Guest guest Posted August 28, 2000 Report Share Posted August 28, 2000 On 27 Aug 2000, Ajamila das wrote: > > 2. Blasphemous GBC Boasts that Srila Prabhupada "is Dead" > > This is an example of cognitive distortion at its worst. The GBC in question > made the statement not as blasphemy but as a statement according to the > context. We are sick of hearing the ritviks put offensive words into others' > mouths. I agree. This text has no business on COM. Someone was wondering what "spam" was. Here is a good example from the original text: ****** Please note that though Jayapataka Swami claims that the Asian Age 'edited' the press release he wrote, here they are quoting *directly* from the press release in question. And Jayapataka Swami does not object to what has been written, rather he boasts to everyone how the 'main gist' is there - with the main gist being that Srila Prabhupada has been 'dead for the last 23 years' - so that we must instead approach impostor Gurus such as himself. ******EOC SPAM is a mixture of dead animal parts, scraped together with some spices to cover up the reality of what it is. The main gist is that it's an abomination to any sane person. The above quote is an offence to Maharaja. One may or may not agree or like everything that Maharaja does or says, but we need a minimum standard. YS JvGs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2000 Report Share Posted August 28, 2000 Kanti prabhu wrote: >Certainly not, simply remove yourself from the conferences. I for one do not >appreciate being protected by censorship, no matter how well intentioned. Me neither. Personally I find such "protection" patronizing. >Don't you think most devotees can make up their own minds whether or not >something is simply propaganda or in fact revelation? yhs, Kanti dasi Thank you for pointing out what is indeed the bottom line here. This possibly well-meaning, but nevertheless patronizing attitude is part of what's at the root of many of ISKCON's problems. For decades, devotees were consistently told that they couldn't think for themselves and that others had to screen what they could and couldn't read or hear. Consequently, devotees were discouraged from thinking for themselves and many problems were never discussed. We still see it on some COM conferences where the organizers/moderators insist on only exposing its members to one side of certain debates, arguing that they wouldn't be able to handle hearing both sides or judging the arguments for themeselves. Shielding individuals from certain information may be warranted when we're dealing with children, but the members of these conferences are adults (if children have accounts it's up to their parents to screen what they receive). If we treat them as children, how can we expect them to become mature, thoughtful members of this society? Since one person here brought up an example in which my guru maharaja was criticised, I want to make perfectly clear that I do not enjoy reading such criticism and I try to avoid it. However, that doesn't mean that others, who have a different relationship with him, don't have the right to criticise him. As Kanti prabhu pointed out, we all have the option of removing ourselves from these conferences if we can't deal with their content. Of course we have the right to insist on basic manners, but if you're a member of conferences such as India Open, Varnasrama, and Topical Discussions, you have to expect that you will occasionally run into texts that may be painful to read. Again, it's up to each person to determine what s/he can handle and whether these conferences are a good match for him/her. Ys, Madhusudani dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2000 Report Share Posted August 28, 2000 The issue here is not censorship. Nor is the content of this specific newsletter the issue. SPAM is uninvited mail sent to multiple email receivers using any variety of mass-mailing techniques. In the U.S., such mailings are required by law to have a clearly available option to opt-out of further mail pieces from that source. My understanding is these conferences are meant serve as a place for individuals to express themselves on various topics. It is understandable that, from time to time, a conference member may wish to forward a relevant portion of a newspaper article or newsletter to a specific conference if he or she has reason to believe the subject is of interest to the other members. However, the wholesale dumping of entire newsletters of any kind into a conference without the prior permission of the participants or moderator is, in my opinion, totally unacceptable. Internet etiquette for newsletters permits subscriptions to be offered to those who desire them. I to quite of few myself, including some from sources whose politics I don't agree with (the newsletter under discussion is one of them). But that should be my choice. There are appropriate forums on Pamho.net for the advertisement of available newsletters. I support the call for the Pamho.net sysops to enforce the anti-spam provisions we agreed to when we purchased our accounts. Your servant, Sri Rama das srirama.acbsp (AT) pamho (DOT) net http://www.krishnagalleria.com > > Madhusudani.Radha.JPS (AT) pamho (DOT) net > [Madhusudani.Radha.JPS (AT) pamho (DOT) net] > Sunday, August 27, 2000 8:50 PM > Cc: India (Continental Committee) Open (Forum); Varnasrama development; > Ananta Purusottama; Ganga (dd) IDS (NE-BBT) > Re: IRM spams conferences > > > Kanti prabhu wrote: > >Certainly not, simply remove yourself from the conferences. I > for one do not > >appreciate being protected by censorship, no matter how well intentioned. > > Me neither. Personally I find such "protection" patronizing. > > >Don't you think most devotees can make up their own minds whether or not > >something is simply propaganda or in fact revelation? yhs, Kanti dasi > > Thank you for pointing out what is indeed the bottom line here. This > possibly well-meaning, but nevertheless patronizing attitude is part > of what's at the root of many of ISKCON's problems. For decades, > devotees were consistently told that they couldn't think for > themselves and that others had to screen what they could and couldn't > read or hear. Consequently, devotees were discouraged from thinking > for themselves and many problems were never discussed. We still see > it on some COM conferences where the organizers/moderators insist on > only exposing its members to one side of certain debates, arguing > that they wouldn't be able to handle hearing both sides or judging > the arguments for themeselves. > > Shielding individuals from certain information may be warranted when > we're dealing with children, but the members of these conferences are > adults (if children have accounts it's up to their parents to screen > what they receive). If we treat them as children, how can we expect > them to become mature, thoughtful members of this society? > > Since one person here brought up an example in which my guru maharaja > was criticised, I want to make perfectly clear that I do not enjoy > reading such criticism and I try to avoid it. However, that doesn't > mean that others, who have a different relationship with him, don't > have the right to criticise him. As Kanti prabhu pointed out, we all > have the option of removing ourselves from these conferences if we > can't deal with their content. Of course we have the right to insist > on basic manners, but if you're a member of conferences such as India > Open, Varnasrama, and Topical Discussions, you have to expect that > you will occasionally run into texts that may be painful to read. > Again, it's up to each person to determine what s/he can handle and > whether these conferences are a good match for him/her. > > Ys, > Madhusudani dasi > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2000 Report Share Posted August 28, 2000 At 22:06 -0700 8/27/2000, Srirama (das) ACBSP wrote: > I support the call for the Pamho.net sysops to enforce the anti-spam >provisions we agreed to when we purchased our accounts. Fine, but that call is irrelevant to the present situation. Sending the newsletter - unsolicited - to lots of individual mailboxes is a spam. Forwarding a copy of one newsletter to one conference is not a spam. Trying to control which texts get to be forwarded to a given conference is censorship, especially when there are no rules of that conference that prohibit such a practice. Ys, Madhusudani dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2000 Report Share Posted August 28, 2000 By that standard it would be acceptable for anyone to dump anything they like into a conference as long as the individual is a conference member and decides he or she wants the all other conference members to receive it. As I previously mentioned, occasionally forwarding a relevant portion of an article may be acceptable, but the technical fact that a conference is a single email address should not exempt those posting entire newsletters from spam rules. Your servant, Sri Rama das srirama.acbsp (AT) pamho (DOT) net http://www.krishnagalleria.com > > Madhusudani.Radha.JPS (AT) pamho (DOT) net > [Madhusudani.Radha.JPS (AT) pamho (DOT) net] > Sunday, August 27, 2000 10:52 PM > Ananta Purusottama; Ganga (dd) IDS (NE-BBT); India (Continental > Committee) Open (Forum); Varnasrama development > Cc: Raktambara das > RE: IRM spams conferences > > > At 22:06 -0700 8/27/2000, Srirama (das) ACBSP wrote: > > > I support the call for the Pamho.net sysops to enforce the anti-spam > >provisions we agreed to when we purchased our accounts. > > Fine, but that call is irrelevant to the present situation. > > Sending the newsletter - unsolicited - to lots of individual > mailboxes is a spam. > > Forwarding a copy of one newsletter to one conference is not a spam. > > Trying to control which texts get to be forwarded to a given > conference is censorship, especially when there are no rules of that > conference that prohibit such a practice. > > Ys, > Madhusudani dasi > 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.