Guest guest Posted February 3, 2003 Report Share Posted February 3, 2003 This is to inform that Adi_Shakthi16 and all her avatars (asimhavahini, vinatha kumar, dkny1, geetangali ... and numerous others) have been ban permanently in Shakti Sadhana. This decision have been made after we have found evidence in the group activity file that Adi Shakthi16 have been on a deletion spree in the group. This has to be taken as the inner demon born out of frustration is trying to wreak vengence and Devi is protecting us Messages posted in the group is an integral part of the discussions on the board, attempts in trying to delete the messages will cause confusion and disinformation when others reads it. As such we cannot allow it to happen. Adi_Shakth16 actions is an attempt to destroy the group. I have back ups of all the messages posted in this group, in due time I will gradually repost all the deleted messages. May DEVI have mercy on us all Om Mahesvaryai Namah Salutations to HER who is the Supreme Sovereign Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2003 Report Share Posted February 3, 2003 > This decision have been made after we have found evidence in the > group activity file that Adi Shakthi16 have been on a deletion spree > in the group. We can only delete our own messages. So messages sent to the list become the property of the list owners, rather than the sender? Doesn't this conflict with the Terms of Service, such as point 8 particularly? Ralf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 let hairsplitting be done by those who need to. As I see it when one posts and a thread starts on it, it becomes an integral part of the thread; the did not mean that one can destroy a thread later for personal reasons. It is in public domain and the purpose cannot, in law, as far as I know, be deleted. Even if deleted if it is restored, it ceases to be the author's. Anyway most of it is cut and paste of what is available on the net. very little original posts. so even the poster cannot claim copyright. I suspect that the prolific posting was made by a member with the intention of destroying it later with some hidden motive. I have my own suspicions on that. This seems to have been te pattern in many HINDU clubs by some person/s. I dunno how far correct I am. why such attacks on HINDU groups alone? I wonder!! is there a pattern? Kochu Ralf <ralf wrote: > This decision have been made after we have found evidence in the > group activity file that Adi Shakthi16 have been on a deletion spree > in the group. We can only delete our own messages. So messages sent to the list become the property of the list owners, rather than the sender? Doesn't this conflict with the Terms of Service, such as point 8 particularly? Ralf Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 , Ralf <ralf@F...> wrote: > > > This decision have been made after we have found evidence in the > > group activity file that Adi Shakthi16 have been on a deletion spree > > in the group. > > We can only delete our own messages. So messages sent to the list > become the property of the list owners, rather than the sender? > Doesn't this conflict with the Terms of Service, such as > point 8 particularly? > > > > Ralf As a long-time member of Shakti Sadhana since its earliest Clubs incarnation, and who has had the (dubious) pleasure of a recent correspondence with the aforementioned person, I assure you that there are other hidden, nefarious issues/agendas at work here, and that, I personally feel Shakti Sadhana would be better off minus the participation of this person. That, I say with a tinge of sadness and bewilderment, because she had been such a positive and cheerful contributor during Shakti Sadhana's earlier days, and so I don't quite comprehend this recent turnabout in attitude. A big lesson I have personally gleaned from this messy situation is that:- the possession of loads of intellectual information about Shaktism and the ability to expound them to others is NO guarantee of the owner's moral impeccability. Should anyone find that they cannot live without A-S's conversation, they can always go to her very own shakti Group (with its *100*-plus members or so). I, for one, know that Nora's decision is fair, well-considered and timely. May Lord Rama safeguard my speech from falsity and slander. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 yes that exactly was my thought!! You strt threads with lots of material; then when it is large and informative remove the basis and remove links in between!! then the group falls!! Was this the reason for the prolific postings? I also wondered why such attack takes place only on HINDU groups??????????? Is it that this person was specifically set up to destroy groups doing serious discussions? By who and why? I just dunno. The interesting thing is that this person is online DAY AND NIGHT. could it be some group of persons or an organisation? no one can be online almost 24 hours a day 7 days a week!! I just wonder whether it is part of the attack on hinduism Kochu "straightshooter_7 <aureusleo" <aureusleo wrote:--- In , Ralf <ralf@F...> wrote: > > > This decision have been made after we have found evidence in the > > group activity file that Adi Shakthi16 have been on a deletion spree > > in the group. > > We can only delete our own messages. So messages sent to the list > become the property of the list owners, rather than the sender? > Doesn't this conflict with the Terms of Service, such as > point 8 particularly? > > > > Ralf As a long-time member of Shakti Sadhana since its earliest Clubs incarnation, and who has had the (dubious) pleasure of a recent correspondence with the aforementioned person, I assure you that there are other hidden, nefarious issues/agendas at work here, and that, I personally feel Shakti Sadhana would be better off minus the participation of this person. That, I say with a tinge of sadness and bewilderment, because she had been such a positive and cheerful contributor during Shakti Sadhana's earlier days, and so I don't quite comprehend this recent turnabout in attitude. A big lesson I have personally gleaned from this messy situation is that:- the possession of loads of intellectual information about Shaktism and the ability to expound them to others is NO guarantee of the owner's moral impeccability. Should anyone find that they cannot live without A-S's conversation, they can always go to her very own shakti Group (with its *100*-plus members or so). I, for one, know that Nora's decision is fair, well-considered and timely. May Lord Rama safeguard my speech from falsity and slander. Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 Thank you straightshooter_7 I, for one, know that Nora's decision is fair, well-considered and timely. This decision is not made by me alone. It's the moderators decision. I have in full consultation with Sankara Menon. Even though Devi Bhakta is not online right now, we have spoken about this several time. We have the same experience once, when a disgruntled member went into his deletion spree. We have discuss in detail the steps we should take if such even reoccur May DEVI have mercy on us all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 --- sankara menon wrote: > let hairsplitting be done by those who need to. > As I see it when one posts and a thread starts on it, > it becomes an integral part of the thread; the did > not mean that one can destroy a thread later for personal > reasons. It is in public domain and the purpose cannot, in law, > as far as I know, be deleted. Even if deleted if it is restored, > it ceases to be the author's. Anyway most of it is cut and paste > of what is available on the net. very little original posts. > so even the poster cannot claim copyright. LOL. Kochu, you have pointed out a phenomenon which I have long been observing on this Group but was too courteous to mention: i.e. the "cut-and-paste" unoriginality of certain messages in the past. Some of A-S's expositions on Kashmir Shaivite theories and famous personages were wholesale liftings, indeed. > I suspect that the prolific posting was made by a member > with the intention of destroying it later with some hidden motive. I am beginning to agree with you on this. > I have my own suspicions on that. This seems to have been > the pattern in many HINDU clubs by some person/s. I dunno how > far correct I am. why such attacks on HINDU groups alone? > I wonder!! is there a pattern? Mmm. Why indeed??? The naughtier side of my mind is now brimming with possible reasons for all these attacks on hindu/shakti Groups.:-) Here is a hypothetical one a.k.a. the Electra-Complex Syndrome: --- A couple seated on a park bench. The man is a devoted Shakta while his girlfriend is just an average hindu with scanty emotional ties to DEVI. The Unbelievably Handsome, Macho and Sexy Shakta Man: "Christina, I have something to tell you... I don't think we should see each other again in the future... Truth is, with each passing occasion I am with you my affection for you wanes further and further... I-I am really sorry but I'd like our association to end here." The Girlfriend (clutches the big, muscular, fine-haired forearm of her Shakta boyfriend in desperate terror): "Hanuman! What are you saying? But why?!! What have I done to make you say that? I love you!!!" The Unbelievably Handsome, Macho and Sexy Shakta Man: "I know. But, I don't feel the same way anymore." The Girlfriend (howls): "Why? WHY?!!" The Unbelievably Handsome, Macho and Sexy Shakta Man: "A girl can truly capture my heart only if she loves my Mother as much as she loves me." The Girlfriend: "AHHHHHH! It's that Woman AGAIN! Will She never go away?!!" The Shakta Man (tearing his forearm away from the Girl's clutches in horror and clasping his hands in reverence): "Holy AUM! Maa is the Supreme Goddess, not a woman! Christina, you disappoint me. See, this is why we have to part..." The Girlfriend : "Oh, don't leave me, please!" The Unbelievably Handsome, Macho and Sexy Shakta Man: "Sorry, but I believe our separation will benefit both of us in the long-run. I wish you all the best. I really have to go now. Tonight I am headed for the Kali Temple to strip naked and get dressed in a sari in Her honour. Jai Ma!!! Jai Ma!!!" (Exits the Unbelievably Handsome, Macho and Sexy Shakta Man a.k.a. Mummy's Boy) The Spurned Girlfriend (trembling in rage): "OHH! This is too much! AH, Devi! Wait and see! I--I'll undermine your worship! I..! I will jumble up the shoes of Your devotees at your temples' entrances! I- I'll stand at Your temple doors and hand out McDonalds and christian pamphlets!!! I - I will infiltrate the internet and wipe out the sites devoted to You! Hahahaha!" (and the wayward little shakti walks off ) --- The above joke may be tacky, but hey, its at least *original*. LOL. I do think Shakti Sadhana needs a dose of humor now and then. It gets so serious here sometimes. omnamahsivaya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2003 Report Share Posted February 4, 2003 >>> This decision have been made after we have found evidence in >>> the group activity file that Adi Shakthi16 have been on a >>> deletion spree in the group. >> We can only delete our own messages. So messages sent to the list >> become the property of the list owners, rather than the sender? >> Doesn't this conflict with the Terms of Service, such as >> point 8 particularly? >> >> > As a long-time member of Shakti Sadhana since its earliest > Clubs incarnation, and who has had the (dubious) pleasure of a > recent correspondence with the aforementioned person, I assure you > that there are other hidden, nefarious issues/agendas at work here, > and that, I personally feel Shakti Sadhana would be better off minus > the participation of this person. I'm sorry, you misunderstood the focus of my post. As participants on hosted forums we maintain copyright and responsibility of our own posts. This means that deletion of posts from the archives is the right of the copyright owner, and refusing such deletion is not within the right of either , or the forum owners/moderators. Who is allowed to join, read, post, etc on the list is a different matter, which in my personal opinion should be decided on democratically by the members of the list, but which of course can only be enforced by the moderators of the list. This is a question of list ownership. Is this a list that the members are building up as a group, and that they feel a certain ownership of, or is it the list of a few key people? The impression I get is the latter, and although I have really enjoyed my chat with Sandeep, despite how it apparently seemed to come across to others when I started questioning too deeply, I don't feel comfortable with the ownership issues, so I think I'll be moving on again in a few days. I also have some work commitments that are going to interfere with the time I have available for discussion, which makes this a bigger picture decision for me of what communities I feel at home at. All the best to everyone here, and may you grow and learn from all your experiences. In Love and Light, Ralf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.