement address to MIT graduates. The transcript of their hilarious speech can be found here.

I want to highlight the following from their speech.

Because what Murky finds out is that right brain people are about ten times as happy than left brain people. So the stupider you get -- by left brain people's measures of stupidity, of course. Because right brain people are too happy to waste their time developing IQ tests. But they're ten times happier. ​

I am sure this is just a made up story, but the point they were making made a deep impression on me. Between being correct and being happy, I often chose being right. Not only that, I wanted to prove that I was right. In the process I lost a lot of happiness. Those were the wasted days of my life.

In my personal experience, the more I try to establish that I am right, whether it is with my wife, or children, or friends, the more unhappy I felt, and I made those whom I love most unhappy as well.

Who is to tell who is right and who is wrong. I am not saying we all must be silent. All I am requesting members is not to throw down the gauntlet.

I request both Shri KRS and Shri RV to go back to the status quo ante. Don't make any final decision in the heat of the moment. Wait for a week. Then make your decision.

With best regards...

 

[kunjuppu]

krs,

thank you very much for two detailed replies.

i am with nara re putting off decisions atleast for a week.

re moderator enjoying the trust of everyone: i am not so sure about that.

'trust' as defined here, i think, is more a situational factor. with this particular issue, maybe there was a disagreement.

but look at all the other posts, where there has no issues or interventions.

you probably hit the nail on the head, in that, venkat was not pre-told about your potential action re deleting the posts.

trust will come and go. the willingness to moderate takes something more than that.

as i stated several times, even during the time i was moderating, i simply do not have it. you have it, this unquantifiable quality.

personally, as i have told you and praveen before, moderation could be done under the generic 'moderator' i.d.

the main advantage, is that it takes the personal element out of moderation.

the moderator, can still enjoy the fruits of membership without being hauled up for dual standards.

also, under the 'moderator' i.d., the process also becomes more committed as one has to go through a separate sign on.

i think there will always be issues re moderating.

same as we go to school, and we always find fault with the teacher. but one does simply quit school because of that. do we?

the forum, ideally should eventually turn into an exchange of views, within the broad spectrum of 0% brahmins to 50% brahmins (using your favourite jargon )

i do not think anyone here even comes close to 50%, let alone anything over that.

agreeing to disagree, while debating, not only provides us to deal with dissident views, but enables us to sharpen our wit, for ultimately humour greases even the most badly ground gears of extreme views.

n'est pas?

 

[tbs]

Hello Dear Sri TBS Ji,

I am still a Moderator and you are violating the Forum's policy of not mocking the Moderators. I know you are miffed because I wanted you to elaborate on your logic in explaining some strange posts on your part. This is quite shameful of you to post when you think I am being attacked.

Please be forewarned. Either post lucid, logically supported posts on moderation or do not post these kinds of ridiculous stuff. If you have stuff to say about moderation, back it up with specific examples, so we can discuss.

Let us see whether you can come up with a proper posting on this subject.

Regards,
KRS


hi folks,
my 2 cents..

regards
tbs

 

[praveen]

As an administrator here is a final say with regards to the moderation and moderators.

"There will be no more comments from the admin team on this issue again. We do not have to explain our actions each and every time. Our actions are based on what we think is right. Period. There will be some who will not like it, but then we cannot realistically please all. Further discussions questioning the moderators/criticizing them will be edited/removed and if continued might also result in temporary ban or at the extreme a permanent ban."

 

[suraju06]

moderators

Dear Sri Raju Ji Sir,

Yes, you are excused. We pretty well understand our standards on moderation. You are poking your nose where it does not belong.

All the same, please continue to post your views on various topics in the Forum.

Thank you for your opinion.
Those amongst you who want to raise an issue on moderation, please send your comments addressed to Sri Praveen Ji, or to Sri Silverfof Ji or to me, based on your preference. Your concerns will be addressed in a timely fashion.


Regards,
KRS

I have been reading this conversation with interest.
I may please be excused if i am poking my nose into prohibited territory.Thanks.Cheers.

 

[suraju06]

Sri VenkataRamani said :-

"Holding the position of Peetathipathi is probably a tough job of protecting the traditions on the one side and yielding to reforms on the other side. Paramacharyal has written lot of articles about the difficulty of the position he was holding at various places in `Deivathin Kural'. I wish no body criticise them."

Sri RV sir,

I humbly beg to differ with you, please. "Netri kannai thirappinum kutram kutrame!" Even God Almighty is criticised. Personally, I had a grievence with Paramacharyal; I still have a grievance with all the mutts. Paramacharyal's word was respected as the word of God. He wielded the power to bring a huge social reform in Tamil Nadu. He could have single handedly wiped out the castesim in Tamil Nadu. Just one announcement.. I can only lament that along with I don't know how many millions. I am sorry, but I am not able to help it.

Does it not occur to you that Acharyas may not be agreeing with your and many others fervour for the wiping out of castes? That is precisely why they did not make that announcement.So where do we stand now? Shall we disown all the acharyas? The problem is not with the existence of the castes. It is with the way discrimination has been superimposed over the system. Castes will exist in one form or other, in this name or some other name. But we can work to remove the discriminations. The arrogance which makes one claim one is superior to the other.
In this I would recommend to Hinduism what Christians have achieved. All spiritual matters are decided by church and the head of the Church is final authority. All social issues are decided by the laity which also has a hand in some of the spiritual matters. It assists the head of the church in taking proper decisions. Similarly the laity association also cannot ignore the views of the churach in any social issues. It is a kind of equal share of power with veto powers on the hands of both. If we can think of some such arrangement for our community then many of the current issues can be easily settled. The laity can chart out a goal for the ordinary hindu bnrahmin and the acharya can throw his weight behind it. Laity can manage the finances, be a trustee of the wealth of the community in the hands of the Maths and leave the acharyas with enough time to pursue spiritual matters and intervening decisively in the affairs of the laity only when there is a grave need.It is loud thinking and members can give their opinions on this.Cheers.

 

[Raghy]

Sri Raju,

Thanks for your input.

It never occured to me that Acharyas may not be agreeing to wipe out the caste system. But, it does not hurt to look forward for such a reform. I do not wish to talk about any Achryas.

I am more than happy to talk about my personal views, however silly it may sound. I am a person who seeks utopia. When I was walking behind a plough, ploughing the field, I was dreaming about driving my own car; when I was driving my own car on a hot summer day, I was dreaming about driving on a freezing day with lot of snow along the road and everywhere; when I was driving along on a freezing day with the windows down..... Sir, this list goes on. To put my point in a nut shell, unless we thrive to make changes, nothing will change on its own.

I am not interested about chruch activities. I know a bit to much about its working ethics. So, I wish to walk away from that. Whatever you wrote about the mutts.... that was what I exactly anticipated. But I was not thinking with a hindu brahmin at the forefront; but any and all committed persons living in Tamil Nadu, by also exercising due respect to respectable people.

 

[suraju06]

Dear Sri Raju Ji Sir,

Yes, you are excused. We pretty well understand our standards on moderation. You are poking your nose where it does not belong.

All the same, please continue to post your views on various topics in the Forum.

Thank you for your opinion.
Those amongst you who want to raise an issue on moderation, please send your comments addressed to Sri Praveen Ji, or to Sri Silverfof Ji or to me, based on your preference. Your concerns will be addressed in a timely fashion.


Regards,
KRS

I have been reading this conversation with interest.
I may please be excused if i am poking my nose into prohibited territory.Thanks.Cheers.

dear Mr. KRS,
//yes you are excused. you are poking your nose where it does not belong...... Please continue to post your views (views are deleted or have vanished without a trace)//

I am amazed at the broadmindedness, self confidence and maturity exhibited. Thank you.

 

[Raghy]

Sri KRS said:-
"Dear Sri Raghy Ji,

I did not take your opinion as you questioning the validity of Maha Periaval's position as a Great Guru. In fact, your question/lament seems to be based on realizing His greatness? How can this be an affront?

But to answer:

1. Maha Periaval gave edicts to our society on not wearing silk sarees and not getting Varadhakshinai. How many of us followed His advice?

2. He wanted us to go back to our roots of following our Varna Dharma. How many of us are following it, 100%?

3. He often said, it was not his place to alter the traditions handed to Him. He lived in a most orthodox period, when Jathi customs were followed very vigorously. Even if He had advised the Jathis to be abolished (there is no record he wanted to do so), the community would have spurned Him.

His charter was not to change the foundations of the existing society, but to ensure the continuation of our religion and make our scriptures ever living."

Sri KRS,

My post became an affront because, I quoted ‘ netri kannai thirappinum kutram kutrame’ in the same paragraph where I was expressing my grievances. I completely agree with Sri RV when Sri RV took it in his mind that I was directing that quotation towards Paramacharyal. I honestly directed that quote towards Sivan himself; but since I failed to separate a paragraph, it gave room for Sri RV to react. I understand his reaction was justified. I requested him to forgive me for hurting his feelings and he was magnanimous enough to calm down. Honestly, it was not my intention to direct that quote towards priyaval.

To answer your questions:-
Non caste Brahmins do not wear silk sarees at the ‘mangalya tharanam’ in the villages. Caste Brahmins did not follow Periyaval’s advice though.

Varna Dhrama? Sri KRS, personally I have different explanations for varna dharma. Possibly others may have too. Kindly allow me to skip this question.

Periyaval often said it was not in his place to bring changes only because Acharyal knew that he could bring changes. I do not know why he was hesitant. If Acharyal did not consider such a thing, Acharyal would not have spoken about it, that too, often.
Acharyal had a large following in the non caste Brahmin community. I do not want to go in detail about this matter. Kindly excuse me, please.

I sincerely request you to postpone your decisions, please. If you think Sri RV’s concerns are justifiable, then you should remain and everything should function as usual; on the other hand, if you think Sri RV’s concerns are unjustifiable, then you should engage in a discussion as a member.

Difference of opinions occur often amoung friends, because they communicate a lot. If we are to be politically correct, then we can not function as friends. You have exhibited much more wisdom to take a reactionary decision. Thanks.

Regards,

Raghy.

 

[Raghy]

Sri Nara,

'Where is Sri Vaishnavam?' The answer is, it not to be seen anywhere.

'Kodumin, KoLLumin' essentially means relationship through marriages. If such marriages do not take place, social reform will not occur. So, slowly ( or quickly) the Sri Vaishnava movement died.

 

[kunjuppu]

...I am amazed at the broadmindedness, self confidence and maturity exhibited. Thank you.

i am not sure if there is hint of sarcasm in this reply.

taking it at face value, i agree 100%. as an ex moderator, i know that it takes some special kind of people to handle this. they need not only a fair mind, but a thick skin. krs is indeed a benchmark.

now, if this is a sarcasm, ... i will hold my comments to suraju till he confirms it. and i then i will share with him, a piece of my mind :whip:

thank you.

 

[pvraman]

Sri Raghy,

Greetings.

Sri Nara,

'Where is Sri Vaishnavam?' The answer is, it not to be seen anywhere.

'Kodumin, KoLLumin' essentially means relationship through marriages. If such marriages do not take place, social reform will not occur. So, slowly ( or quickly) the Sri Vaishnava movement died.

Pardon me for my ignorance. I am not against inter cast marriage, if the girl and boy know all the pros and cons and they are at their liberty to marry anybody. Modern parents does not force them to be cast-centric or country-centric, language-centric. கொடுமின் கொள்மீன் is liberally happening nowadays esp rich forward thinking brahmins. As long as the great social equalizer, "wealth and social status" is obtained, i think ideology has no importance. As the great saying goes "வல்லவன் வகுத்ததே சட்டம் (அ) வாய்க்கால்."

Before that, I have few question to clear my understanding. I want to know what is the social reform you mean and what a Brahmin must be prepared to (loose or) change, for the social reform and what is the end result we are talking about. Will the change include loosing Punool and rituals attached to it? Why I ask this question is, the great difference now between TN NB and B is Punool. If you remove punool, you are as good as NB, it is simple as that. so do you mean that?

I want to discuss further after getting reply.

Thanks to Sri Nara & Your posts, I am learning here.........................


Thanks
PVR

 

[suraju06]

i am not sure if there is hint of sarcasm in this reply.

taking it at face value, i agree 100%. as an ex moderator, i know that it takes some special kind of people to handle this. they need not only a fair mind, but a thick skin. krs is indeed a benchmark.

now, if this is a sarcasm, ... i will hold my comments to suraju till he confirms it. and i then i will share with him, a piece of my mind :whip:

thank you.

Mr. Kunjuppu,
Before answering your question I would like you to enlighten me on the smiley which you have planted in your message. What are you conveying? You can wait to share a piece of your mind. After getting your reply to my above query I would give you a piece of my mind. Eagerly looking forward to your enlightening answer, I remain a humble tamil brahmin member of this forum.You have of course the freedom to ban me if you want without any notice to me.cool.

 

[suraju06]

Sri Nara,

'Where is Sri Vaishnavam?' The answer is, it not to be seen anywhere.

'Kodumin, KoLLumin' essentially means relationship through marriages. If such marriages do not take place, social reform will not occur. So, slowly ( or quickly) the Sri Vaishnava movement died.

Kodumin Kolmin does not mean relationship by marriage. Period. Sri Vaishnava movement has not died. It is very much alive and kicking. Please look into a tamil dictionary and find out what is the meaning of the words kodumin and kollmin. Of all the meanings there is no marriage even remotely indicated. In spite of all this if you want to believe that the meaning is marriage be happy believing it. All the best.

 

[RVR]

Mr. Kunjuppu,
Before answering your question I would like you to enlighten me on the smiley which you have planted in your message. What are you conveying? You can wait to share a piece of your mind. After getting your reply to my above query I would give you a piece of my mind. Eagerly looking forward to your enlightening answer, I remain a humble tamil brahmin member of this forum.You have of course the freedom to ban me if you want without any notice to me.cool.

Sri Raju,

Sri Kunjuppu also ordinary member like us. He has given up moderator position few days back and he is also like one of us. He doesn't have any special right to ban you or me.

All the best

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Raju Ji,

Let me quote the posting above by Sri Praveen Ji about your inference below on 'views' deleted:

As an administrator here is a final say with regards to the moderation and moderators.

"There will be no more comments from the admin team on this issue again. We do not have to explain our actions each and every time. Our actions are based on what we think is right. Period. There will be some who will not like it, but then we cannot realistically please all. Further discussions questioning the moderators/criticizing them will be edited/removed and if continued might also result in temporary ban or at the extreme a permanent ban."

Hope this explains.

Regards,
KRS

dear Mr. KRS,
//yes you are excused. you are poking your nose where it does not belong...... Please continue to post your views (views are deleted or have vanished without a trace)//

I am amazed at the broadmindedness, self confidence and maturity exhibited. Thank you.

 

[Nara]

What are you conveying? You can wait to share a piece of your mind.

Dear Shri Raju,

Greetings!

I enjoyed the conversation we had earlier in this thread and hope to have more. Your presence is important to keep me honest . So I hope you won't get into a "dare" situation.

The relative anonymity of internet communication makes us sometimes say things that we may not say face-to-face. Further, I am sure you know, in a face-to-face conversation communication takes place in several modes, speech, tone, loudness, hand gestures, etc.

In written communication like what we have in this forum, bereft of all but the written words, the meaning one wants to convey often gets distorted. The emoticons help a little bit, but are woefully inadequate.

Not that you don't know any of this, it just came to my mind...

I would say to my friend Kunjuppu that Shri Raju probably meant it in a sarcastic vain, but it was just a momentary emotion that can be overlooked.

Cheers to one and all!

 

[Nara]

Hope this explains.

The words of moderators are indeed final. They have every right and indeed an obligation to edit or remove posts in the broader interest of the forum.

All I wish is that it is done with a velvet glove. Public dressing down can be avoided as this may make the member feel humiliated.

just my 2 cents....

 

[silverfox]

Friends:

We were having some excellent thought-provoking discussions on the topic when we ALL got side-tracked by this moderators/ban/ et al.

Moderators are also mere mortals (!) and they are volunteering their time and effort. They didn't seek out this position; it was given to them. Whatever they have done were with good intentions.

I beseech all of you to put this behind us and get on with this wonderful topic started by Prof. Nara. I am sure we all are learning quite a bit from these postings.

Thanks

 

[RVR]

I fully agree with Sri silverfox.

I request Prof Nara to continue to enlighten us on the subject.

All the best