Theos-Talk Archives (July 2010 Message tt00118)

HI Erica,

I certainly did not mean to suggest the Brazilian section should not be welcome. I just thought they were over represented: that is, more speakers from that section than was to be expected based on membership numbers etc. 

As for any controversy about that section: there are serious doubts about how much influence the actual members have on the administration. 

Katinka


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Erica L. Georgiades" <eletzerich@...> wrote:
>
> I am surprised to know the list is censored. As member of theos-talk for many 
> years, the element of freedom was always present and everyone could post.
> 
> I think that Eldon and Ramadoss should discuss about the current policy of 
> censoring posts, and restore the list to its normal activities. 
> 
> 
> Those persons who were censored, should have send their post to  theos-net along 
> with a protest for censoring. 
> 
> 
> Ramadoss many members have been complaining about the secrecy which pervades  
> the moves of some leaders and sections. All the conflict that happened in the 
> last elections, was mainly because of the proposal to remove the rights of 
> members to vote for International President. And you are one of the persons who 
> most complained about such tactics. 
> 
> 
> So if we want a T.S. more democratic and open, we should settle the example. The 
> price paid for a democratic system, is that not always pleasant things are said 
> or stated. But people have freedom to express themselves. 
> 
> 
> About the speculation Katinka mentioned, this do not surprise me at all. After 
> all there is group in the T.S. sustaining and promoting a theory of conspiracy 
> and specially attacking the Brazilian Section. There was a post even considering 
> the invitation of Ricardo Lindemann a controversial choice, because he belongs 
> to the Brazilian Section. If I am not wrong Katinka made such a comment. Maybe 
> in the mind of some people, every Brazilian should be excluded from activities, 
> as the Section is the target for different accusations. 
> 
> 
> My personal opinion on this matter is that: if there is a problem with the 
> Brazilian Section, the members of the Section should deal with it, and solve the 
> problem. Furthermore we should be careful before considering excluding someone 
> because of accusations without substantial proofs. Because exclusions are made 
> not only in online forums, but also in activities organized by the T.S.. So or 
> we are against this kind of policy in every area, or we are hypocrites. 
> 
> 
> As far as I know the people who are using many e-mails and sending anonymous 
> messages with threats, is the side "against Radha." Actually they went as far as 
> to create an e-mail address in hushmail, to send their anonymous messages so 
> they cannot be traced.  So a person, who does this kind of things, naturally 
> will think that others can do it also. 
> 
> 
> Either way the point of this post is that censoring posts or excluding people is 
> not right.
> 
> 
> Erica
> 
> ps. Someone may say that messages had to be pre-approved in the blog I created, 
> during the controversy of the disfranchising proposal, so there was not freedom. 
> This is the way I prefer to work with blogs, even my personal blog has the same 
> policy.  But nobody can ever say that a comment sent to that blog was censored. 
> Such a thing never happened.
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Spirituality <mail@...>
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wed, July 28, 2010 3:00:38 PM
> Subject: Theos-World Re: Comments on Independence and impartiality
> 
>   
> Hi MKR,
> 
> That's great to hear, but not really what people are concerned about I think.
> 
> Let's go back a bit. At the Theosophical World Congress, and through email in 
> the days after it, several people expressed their concern to me that your 
> management of theos-talk was not impartial. That is: you have sensored people 
> who had perfectly decent contributions to make (Preetthi and Govert and perhaps 
> more) and seemed informed extraordinarily quickly of any movement on the part of 
> Radha/Pedro etc. 
> 
> 
> Hearing that, and thinking that Eldon was still ultimately in charge of this 
> list, I asked him to use his authority to get the list back on track, or close 
> it. Whichever he preferred. He probably contacted you - and the below is your 
> response. 
> 
> 
> Personally I don't give a darn whether you make money on theosophy or not. 
> Obviously it is easier to be critical for those who aren't in the employ of the 
> TS, but that doesn't mean that those who aren't - are necessarily impartial. 
> They're just financially independent of the TS - which is the situation for most 
> of us here. 
> 
> 
> For me, and several of my correspondents - the question is: why has theos-talk 
> stopped being the open forum it used to be? 
> 
> 
> And more specifically: how come you use several email addresses to post on here? 
> What are you trying to hide? In fact, the speculation has come up that MKR hides 
> several people on several continents. 
> 
> 
> Now I'm all for freedom and would have preferred for theosophical.ning.com to 
> stay open for everybody and the search engines. Glad some of us set up 
> theosophy.net last year: it IS open (just checked). 
> 
> 
> However, I'm also all for accountability. The internet gives us all the 
> opportunity to hide behind screen names and loose all fairness in the process. 
> No need to be polite or just when nobody knows who you are. 
> 
> 
> Now - in case this gets censored - I will be saving the text of this on my pc. I 
> don't really want to post it elsewhere, but I do think the below has made a 
> response necessary. 
> 
> 
> I will also be deleting any links to theos-talk on my own sites BTW as it 
> doesn't seem like this forum serves any purpose to the theosophical movement any 
> more. 
> 
> 
> Best wishes,
> Katinka Hesselink
> 
> Disclosure: The Dutch TS paid me for their recent redesign, so I guess I'm not 
> independent by your definition. That hasn't stopped me from speaking out where I 
> see fit though.
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, MKR <mkr777@> wrote:
> >
> > All organized entities such as governments, business corporations, spiritual
> > organizations, and even individual leaders and politicians are always on the
> > look out for opportunities to influence the individuals such as membership
> > and even media people to either keep them in line or influence them to act
> > or write in ways supporting the activities and action of the organizations
> > and its leaders or even act as cat�s paws to handle touchy issues. Many
> > times, clever individuals and leaders will stay back in the background and
> > let others do their dirty work.
> > 
> > In organizations, range of techniques used may be outright giving money
> > grants, reimbursing the travel expenses, offer platforms to lecture or write
> > or even help them to move up in the leadership ladder. In theosophical
> > circles, due to the common membership in other officially unconnected
> > organizations, the fear of paying a price will keep writers and lecturers in
> > line with official wishes.
> > 
> > The reason why I bring this up is because it is necessary to clarify my
> > personal position in all activities and writings related to theosophical and
> > other issues. Firstly, as I have mentioned several times before, I maintain
> > my independence because of several reasons. I am not looking forward to hold
> > any elected office in future and I have an independent lively hood which
> > does not depend on TS or any of its members. Also in the past I have never
> > received any manner of financial support from TS or any of its members.
> > 
> > I am reiterating the above so that the newbees are very clear as to where I
> > come from and the independence gives some credibility to what I write on
> > this and other theosophical forums. In today�s Internet environment,
> > transparent and open clarification of the independence issue is good for
> > anyone in the cyberspace - writers, participants, website owners, website
> > operators etc. I hope the above clarification helps.
> > 
> > 
> > MKR
> > 
> > There is No Religion Higher Than Truth
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> 
> 
>  
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>