Whatever

[padamchen]

What in the world are you talking about?

Anyone with Indian flag represents India...there is no group here that can claim to say they are Indian representatives and the others are not.

You are beginning to understand my disgust and disengagement.

 

[jamahir]

What in the world are you talking about?

Anyone with Indian flag represents India...there is no group here that can claim to say they are Indian representatives and the others are not.

I will give an example. Some years ago a Kerala member ( perhaps SrNair ) justified honor killing in a post. You tell me, should there be no Indian members to counter his types ? Should posts and threads from Indian members all be from like his types ?

What about India's image ?

 

[Nilgiri]

I will give an example. Some years ago a Kerala member ( perhaps SrNair ) justified honor killing in a post. You tell me, should there be no Indian members to counter his types ? Should posts and threads from Indian members all be from like his types ?

What about India's image ?

You seem to misunderstand me. It is your sworn duty by having life, wit and sense.....to counter anything you see is wrong...in the best way you see fit.....here or anywhere...and the same goes for those that disagree with you.

Don't conflate that by stripping those you disagree with of their identity and representation...all are part and parcel of the reality of India...or any nation/identity they have that they gained or inherited by action far greater in magnitude over time and space than really any discussion can reach.

There is good, bad and all grey in between in every nook and cranny of this Earth inhabited by man...and in fact in every man too.

You cannot forcibly assign some absolute on someone or some people...that too on another matter entirely... based on existence and promotion of good, bad and grey by your perception. For no living soul has that vantage point, you are but a corruptible imperfect man yourself. This is the whole basic reason to have discourse and debate in first place.

You may reject or accept.... hate or love any idea or thing you see fit, but you cannot say one who says something your reject/hate is not representing India and only another saying something you accept/love does.

 

[padamchen]

I will give an example. Some years ago a Kerala member ( perhaps SrNair ) justified honor killing in a post. You tell me, should there be no Indian members to counter his types ? Should posts and threads from Indian members all be from like his types ?

What about India's image ?

Let's get down to brass tacks.

Do YOU represent India?

Who says?

Cheers, Doc

 

[Joe Shearer]

You seem to misunderstand me. It is your sworn duty by having life, wit and sense.....to counter anything you see is wrong...in the best way you see fit.....here or anywhere...and the same goes for those that disagree with you.

LOL.

And YOU seem to misunderstand US (collective, not country).

How does asking for civility in discourse become an issue where some are in and some are out? You've been bandying around the word 'conflate'; why do we 'conflate' opposition to those who do not want to be civil with opposition to views on politics or on sociology?

Pardon, your chaddi is showing.

Don't conflate that by stripping those you disagree with of their identity and representation...all are part and parcel of the reality of India...or any nation/identity they have that they gained or inherited by action far greater in magnitude over time and space than really any discussion can reach.

Who was stripped of identity or representation? What identity was stripped away by XYZ refusing to subscribe to a voluntary code of conduct? Are we prowling around looking for an excuse to disagree?

all are part and parcel of the reality of India...or any nation/identity they have that they gained or inherited by action far greater in magnitude over time and space than really any discussion can reach.

Are you sure you meant to write this? Are you sure you know what is under discussion?

".....gained or inherited by action far greater in magnitude over time and space than really any discussion can reach..."

WHAT did that mean? They collectively (us, not US) performed the Aswamedha?

You seem to have let @jamahir get you worked up in a most unusual manner. Not a good day?

There is good, bad and all grey in between in every nook and cranny of this Earth inhabited by man...and in fact in every man too.

<sigh!>

This was a code of conduct, not a loyalty oath.

Earth calling Nilgiri: come on down, the water's fine.

You cannot forcibly assign some absolute on someone or some people...that too on another matter entirely... based on existence and promotion of good, bad and grey by your perception. For no living soul has that vantage point, you are but a corruptible imperfect man yourself. This is the whole basic reason to have discourse and debate in first place.

Upanishadic, almost.

You are quite sure you had the code of conduct in mind when you wrote that awesome passage?

This is the whole basic reason to have discourse and debate in first place.

Crap.

Discussion is necessary to find common ground and to avoid resorting to hostility and violence as the only way of resolving differences.

To quote,"C'mon, man."

You may reject or accept.... hate or love any idea or thing you see fit, but you cannot say one who says something your reject/hate is not representing India and only another saying something you accept/love does.

How did India come into this? How did representing India come into this?

It may happen that I personally detest a point of view expressed by an Indian; you mean that is not allowed? that I must agree with every point of view expressed by an Indian? Wait a minute, this is the same person who waxes eloquent about free speech, as it is done in the US and in Canada, now waning mute about free speech, as it should not be done in India?

It is extremely strange to read these views. If they are meant to irritate the management, please go ahead; I have other things to do. If they are meant as a serious reflection of your views about the code of conduct, it is a bit late in the day, but let us agree that your views are noted respectfully by all. We are sure to discover their applicability at some time or the other; until then, your articulate and wise counsels will be treasured.

That is not what he aims to achieve. You have misunderstood. It is not about just Indian Muslims. It is about the Indian representation to be of sensible persons. Members like SrNair and Gadkari should not represent us.

@Nilgiri

Please read the code. Please go by what you read. Nowhere has it suggested that the irrational behaviour of any Indian members disqualifies them - or disenfranchises them - in any way. Any one of us - @jamahir included - may have views that extend onward from the code proper; no fault of the code.

 

[Nilgiri]

LOL.

And YOU seem to misunderstand US (collective, not country).

How does asking for civility in discourse become an issue where some are in and some are out? You've been bandying around the word 'conflate'; why do we 'conflate' opposition to those who do not want to be civil with opposition to views on politics or on sociology?

Pardon, your chaddi is showing.



Who was stripped of identity or representation? What identity was stripped away by XYZ refusing to subscribe to a voluntary code of conduct? Are we prowling around looking for an excuse to disagree?



Are you sure you meant to write this? Are you sure you know what is under discussion?

".....gained or inherited by action far greater in magnitude over time and space than really any discussion can reach..."

WHAT did that mean? They collectively (us, not US) performed the Aswamedha?

You seem to have let @jamahir get you worked up in a most unusual manner. Not a good day?



<sigh!>

This was a code of conduct, not a loyalty oath.

Earth calling Nilgiri: come on down, the water's fine.



Upanishadic, almost.

You are quite sure you had the code of conduct in mind when you wrote that awesome passage?



Crap.

Discussion is necessary to find common ground and to avoid resorting to hostility and violence as the only way of resolving differences.

To quote,"C'mon, man."



How did India come into this? How did representing India come into this?

It may happen that I personally detest a point of view expressed by an Indian; you mean that is not allowed? that I must agree with every point of view expressed by an Indian? Wait a minute, this is the same person who waxes eloquent about free speech, as it is done in the US and in Canada, now waning mute about free speech, as it should not be done in India?

It is extremely strange to read these views. If they are meant to irritate the management, please go ahead; I have other things to do. If they are meant as a serious reflection of your views about the code of conduct, it is a bit late in the day, but let us agree that your views are noted respectfully by all. We are sure to discover their applicability at some time or the other; until then, your articulate and wise counsels will be treasured.



@Nilgiri

Please read the code. Please go by what you read. Nowhere has it suggested that the irrational behaviour of any Indian members disqualifies them - or disenfranchises them - in any way. Any one of us - @jamahir included - may have views that extend onward from the code proper; no fault of the code.

Joe I agree with all of this (where you are coming from)...but I would prefer jamahir to answer/clarify.

If he meant some standard of "sensible Indian" to be represented by "sensible Indians"....thats fine. You are indeed correct that would merely come about by elective choice and free speech governing the definition anyway...an honour code is just semantics at that point if you ask me.

But he said:

It is about the Indian representation to be of sensible persons. Members like SrNair and Gadkari should not represent us.

To me any representation is going to inevitably be of sensible and non-sensible (and each would call the other the other one most likely...again by action of free thought and speech) ...you cannot reasonably pick only one side (or one group selection if you will) as the asserted Indian one with a "the"....rather than "an" or some other qualifier.

If jamahir didn't mean it such way, he can say so. He will always have benefit of any doubt from my end, because he has long earned it (I have unfairly attacked him on various things over course of this forum and he has a very thick skin and good positive spirit inside).

By the by, this code stuff is getting dug up this way for some mucking around a certain way....I should not have entered it.

 

[King Julien]

"It is about the Indian representation to be of sensible persons. Members like SrNair and Gadkari should not represent us."

PDF has minuscule / negligible internet traffic tbh.

 

[Nilgiri]

It may happen that I personally detest a point of view expressed by an Indian; you mean that is not allowed?

Yes this was a slip up, I should have qualified with something like "reasonably"

"It is about the Indian representation to be of sensible persons. Members like SrNair and Gadkari should not represent us."

PDF has minuscule / negligible internet traffic tbh.

It does pretty well for a defence forum though

 

[King Julien]

It does pretty well for a defence forum though

True.. but Indian representation not a factor here.. we are doing very well on Internet imo, on Twitter etc where large number of international users are present.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Joe I agree with all of this (where you are coming from)...but I would prefer jamahir to answer/clarify.

No problem with that, dear Sir; just en passant might I mention that you are now squarely in the same mode of thinking of others you have yourself remarked upon: you weren't asked in, @jamahir never addressed you, but you are asking me to stay out!!

Just like some others who were never asked in, but invited themselves in; and then, on their own thread, asked me and others to stay out.

Strange feeling, isn't it?

Not a problem, as I said; whatever use of asymmetry floats your boat.

 

[Nilgiri]

True.. but Indian representation not a factor here.. we are doing very well on Internet imo, on Twitter etc where large number of international users are present.

Ew twitter.

you weren't asked in, @jamahir never addressed you, but you are asking me to stay out!!

Where did I mention or ask you to stay out friend?

I mentioned I'd prefer @jamahir to clarify what he said....ok let me qualify "if he would like to"....its his words after all, he knows best what he meant by them.

If he doesn't want to, thats fine. If he wants to hit a like on your posts as some substitute or affirmative as he is doing right now rather than speaking for himself, thats also fine.

If someone else answered a jamahir question posed to me (like jamahir posed in #82203) regardless of who invited who and who interjected where, he would also be within his right to ask clarification from me directly. Let me clarify I never asked you or anyone else to "stay out".

None of this matters Joe...I was developing a certain heading with another purpose in mind (depending on what Jamahir answered) than what this now has become...and I goofed up which I will explain to you later somewhere else.

Just like some others who were never asked in, but invited themselves in; and then, on their own thread, asked me and others to stay out.

Come now, comparing them to this is a stretch isn't it? But that was a far more funnier fleshed out episode overall.

It is not for anyone to say who can and can't participate in discussion anywhere here. I often make it a point to specifically interject when it is attempted...and there is absolutely nothing wrong I see with how you answered here too (I hit a thanks after all).

 

[jamahir]

we are doing very well on Internet imo, on Twitter etc where large number of international users are present.

Twitter is largely unregulated, just like YouTube comments section, therefore a lot of right-wing poisonous statements find free expression and these statements many times drown out sensible statements. PDF which is much smaller than Twitter has reasonably good moderation which allows for good discussion for a reasonable time. Also, PDF allows for long text discussions which is difficult to achieve on Twitter.

Let's get down to brass tacks.

Do YOU represent India?

Who says?

I can claim to represent the better, calm face of India.

If someone else answered a jamahir question posed to me (like jamahir posed in #82203) regardless of who invited who and who interjected where, he would also be within his right to ask clarification from me directly.

What should I make of those Indian members who didn't sign on the Code of Conduct ?

 

[padamchen]

Twitter is largely unregulated, just like YouTube comments section, therefore a lot of right-wing poisonous statements find free expression and these statements many times drown out sensible statements. PDF which is much smaller than Twitter has reasonably good moderation which allows for good discussion for a reasonable time. Also, PDF allows for long text discussions which is difficult to achieve on Twitter.



I can claim to represent the better, calm face of India.



What should I make of those Indian members who didn't sign on the Code of Conduct ?

You can claim anything.

So can everyone else.

It is noted with a sense of depressive inevitability that you sidestepped my direct question to you.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Joe Shearer]

Where did I mention or ask you to stay out friend?

I mentioned I'd prefer @jamahir to clarify what he said....ok let me qualify "if he would like to"....its his words after all, he knows best what he meant by them.

If he doesn't want to, thats fine. If he wants to hit a like on your posts as some substitute or affirmative as he is doing right now rather than speaking for himself, thats also fine.

If someone else answered a jamahir question posed to me (like jamahir posed in #82203) regardless of who invited who and who interjected where, he would also be within his right to ask clarification from me directly. Let me clarify I never asked you or anyone else to "stay out".

Point taken; there was never an actual discouragement, but it was amusing to see that it was not felt relevant to explain on my own behalf that jamahir speaking for me was speaking for a hypothetical position that is not mine.

I write this with a strong sense of the ridiculous; the whole matter is a tangled one.

Come now, comparing them to this is a stretch isn't it? But that was a far more funnier fleshed out episode overall.

Of course.

If I took a neutered view of your post, what would constitute grounds for disagreement? If there was no cause for disagreement, what would allow me to intervene and to be ponderously funny about your treatment of poor jamahir? I suspect also, from the disjointed nature of some of the exchanges, that the two of you were dealing with one of my specials, somebody from my ignore list. It is easy to find out by displaying ignored content, but it is not something that will get done; what was obnoxious then is likely to remain obnoxious now, so why bother?

 

[Sharma Ji]

great, they junked the thread

FCUK Gauruv Arya, mind your own business SOB. I really despise this character, trying to act friendly in the video.

Low IQ fools just end up being their own worst nightmare.

Gotta listen to the other side, spl the enemy.

Man, I listen to and watch hours and hours of people who I don't agree with just to get a better understanding. Echo chambers are safety blankets for people who are just not very sharp.

Why are you even interested in geopolitics or politics or maters of wars or religious conflict if a blanket denial and ostrich strategy and circle jerking and censoring people is your thing ?

Itna triggered ? Grow up, kid.

I asked you earlier, how old are you ? Anything 25+ will greatly disappoint me and have me feeling sorry for your old folks.

Like some guy's signature on here. "Anything that irritates you about others will lead to a greater understanding of yourself" -Jung (I think)

to add to it, it'll also lead you to a greater understanding of the situation at hand.