N
Nara
Guest
A member directed me to the new discussion on missing posters. I see a flood of posts in a short period of time. It is obvious the absence is noticed, with a touch of discontent by some and a boatload of delight – “good riddance to bad rubbish” -- by many.
Some have divined our return, mostly with trepidation, based on a list of disparate reasons such as no exit message to vacationing. So, with a healthy measure of trepidation from my side as well, I dare make this short post giving brief explanation with the hope it won’t be seen to be lame.
First, there are several people who are abstaining from participation, but I can only speak for myself. There is no clique based coordination of any kind. My action is guided solely by my commitment to my honesty and integrity, not any sense of some sort of tribal solidarity with others.
The reason for my silence is not the opposition I have faced for the ideas I express -- that can never drive me away. If anything, such opposition can only persuade me not to stay silent and be a thorn in their irrational craw. In this respect I must express my profound gratitude to Praveen, he has always supported my freedom of expression.
The reason for my silence, and only that of mine, is my inability to accept the way moderation is applied. Now, I realize moderation is final and nobody is allowed to question the fairness or anything else about it. Anyone caught in this position is expected to leave, silently, which is what I did. This is the reason I left without posting an exit message.
I don’t hold any particular individual responsible for this situation. In many ways this is a catch-22 predicament for the moderators also. IMO, “not hurting the sensitivities of members” is too vague a rule for any moderator to apply and still be seen as impartial by everyone. A more objective guideline such as no foul language, no personal attacks would be much more practical for the moderators to enforce impartially and be seen as impartial, and the members to abide by. But, as they so enigmatically say, it is what it is.
I am fully aware I am not an indispensable member to the forum, and fortunately for me, and I say this with more than mere due respect to Praveen who has always been fair to me personally, the forum is not indispensable to me.
Please note that I am making this post only to offer an explanation, not to initiate a debate on moderation. I will not participate in a debate if one ensues.
I sign off with charity for all and malice towards none ….
Cheers!
Some have divined our return, mostly with trepidation, based on a list of disparate reasons such as no exit message to vacationing. So, with a healthy measure of trepidation from my side as well, I dare make this short post giving brief explanation with the hope it won’t be seen to be lame.
First, there are several people who are abstaining from participation, but I can only speak for myself. There is no clique based coordination of any kind. My action is guided solely by my commitment to my honesty and integrity, not any sense of some sort of tribal solidarity with others.
The reason for my silence is not the opposition I have faced for the ideas I express -- that can never drive me away. If anything, such opposition can only persuade me not to stay silent and be a thorn in their irrational craw. In this respect I must express my profound gratitude to Praveen, he has always supported my freedom of expression.
The reason for my silence, and only that of mine, is my inability to accept the way moderation is applied. Now, I realize moderation is final and nobody is allowed to question the fairness or anything else about it. Anyone caught in this position is expected to leave, silently, which is what I did. This is the reason I left without posting an exit message.
I don’t hold any particular individual responsible for this situation. In many ways this is a catch-22 predicament for the moderators also. IMO, “not hurting the sensitivities of members” is too vague a rule for any moderator to apply and still be seen as impartial by everyone. A more objective guideline such as no foul language, no personal attacks would be much more practical for the moderators to enforce impartially and be seen as impartial, and the members to abide by. But, as they so enigmatically say, it is what it is.
I am fully aware I am not an indispensable member to the forum, and fortunately for me, and I say this with more than mere due respect to Praveen who has always been fair to me personally, the forum is not indispensable to me.
Please note that I am making this post only to offer an explanation, not to initiate a debate on moderation. I will not participate in a debate if one ensues.
I sign off with charity for all and malice towards none ….
Cheers!
ray2:
