TO THE IDIOT OF THIS FORUM / One question for all !!

[Guest guest]

Om Datta Guru

 

Dear Prafulla ji,

I understand the agony of your post.

 

My only comment is we all do PR astrology and not jyotish. This PR

astrology i have found working on all lists and had hence written about

it a year back in very crude terms bringing the reality to our face.

 

The person who makes it provocative in the first place should be banned

in the first place by the moderator whether he is an old or young

member. If the offense is less then a period of few months of ban should

be imposed.

 

I have always pointed out that we need more stringent action from the

moderator but my words were on deaf ears hence this is the state of the

list today.

 

> why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to community !!

> and we still call it a jyotish community.

 

Most jyotishis are spineless we can see that, the olden days are gone,

here even in a technical debate they are selective in their replies,

avoiding the tricky areas of the subject and avoidance of tricky

questions that challenge the very foundation of our theories. In this

atmosphere no real exchange of knowledge can happen.

 

 

regards,

Sunil John

 

 

 

 

, " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish

wrote:

>

> Dear Members,

>

> Each one has his own perspective and objectivity of the forum. and

> Likewise - each member may have his own approach to deal with

> provocation / reaction. But I am seriously raising few question-

>

> Why do not objection come when someone initializes provocation? Why do

> not members object - when someone's personal chart is attacked as

> character assassination? Why two standards on the forum.....

>

> Recently - Pradeep ji provoked Tarun ji by unwanted comments, but when

> Tarun ji remarked - it is taken as offense. Likewise Raja ji commented

> badly about Bhaskar ji's parents - but members objected to Bhaskar

> ji's reaction. Earlier Sreenadh abused (m*****f****r) Bhaskar ji - but

> members objected to Bhaskar ji's post. On many occasions - rather

> people provoking were defended.

>

> why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to community !!

> and we still call it a jyotish community.

>

>

> regards / Prafulla

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Sunil John

 

Yes - I am realizing it.

 

I will be posting separate mail on Shri Pradeep's model - but can you

imagine the waste of time of the entire audience for repetitive

arguments !! I am still open to the theory / method - but then

political mails as escapism or belittling others as if - there is

serious diplomacy being done.

 

BTW - Diplomacy - n. the patriotic act of lying for one's country /

community.

 

Of course - each one of has right to ignore or spam the poster; but

then what is relevance of calling it as " community forums " without

sense of belonging?

 

regards / Prafulla

 

, " jjnet2000_in " <jjnet2000_in

wrote:

>

> Om Datta Guru

>

> Dear Prafulla ji,

> I understand the agony of your post.

>

> My only comment is we all do PR astrology and not jyotish. This PR

> astrology i have found working on all lists and had hence written about

> it a year back in very crude terms bringing the reality to our face.

>

> The person who makes it provocative in the first place should be banned

> in the first place by the moderator whether he is an old or young

> member. If the offense is less then a period of few months of ban should

> be imposed.

>

> I have always pointed out that we need more stringent action from the

> moderator but my words were on deaf ears hence this is the state of the

> list today.

>

> > why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to community !!

> > and we still call it a jyotish community.

>

> Most jyotishis are spineless we can see that, the olden days are gone,

> here even in a technical debate they are selective in their replies,

> avoiding the tricky areas of the subject and avoidance of tricky

> questions that challenge the very foundation of our theories. In this

> atmosphere no real exchange of knowledge can happen.

>

>

> regards,

> Sunil John

>

>

>

>

> , " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Members,

> >

> > Each one has his own perspective and objectivity of the forum. and

> > Likewise - each member may have his own approach to deal with

> > provocation / reaction. But I am seriously raising few question-

> >

> > Why do not objection come when someone initializes provocation? Why do

> > not members object - when someone's personal chart is attacked as

> > character assassination? Why two standards on the forum.....

> >

> > Recently - Pradeep ji provoked Tarun ji by unwanted comments, but when

> > Tarun ji remarked - it is taken as offense. Likewise Raja ji commented

> > badly about Bhaskar ji's parents - but members objected to Bhaskar

> > ji's reaction. Earlier Sreenadh abused (m*****f****r) Bhaskar ji - but

> > members objected to Bhaskar ji's post. On many occasions - rather

> > people provoking were defended.

> >

> > why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to community !!

> > and we still call it a jyotish community.

> >

> >

> > regards / Prafulla

> >

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Prafullaji

 

My humble request once again to yuo to quit moral policing,

especially since you seem to accept that an initial provocation

warrants such an extended and prolonged torrent of abuse/waste of

space.

 

Tit for tat = a never ending spiral of controversy. Please encourage

dispute resolution rather than encourage dispute inflamation.

 

Take care.

 

, " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish

wrote:

>

> Dear Members,

>

> Each one has his own perspective and objectivity of the forum. and

> Likewise - each member may have his own approach to deal with

> provocation / reaction. But I am seriously raising few question-

>

> Why do not objection come when someone initializes provocation? Why

do

> not members object - when someone's personal chart is attacked as

> character assassination? Why two standards on the forum.....

>

> Recently - Pradeep ji provoked Tarun ji by unwanted comments, but

when

> Tarun ji remarked - it is taken as offense. Likewise Raja ji

commented

> badly about Bhaskar ji's parents - but members objected to Bhaskar

> ji's reaction. Earlier Sreenadh abused (m*****f****r) Bhaskar ji -

but

> members objected to Bhaskar ji's post. On many occasions - rather

> people provoking were defended.

>

> why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to community !!

> and we still call it a jyotish community.

>

>

> regards / Prafulla

>

[Guest guest]

Shri Atma Gnan ji,

 

Thanks for your " humble " suggestion. You may kindly choose to ignore

my posts in future, if they bug you.

 

regards / Prafulla

 

, " atma_gnan " <atma_gnan wrote:

>

> Prafullaji

>

> My humble request once again to yuo to quit moral policing,

> especially since you seem to accept that an initial provocation

> warrants such an extended and prolonged torrent of abuse/waste of

> space.

>

> Tit for tat = a never ending spiral of controversy. Please encourage

> dispute resolution rather than encourage dispute inflamation.

>

> Take care.

>

> , " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Members,

> >

> > Each one has his own perspective and objectivity of the forum. and

> > Likewise - each member may have his own approach to deal with

> > provocation / reaction. But I am seriously raising few question-

> >

> > Why do not objection come when someone initializes provocation? Why

> do

> > not members object - when someone's personal chart is attacked as

> > character assassination? Why two standards on the forum.....

> >

> > Recently - Pradeep ji provoked Tarun ji by unwanted comments, but

> when

> > Tarun ji remarked - it is taken as offense. Likewise Raja ji

> commented

> > badly about Bhaskar ji's parents - but members objected to Bhaskar

> > ji's reaction. Earlier Sreenadh abused (m*****f****r) Bhaskar ji -

> but

> > members objected to Bhaskar ji's post. On many occasions - rather

> > people provoking were defended.

> >

> > why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to community !!

> > and we still call it a jyotish community.

> >

> >

> > regards / Prafulla

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Prafulla ji,

 

this forum has lost its dignity , as this was the great forum with

real astrologers. But now very few astrologers are here.

 

All the senior persons have left forum due to the boring environment

and repeated topics raised by few members... you can see the archives

of the forum for those ref. As few members quote to provide a new

method but they themself donot can explain the model. Which is like

just wasting everyone's time ...its like showing a UFO and then saying

it ...just kidding.....its more or less a funnier part of this forum .

Which has become tradition continued by few members who are active to

waste time since 2004.

 

I hope none of the older member would take this mail for them :-)

 

Regards,

 

Tarun

 

 

 

 

, " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish wrote:

>

> Dear Sunil John

>

> Yes - I am realizing it.

>

> I will be posting separate mail on Shri Pradeep's model - but can you

> imagine the waste of time of the entire audience for repetitive

> arguments !! I am still open to the theory / method - but then

> political mails as escapism or belittling others as if - there is

> serious diplomacy being done.

>

> BTW - Diplomacy - n. the patriotic act of lying for one's country /

> community.

>

> Of course - each one of has right to ignore or spam the poster; but

> then what is relevance of calling it as " community forums " without

> sense of belonging?

>

> regards / Prafulla

>

> , " jjnet2000_in " <jjnet2000_in@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Om Datta Guru

> >

> > Dear Prafulla ji,

> > I understand the agony of your post.

> >

> > My only comment is we all do PR astrology and not jyotish. This PR

> > astrology i have found working on all lists and had hence written

about

> > it a year back in very crude terms bringing the reality to our face.

> >

> > The person who makes it provocative in the first place should be

banned

> > in the first place by the moderator whether he is an old or young

> > member. If the offense is less then a period of few months of ban

should

> > be imposed.

> >

> > I have always pointed out that we need more stringent action from the

> > moderator but my words were on deaf ears hence this is the state

of the

> > list today.

> >

> > > why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to community !!

> > > and we still call it a jyotish community.

> >

> > Most jyotishis are spineless we can see that, the olden days are gone,

> > here even in a technical debate they are selective in their replies,

> > avoiding the tricky areas of the subject and avoidance of tricky

> > questions that challenge the very foundation of our theories. In this

> > atmosphere no real exchange of knowledge can happen.

> >

> >

> > regards,

> > Sunil John

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Members,

> > >

> > > Each one has his own perspective and objectivity of the forum. and

> > > Likewise - each member may have his own approach to deal with

> > > provocation / reaction. But I am seriously raising few question-

> > >

> > > Why do not objection come when someone initializes provocation?

Why do

> > > not members object - when someone's personal chart is attacked as

> > > character assassination? Why two standards on the forum.....

> > >

> > > Recently - Pradeep ji provoked Tarun ji by unwanted comments,

but when

> > > Tarun ji remarked - it is taken as offense. Likewise Raja ji

commented

> > > badly about Bhaskar ji's parents - but members objected to Bhaskar

> > > ji's reaction. Earlier Sreenadh abused (m*****f****r) Bhaskar ji

- but

> > > members objected to Bhaskar ji's post. On many occasions - rather

> > > people provoking were defended.

> > >

> > > why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to community !!

> > > and we still call it a jyotish community.

> > >

> > >

> > > regards / Prafulla

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Prafullaji,

 

Apolgies if my suggestion upset you.

 

I value your posts on Jyotish very highly, so the challenge is being

able to predict and then select those that focus on the area of

interest (Jyotish) and avoid those that focus on petty playground

squabbles.

 

Best wishes.

 

, " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish

wrote:

>

> Shri Atma Gnan ji,

>

> Thanks for your " humble " suggestion. You may kindly choose to ignore

> my posts in future, if they bug you.

>

> regards / Prafulla

>

> , " atma_gnan " <atma_gnan@> wrote:

> >

> > Prafullaji

> >

> > My humble request once again to yuo to quit moral policing,

> > especially since you seem to accept that an initial provocation

> > warrants such an extended and prolonged torrent of abuse/waste of

> > space.

> >

> > Tit for tat = a never ending spiral of controversy. Please

encourage

> > dispute resolution rather than encourage dispute inflamation.

> >

> > Take care.

> >

> > , " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Members,

> > >

> > > Each one has his own perspective and objectivity of the forum.

and

> > > Likewise - each member may have his own approach to deal with

> > > provocation / reaction. But I am seriously raising few question-

> > >

> > > Why do not objection come when someone initializes provocation?

Why

> > do

> > > not members object - when someone's personal chart is attacked

as

> > > character assassination? Why two standards on the forum.....

> > >

> > > Recently - Pradeep ji provoked Tarun ji by unwanted comments,

but

> > when

> > > Tarun ji remarked - it is taken as offense. Likewise Raja ji

> > commented

> > > badly about Bhaskar ji's parents - but members objected to

Bhaskar

> > > ji's reaction. Earlier Sreenadh abused (m*****f****r) Bhaskar

ji -

> > but

> > > members objected to Bhaskar ji's post. On many occasions -

rather

> > > people provoking were defended.

> > >

> > > why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to

community !!

> > > and we still call it a jyotish community.

> > >

> > >

> > > regards / Prafulla

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

, " atma_gnan " <atma_gnan wrote:

>

> Prafullaji

>

> My humble request once again to yuo to quit moral policing,

 

Ho ho ho, look who's preaching about moral policing! Your first post

here (I shall give you the reference number if you want) was all about

just that, remember?

 

Posturing hypocrite, with a posturing pseudonym.

 

PJ

[Guest guest]

Praneshji

 

I am happy to hear that you have tracked my message history here - that

must have taken some time. But don't you think that time would have

been better spent learning some Jyotish?

 

Your point is valued, but I have mentioned on several occasions that my

experiances in condeming inapproporate behaviour have convinced me that

moral policing achives nothing but extend the issue (just as it has

here once again) rather then resolve any dispute.I am simply advising

others to adopt such an approach, which seems like the most mature and

responsible thing to do in the absence of active moderation.

 

However, if you take pleasure from making sideline comments on disputes

thats your perogative which are of course entitled to.

 

Take care.

 

 

 

, " pranesh_joshi2003 "

<pranesh_joshi2003 wrote:

>

> , " atma_gnan " <atma_gnan@> wrote:

> >

> > Prafullaji

> >

> > My humble request once again to yuo to quit moral policing,

>

> Ho ho ho, look who's preaching about moral policing! Your first post

> here (I shall give you the reference number if you want) was all about

> just that, remember?

>

> Posturing hypocrite, with a posturing pseudonym.

>

> PJ

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Atma Gnan ji

 

No - your mail did not upset me. I was rather cautious, if my mails

are upsetting you - so I requested you to ignore them.

 

Well - Let each member contribute to Jyotish the way - one is

competent like. I am not competent predictor - so I avoid predicting.

I feel, it is better - not to predict - than giving wrong advise. I

hope, now you do not have problem with my capability.

 

Your mail is diversion to an important question - which i thought must

be answered once for all and onwards, such incidents are not repeated.

 

regards / Prafulla

 

, " atma_gnan " <atma_gnan wrote:

>

> Prafullaji,

>

> Apolgies if my suggestion upset you.

>

> I value your posts on Jyotish very highly, so the challenge is being

> able to predict and then select those that focus on the area of

> interest (Jyotish) and avoid those that focus on petty playground

> squabbles.

>

> Best wishes.

>

> , " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Shri Atma Gnan ji,

> >

> > Thanks for your " humble " suggestion. You may kindly choose to ignore

> > my posts in future, if they bug you.

> >

> > regards / Prafulla

> >

> > , " atma_gnan " <atma_gnan@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Prafullaji

> > >

> > > My humble request once again to yuo to quit moral policing,

> > > especially since you seem to accept that an initial provocation

> > > warrants such an extended and prolonged torrent of abuse/waste of

> > > space.

> > >

> > > Tit for tat = a never ending spiral of controversy. Please

> encourage

> > > dispute resolution rather than encourage dispute inflamation.

> > >

> > > Take care.

> > >

> > > , " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish@>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Members,

> > > >

> > > > Each one has his own perspective and objectivity of the forum.

> and

> > > > Likewise - each member may have his own approach to deal with

> > > > provocation / reaction. But I am seriously raising few question-

> > > >

> > > > Why do not objection come when someone initializes provocation?

> Why

> > > do

> > > > not members object - when someone's personal chart is attacked

> as

> > > > character assassination? Why two standards on the forum.....

> > > >

> > > > Recently - Pradeep ji provoked Tarun ji by unwanted comments,

> but

> > > when

> > > > Tarun ji remarked - it is taken as offense. Likewise Raja ji

> > > commented

> > > > badly about Bhaskar ji's parents - but members objected to

> Bhaskar

> > > > ji's reaction. Earlier Sreenadh abused (m*****f****r) Bhaskar

> ji -

> > > but

> > > > members objected to Bhaskar ji's post. On many occasions -

> rather

> > > > people provoking were defended.

> > > >

> > > > why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to

> community !!

> > > > and we still call it a jyotish community.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > regards / Prafulla

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

, " atma_gnan " <atma_gnan wrote:

>

> Praneshji

>

> I am happy to hear that you have tracked my message history here - that

> must have taken some time. But don't you think that time would have

> been better spent learning some Jyotish?

 

No, and that's my prerogative.

 

> Your point is valued, but I have mentioned on several occasions that my

> experiances in condeming inapproporate behaviour have convinced me that

> moral policing achives nothing but extend the issue (just as it has

> here once again) rather then resolve any dispute.I am simply advising

> others to adopt such an approach, which seems like the most mature and

> responsible thing to do in the absence of active moderation.

 

I held the same kind of view but I must say that my dear

friend/teacher/colleague (formerly an infamous member here too!) has

convinced me that moderation is just another word for censorship,

which I could not subject myself to.

 

 

> However, if you take pleasure from making sideline comments on disputes

> thats your perogative which are of course entitled to.

 

 

Yes of course, I know that. A society should always be a cauldron of

thoughts and views. Depending on individual intellect, those thoughts

and views would vary, as would the attention they demand. Let the

noise find its own level, unless one likes censorship better.

 

pj

[Guest guest]

Prafullaji

 

I have no problem with your capabilies in Jyotish - in fact I enjoy

reading your posts. I have never stated that discussions on Jyotish

should be restricted to predictions : there should be a healthy

balance of both, and you have contributed invaluable pieces on the

thoeretical side.

 

And the most important question here, in my view, is of the validity

of using houses in d-charts. Thus messages straying from this strand

of Jyotish are indeed diversions.

 

Let us all stick to Jyotish.

 

Thanks.

 

, " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish

wrote:

>

> Dear Atma Gnan ji

>

> No - your mail did not upset me. I was rather cautious, if my mails

> are upsetting you - so I requested you to ignore them.

>

> Well - Let each member contribute to Jyotish the way - one is

> competent like. I am not competent predictor - so I avoid

predicting.

> I feel, it is better - not to predict - than giving wrong advise. I

> hope, now you do not have problem with my capability.

>

> Your mail is diversion to an important question - which i thought

must

> be answered once for all and onwards, such incidents are not

repeated.

>

> regards / Prafulla

>

> , " atma_gnan " <atma_gnan@> wrote:

> >

> > Prafullaji,

> >

> > Apolgies if my suggestion upset you.

> >

> > I value your posts on Jyotish very highly, so the challenge is

being

> > able to predict and then select those that focus on the area of

> > interest (Jyotish) and avoid those that focus on petty playground

> > squabbles.

> >

> > Best wishes.

> >

> > , " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Shri Atma Gnan ji,

> > >

> > > Thanks for your " humble " suggestion. You may kindly choose to

ignore

> > > my posts in future, if they bug you.

> > >

> > > regards / Prafulla

> > >

> > > , " atma_gnan " <atma_gnan@>

wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Prafullaji

> > > >

> > > > My humble request once again to yuo to quit moral policing,

> > > > especially since you seem to accept that an initial

provocation

> > > > warrants such an extended and prolonged torrent of

abuse/waste of

> > > > space.

> > > >

> > > > Tit for tat = a never ending spiral of controversy. Please

> > encourage

> > > > dispute resolution rather than encourage dispute inflamation.

> > > >

> > > > Take care.

> > > >

> > > > , " Prafulla Gang "

<jyotish@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Members,

> > > > >

> > > > > Each one has his own perspective and objectivity of the

forum.

> > and

> > > > > Likewise - each member may have his own approach to deal

with

> > > > > provocation / reaction. But I am seriously raising few

question-

> > > > >

> > > > > Why do not objection come when someone initializes

provocation?

> > Why

> > > > do

> > > > > not members object - when someone's personal chart is

attacked

> > as

> > > > > character assassination? Why two standards on the forum.....

> > > > >

> > > > > Recently - Pradeep ji provoked Tarun ji by unwanted

comments,

> > but

> > > > when

> > > > > Tarun ji remarked - it is taken as offense. Likewise Raja

ji

> > > > commented

> > > > > badly about Bhaskar ji's parents - but members objected to

> > Bhaskar

> > > > > ji's reaction. Earlier Sreenadh abused (m*****f****r)

Bhaskar

> > ji -

> > > > but

> > > > > members objected to Bhaskar ji's post. On many occasions -

> > rather

> > > > > people provoking were defended.

> > > > >

> > > > > why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to

> > community !!

> > > > > and we still call it a jyotish community.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > regards / Prafulla

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Praneshji,

 

I think we share the same objective in that we both oppose active

moderation. My take is that collective maturity/responsibility is far

more effective than moderation and that is best achived in instances

such as these by ignoring petty disputes thats why I have advised

others to do the same.

 

Of course this is just an advice - not an instruction, dictation or

an authoratative statement. So those tuned in to this frequency will

listen and those tuned out will ignore. I have no real contention

with that.

 

Take care.

 

 

 

 

 

, " pranesh_joshi2003 "

<pranesh_joshi2003 wrote:

>

> , " atma_gnan " <atma_gnan@> wrote:

> >

> > Praneshji

> >

> > I am happy to hear that you have tracked my message history here -

that

> > must have taken some time. But don't you think that time would

have

> > been better spent learning some Jyotish?

>

> No, and that's my prerogative.

>

> > Your point is valued, but I have mentioned on several occasions

that my

> > experiances in condeming inapproporate behaviour have convinced

me that

> > moral policing achives nothing but extend the issue (just as it

has

> > here once again) rather then resolve any dispute.I am simply

advising

> > others to adopt such an approach, which seems like the most

mature and

> > responsible thing to do in the absence of active moderation.

>

> I held the same kind of view but I must say that my dear

> friend/teacher/colleague (formerly an infamous member here too!) has

> convinced me that moderation is just another word for censorship,

> which I could not subject myself to.

>

>

> > However, if you take pleasure from making sideline comments on

disputes

> > thats your perogative which are of course entitled to.

>

>

> Yes of course, I know that. A society should always be a cauldron of

> thoughts and views. Depending on individual intellect, those

thoughts

> and views would vary, as would the attention they demand. Let the

> noise find its own level, unless one likes censorship better.

>

> pj

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Atmagnaniji,

 

I respect you much for your astrological knowledge

and also for your desire to mantain an equilibrium

on the Forum , of the same.

 

But when some members Parents and the Member himself

too is remarked,as being involved in illegal activites,

then it no more remains a petty squabble or a dispute.

 

I have dispute with none.

I am still searcing for the answers, how is my

family, and why, are we involved in unlawful

activities.

 

No sane person will pass off a remark about

some one and his parents, without astrological

base, and I am asking for that base, so that

we all can learn astrology. Either the person

having paassed such remark, prove himself sane,

or if not so, then leave the assembly

of sane logical and astrological minds.

 

//collective maturity/responsibility is far

> more effective than moderation //

 

This is what I hinted and said directly in my

earlier posts. But your way is

different and mines seperate. You are suggesting

responsibilty, by listening to an abuse, on

ones own self and ones parents, and keeping

mum. That is maturity in your observance.

 

For me its the other way.I would rather

have the collective responsibilty and

maturity of the members displayed,in

show of members asking the abuser to

move out, the one who abuses unnecessarily

without base, cause, and provocation.

 

regards,

Bhaskar.

 

 

 

, " atma_gnan " <atma_gnan wrote:

>

> Praneshji,

>

> I think we share the same objective in that we both oppose active

> moderation. My take is that collective maturity/responsibility is far

> more effective than moderation and that is best achived in instances

> such as these by ignoring petty disputes thats why I have advised

> others to do the same.

>

> Of course this is just an advice - not an instruction, dictation or

> an authoratative statement. So those tuned in to this frequency will

> listen and those tuned out will ignore. I have no real contention

> with that.

>

> Take care.

>

>

>

>

>

> , " pranesh_joshi2003 "

> <pranesh_joshi2003@> wrote:

> >

> > , " atma_gnan " <atma_gnan@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Praneshji

> > >

> > > I am happy to hear that you have tracked my message history here -

> that

> > > must have taken some time. But don't you think that time would

> have

> > > been better spent learning some Jyotish?

> >

> > No, and that's my prerogative.

> >

> > > Your point is valued, but I have mentioned on several occasions

> that my

> > > experiances in condeming inapproporate behaviour have convinced

> me that

> > > moral policing achives nothing but extend the issue (just as it

> has

> > > here once again) rather then resolve any dispute.I am simply

> advising

> > > others to adopt such an approach, which seems like the most

> mature and

> > > responsible thing to do in the absence of active moderation.

> >

> > I held the same kind of view but I must say that my dear

> > friend/teacher/colleague (formerly an infamous member here too!) has

> > convinced me that moderation is just another word for censorship,

> > which I could not subject myself to.

> >

> >

> > > However, if you take pleasure from making sideline comments on

> disputes

> > > thats your perogative which are of course entitled to.

> >

> >

> > Yes of course, I know that. A society should always be a cauldron of

> > thoughts and views. Depending on individual intellect, those

> thoughts

> > and views would vary, as would the attention they demand. Let the

> > noise find its own level, unless one likes censorship better.

> >

> > pj

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Om Datta Guru

 

Dear Prafulla ji,

 

Nice crisp points by you and I totally agree on the point of self

belonging of community forums. What i liked the best & caught my

attention was this

 

> BTW - Diplomacy - n. the patriotic act of lying for one's country /

> community.

 

I still remember what B V Raman wrote in his 'My Experiences in

Astrology'- on his father ''he did not know about Diplomacy'' - writing

from memory so hope no forum member tries to crucify me ))

 

This forum is taking time can you or Bharat form another good forum

where only its only by invite.

 

Best wishes

 

Sunil John

 

Mumbai

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish

wrote:

>

> Dear Sunil John

>

> Yes - I am realizing it.

>

> I will be posting separate mail on Shri Pradeep's model - but can you

> imagine the waste of time of the entire audience for repetitive

> arguments !! I am still open to the theory / method - but then

> political mails as escapism or belittling others as if - there is

> serious diplomacy being done.

>

> BTW - Diplomacy - n. the patriotic act of lying for one's country /

> community.

>

> Of course - each one of has right to ignore or spam the poster; but

> then what is relevance of calling it as " community forums " without

> sense of belonging?

>

> regards / Prafulla

>

> , " jjnet2000_in " jjnet2000_in@

> wrote:

> >

> > Om Datta Guru

> >

> > Dear Prafulla ji,

> > I understand the agony of your post.

> >

> > My only comment is we all do PR astrology and not jyotish. This PR

> > astrology i have found working on all lists and had hence written

about

> > it a year back in very crude terms bringing the reality to our face.

> >

> > The person who makes it provocative in the first place should be

banned

> > in the first place by the moderator whether he is an old or young

> > member. If the offense is less then a period of few months of ban

should

> > be imposed.

> >

> > I have always pointed out that we need more stringent action from

the

> > moderator but my words were on deaf ears hence this is the state of

the

> > list today.

> >

> > > why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to community

!!

> > > and we still call it a jyotish community.

> >

> > Most jyotishis are spineless we can see that, the olden days are

gone,

> > here even in a technical debate they are selective in their replies,

> > avoiding the tricky areas of the subject and avoidance of tricky

> > questions that challenge the very foundation of our theories. In

this

> > atmosphere no real exchange of knowledge can happen.

> >

> >

> > regards,

> > Sunil John

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , " Prafulla Gang " <jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Members,

> > >

> > > Each one has his own perspective and objectivity of the forum. and

> > > Likewise - each member may have his own approach to deal with

> > > provocation / reaction. But I am seriously raising few question-

> > >

> > > Why do not objection come when someone initializes provocation?

Why do

> > > not members object - when someone's personal chart is attacked as

> > > character assassination? Why two standards on the forum.....

> > >

> > > Recently - Pradeep ji provoked Tarun ji by unwanted comments, but

when

> > > Tarun ji remarked - it is taken as offense. Likewise Raja ji

commented

> > > badly about Bhaskar ji's parents - but members objected to Bhaskar

> > > ji's reaction. Earlier Sreenadh abused (m*****f****r) Bhaskar ji -

but

> > > members objected to Bhaskar ji's post. On many occasions - rather

> > > people provoking were defended.

> > >

> > > why prejudiced and spineless / politicized approach to community

!!

> > > and we still call it a jyotish community.

> > >

> > >

> > > regards / Prafulla

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >