Theos-Talk Archives (July 2006 Message tt00266)

In all the unmoderated Internet maillists I have participated, I have
noticed two characteristics -  (1) number of messages which most
participants treat as noise (some of them long msgs)  and ignore them - just
hit the delete key and (2) a few participants dominate the msg traffic by
posting a large number of messages. Many of us who have been participating
in maillists since the early days of Internet have by now learnt to deal
with them on a daily basis. The alternative is to moderate the maillist. In
a very active maillist, it is almost impossible workload to moderate due to
enormous time it takes to read  every message and post permissible ones with
or without modification. Also in the past some of the moderated maillists
were failures since the Internet culture, especially with the new generation
which is growing up in the Internet world. There is also the problem with
those who grew up in the pre-Internet culture having problems dealing with
the new world where Internet is an integral part of the modern communication
where controls are difficult to establish. (By the way one of the well known
theosophists who had held organizational positions had a very hard time
dealing with Internet even while this personal incessantly publicly talked
about Internet. Whenever  I corresponded with this person via e-mail, I
always received responses not in e-mail but in a nicely laser printed hard
copy reply by snailmail, cost being no consideration since the expense did
not come from the writer's pockets).

So as things stand today, there are no easy answers. A lot of patience helps
in that things tend to settle down when the incessant posters get tired when
no one seem to respond to their messages.

mkr
On 7/12/06, pedro oliveira <prmoliveira@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Eldon,
>
> On a very few occasions here you have pointed out how special an
> opportunity this list represents for those interested in Theosophy,
> from whatever school of thought they belong to. More recently, when
> posts to the list became openly offensive and violent, you again had
> sobering words of warning to the list participants. These examples
> show to me that, as the listowner, you can make your view not only
> heard but also considered.
>
> As you know, I have tried to make a tentative return to discussions
> on the list, while attempting to ignore the still small voice which
> said it was probably not a good idea. As usual, one of the replies
> came loaded with semi-direct accusations and inuendos. Instead of
> joining the accusatory game I have decided to write to you.
>
> What do we have in theos-talk as a pattern these days? I will give
> you a few examples as I see them: postings telling scholars what
> they can and what they cannot write about a given subject; an
> attempt to obliterate dissent and differences of opinion through
> open bullying, intimidation and character assassination; an
> enthronization of H. P. Blavatsky as the Apostle of the Ultimate
> Truth, and a merciless hunting down of those who criticize her or
> who present controversial information about her work for
> consideration; a relentless, callous and coward victimization of the
> Theosophical Society with International Headquarters at Adyar,
> portrayed as the ultimate den of everything dark in the world; and a
> practical contempt for the essence of Theosophy - Universal
> Brotherhood without distinction.
>
> Please allow me to quote from a well-known letter of one of the
> Teachers of Madame Blavatsky:
>
> "It is a universally admitted fact that the marvellous success of
> the Theosophical Society in India is due entirely to its principle
> of wise and respectful toleration of each other's opinions and
> beliefs. Not even the President-Founder has the right directly or
> indirectly to interfere with the freedom of thought of the humblest
> member, least of all to seek to influence his personal opinion. It
> is only in the absence of this generous consideration, that even the
> faintest shadow of difference arms seekers after the same truth,
> otherwise earnest and sincere, with the scorpion-whip of hatred
> against their brothers, equally sincere and earnest. Deluded victims
> of distorted truth, they forget, or never knew, that discord is the
> harmony of the Universe." (ML #120, chronological sequence)
>
> Please don't understand the above as a reaction to a personal
> attack. I am trying to express a real concern for theos-talk as a
> potential forum for theosophical dialogue. You have achieved that,
> Eldon, with the 100th issue of "Theosophy World", wherein differing
> views were expressed respectfully. Why should theos-talk be allowed
> to become a forum of intolerance, an online Inquisition room wherein
> vindictive judgements as dispensed practically everyday? Do you want
> to be part of such a list? Does it honor the magnanimous spirit of
> the Wisdom-Tradition?
>
> With best wishes, fading hope and ubiquitous sadness,
>
> Pedro Oliveira
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]