Guest guest Posted April 20, 1999 Report Share Posted April 20, 1999 At 5:03 -0800 4/20/99, COM: Jatukarnya (das) CI (Cintamani Intl, Oslo - N) wrote: >1. Continue as we have done until now, and let those who think it is >too much start up another conferance. > >2. Restrict this conferance to talks directly related to Varnasrama >only, and then start up another conferance which allows more or less any >discussions. Either option is fine with me. The main thing seems to be that we have a place where we can feel free to have general discussions. COM's history over at least the past 6 years suggests that there is a real need for such a forum. We had the "free forum", the "philosophical exchange", the "philosophical discussions" (renamed "garbage" and then deleted by our sysop) etc. Each time one option was eliminated, devotees simply found a new forum. The main reason to move this discussion would be if there are members who only want a "pure VAD" discussion and who are discouraged from doing so with all the other "talking" going on. That would be unfortunate. Otherwise it seems pretty much any topic can be related to VAD *or* to Social and Economic Development. Justa thought; *if* we want to start using the SED conference, it's probably best simply to start cc-ing it as a reciever since most people tend just to hit "reply" or "comment". Ys, Madhusudani dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 1999 Report Share Posted April 20, 1999 "COM: Jatukarnya (das) CI (Cintamani Intl, Oslo - N)" wrote: > [Text 2249868 from COM] > > > Why don't we rename it to the Discussions conf. since there is > > practically nothing about varnasrama. > > There have been others who also think there are too many discussions about > things not related to varnasrama on this conferance. But there are different > alternatives for sorting that situation out. > > 1. Continue as we have done until now, and let those who think it is > too much start up another conference. >>>>>>>>>>>> I vote for #1. Sooner or later, we always come back to varnasrama. -- hkdd > > 2. Restrict this conferance to talks directly related to Varnasrama > only, and then start up another conferance which allows more or less any > discussions. > Personally, I would go for version 1, but I am open for version 2. Any > comments? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 1999 Report Share Posted April 21, 1999 > We could leave this conference intact, renaming it the 'social and > economical development conference'. Then we could take the old 'social' > conference and rename that one 'Varnasrama development.' This way we > wouldn't need to inconveniance anyone and also honestly say there is > little happening in ISKCON on varnasrama. People would still get to the cow for milk even if you rename her a bull. ys Prisni dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 1999 Report Share Posted April 21, 1999 > Justa thought; *if* we want to start using the SED conference, it's > probably best simply to start cc-ing it as a reciever since most people > tend just to hit "reply" or "comment". I have been requested by the Sysop to discourage double-postings which go to both Varnasrama development and Social and ec. dev. So I would prefer that we do it either in one of the ways I suggested, or in the way which Sthita-dhi-muni suggested: > We could leave this conference intact, renaming it the 'social and > economical development conference'. Then we could take the old 'social' > conference and rename that one 'Varnasrama development.' This way we > wouldn't need to inconveniance anyone and also honestly say there is > little happening in ISKCON on varnasrama. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 1999 Report Share Posted April 21, 1999 "COM: Jatukarnya (das) CI (Cintamani Intl, Oslo - N)" wrote: > [Text 2249868 from COM] > > > Why don't we rename it to the Discussions conf. since there is > > practically nothing about varnasrama. > > There have been others who also think there are too many discussions about > things not related to varnasrama on this conferance. But there are different > alternatives for sorting that situation out. > > 1. Continue as we have done until now, and let those who think it is > too much start up another conferance. There are a lot of mISKCONceptions about what VAD is. In a nutshell, it is a way to feed devotees and to formalize relationships. I feel that although this conference may be unliked by many who have an agenda they wish to impose under the guise of VAD, the whole point of VAD IS to encompass a broad variety of topics. I like it this way, and feel a sense of community starting to develop. If I can't talk about something here amongst devotees I am starting to think of as friends, where shall I discuss them? With friendly karmis whose minds aren't closed by philosopical dogma? And I do see every week a lot of discussion on VAD that any one should be able to recognise as such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 1999 Report Share Posted April 21, 1999 > There are a lot of mISKCONceptions about what VAD is. In a nutshell, it > is a way to feed devotees and to formalize relationships. > > I feel that although this conference may be unliked by many who have an > agenda they wish to impose under the guise of VAD, the whole point of VAD > IS to encompass a broad variety of topics. > > I like it this way, and feel a sense of community starting to develop. > If I can't talk about something here amongst devotees I am starting to > think of as friends, where shall I discuss them? With friendly karmis > whose minds aren't closed by philosopical dogma? > > And I do see every week a lot of discussion on VAD that any one should be > able to recognise as such. I truly agree with you. Already last year, I travelled and visited both you and Janesvara, and I got to know both of you through this conferance. 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.