-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet From - Fri Feb 07 08:26:43 1997 Received: from news2.acs.oakland.edu (141.210.10.152) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:39:57 -0500 Received: (from news@localhost) by news2.acs.oakland.edu (8.8.5/8.7.4) id GAA24263; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 06:45:27 -0500 To: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net Path: ppp-pm01-dy-23.ouhub.moa.net From: FG <@moa.net> Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: Re: censorship Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:47:14 -0500 Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. Lines: 44 Message-ID: <32FB1642.7642@moa.net> References: <"6x4fSB.A.tlE.InP-y"@bounty> Reply-To: @moa.net NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.moa.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) To: John Haukness CC: @moa.net X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1895 John Haukness wrote: > > Dear Friends: This folly of incinuating that both the United States > National Spiritual Assembly and the Dialogue staff were 50 to 50% both to > blame and both were miscommunicating, seems to me a very good way to > elevate the station of the Journal staff, as well as to think that we are > qualified to judge our National Spiritual Assemblies. It's difficult to conceive of it in any other way.... I subscribed to Dialogue for one year and then allowed my subscription to expire because I was less than impressed with the level of discussion.... However, I respected the editors for their endeavors, for at least attempting to develop a forum other than the prevailing insipid ones.... Folks, we do not > know, what goes on within our National Spiritual Assemblies, we do not > know what the group dynamics are, and for people connected to dialogue to > post here and portray that they can give us a picture of what the > National Spiritual Assembly did or did not do, I find as poor a paractice > as sitting in marriage counseling and focusing on the absent spouse, it > just doesn't work. au revoir > Some marriages are palpably dysfunctional and apparently so to outside observers.... One doesn't need advanced pyschiatric training to notice a husband oppressively beating his wife and family has certain problems, etc.... There's a terrible contradiction in this religion between wanting to attractive capable people and then driving them out of the Faith with incessant banality and attempts to coerce and oppress their consciences.... It's no wonder nobody in their right mind would want anything to do with the Bahai Faith. > haukness@tenet.edu > 2015 Bay St. N. > Texas City, TX 77590 > voice/fax 409-948-6074 > One planet one people please! -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 07 08:26:45 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.55) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:40:02 -0500 Message-ID: <32FB1653.3224@moa.net> Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:47:31 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups To: John Haukness CC: @moa.net Subject: Re: censorship References: <"6x4fSB.A.tlE.InP-y"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1895 John Haukness wrote: > > Dear Friends: This folly of incinuating that both the United States > National Spiritual Assembly and the Dialogue staff were 50 to 50% both to > blame and both were miscommunicating, seems to me a very good way to > elevate the station of the Journal staff, as well as to think that we are > qualified to judge our National Spiritual Assemblies. It's difficult to conceive of it in any other way.... I subscribed to Dialogue for one year and then allowed my subscription to expire because I was less than impressed with the level of discussion.... However, I respected the editors for their endeavors, for at least attempting to develop a forum other than the prevailing insipid ones.... Folks, we do not > know, what goes on within our National Spiritual Assemblies, we do not > know what the group dynamics are, and for people connected to dialogue to > post here and portray that they can give us a picture of what the > National Spiritual Assembly did or did not do, I find as poor a paractice > as sitting in marriage counseling and focusing on the absent spouse, it > just doesn't work. au revoir > Some marriages are palpably dysfunctional and apparently so to outside observers.... One doesn't need advanced pyschiatric training to notice a husband oppressively beating his wife and family has certain problems, etc.... There's a terrible contradiction in this religion between wanting to attractive capable people and then driving them out of the Faith with incessant banality and attempts to coerce and oppress their consciences.... It's no wonder nobody in their right mind would want anything to do with the Bahai Faith. > haukness@tenet.edu > 2015 Bay St. N. > Texas City, TX 77590 > voice/fax 409-948-6074 > One planet one people please! -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Mon Feb 10 04:52:49 1997 Received: from drew.berry.edu (168.31.232.19) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 09 Feb 1997 23:46:50 -0500 Received: from odin.berry.edu (odin.berry.edu [168.31.232.26]) by drew.berry.edu (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id WAA14885; Sun, 9 Feb 1997 22:59:14 -0500 Received: from ODIN/SpoolDir by odin.berry.edu (Mercury 1.21); 10 Feb 97 00:03:35 -400 Received: from SpoolDir by ODIN (Mercury 1.30); 10 Feb 97 00:03:06 -400 From: "Susan Maneck" Organization: Berry College To: talisman@umich.edu Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 00:03:04 EST Subject: censorship Reply-to: SManeck@berry.edu CC: srb-mods@bcca.org, "Ahang Rabbani" , @moa.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.52) Message-ID: <24C950A0DFE@odin.berry.edu> X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6387 ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- From: Self To: smsmith@mail.cybertrails.com,srb-mods@bcca.org Subject: Re: censorship Cc: Rick Boatright,Richard C. Detweiler Reply-to: SManeck@Berry.Edu Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 10:21:02 EST Dear Michelle, You wrote: > I am returning this submission to you unposted for a couple of > reason. Firstly, much of the material in it is repetative in nature. > This seems to have been hashed and rehashed. This may seem "rehashed" to you because of that mistaken "repost" I made which was an extension of an earlier post. As you recall I withdrew that post. This post restates some of the remarks I made in that unposted "repost" that was not posted earlier. In other words, you've read it all before, but unless I've gotten completely confused over what got posted and what didn't our readers have not. I hope I'm not getting too convoluted here. Secondly, I think that > the coverage of this issue is getting too deep for much of the > general readership of soc.religion.bahai. Please keep in mind that > many of the readers of this newsgroup are seekers. They do not have > the background in the Faith that you and others who have been > discussing this issue, have. > > In reading through the many postings on this thread, there is much > repetion, charges and countercharges, and it gets very confusing to > follow. If someone who is interested in learning the fundamentals of > the Faith were to jump in in the middle of all this, what would be > their first impression? I ask you to consider this in light of the > delicate nature of this thread. I too, am concerned with the impressions new believers have of the faith. Typically Baha'is tend to present themselves as having all the answers and expect seekers to have all the questions. I submit this approach is often counterproductive and in fact often means that those who are attracted to the Faith reinforce a rather rigid approach to it. In other words, if we insist on concentrating on the "fundamentals" as you say, we will produce Fundamentalists. Judging by the amount of backchannel mail I get from participants on this list I am inclined to think that seekers are attracted rather than repelled by my postings. At any rate, unless you can show me from the posts that actually ended up on the list , that the posting below, is redundant I formally request that the moderators reconsider their rejection of this post. Susan P.S. I find the subject-line of this rejected post to be rather ironic, don't you? > > Sincerely, > S. Michele Smith > co-moderator, soc.religion.bahai > [respond to: srb-mods@bcca.org] > > > > From: "Susan Maneck" > > Organization: Berry College > > To: bahai-faith@bcca.org > > Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 20:39:14 EST > > Subject: Re: censorship > > Reply-to: SManeck@berry.edu > > Priority: normal > > > John writes: > > > > > >Dear Friends: This folly of incinuating that both the United States > > > >National Spiritual Assembly and the Dialogue staff were 50 to 50% both to > > > >blame and both were miscommunicating, seems to me a very good way to > > > >elevate the station of the Journal staff, as well as to think that we are > > > >qualified to judge our National Spiritual Assemblies. Folks, we do not > > > >know, what goes on within our National Spiritual Assemblies, we do not > > > >know what the group dynamics are, and for people connected to dialogue to > > > >post here and portray that they can give us a picture of what the > > > >National Spiritual Assembly did or did not do, I find as poor a paractice > > > >as sitting in marriage counseling and focusing on the absent spouse, it > > > >just doesn't work. au revoir > > > > > > Dear John, > > > > If it is inappropriate to judge our NSA is not egually inappropriate > > to judge the Dialogue staff? Mistakes were made. Apparently action > > was initiated against these Baha'is under the mistaken premise that > > they had distributed the article to delegates prior to the Convention. > > Those sanctions were not withdrawn even after the mistake was > > realized, perhaps because of the intemperate tone of the > > communications which these individuals had with the institutions in > > the course of the investigation. . But anger and even paranoia are a > > human thing to express when one believes a grave injustice has been > > done to them. Thereafter these Baha'is felt antagonistic towards the > > Administration. Talisman created a network of people some of whom > > shared similarily negative experiences with the Administration. As > > one former Talismanian put it; a skewed discourse developed which was > > "grounded in the assumption that these experiences were were somehow > > normative or key to understanding the essential characteristics of > > Baha'i organizational practices." As these experiences were related > > and recycled over and over again an exceedingly negative "group think" > > developed. These extreme expressions created concern in the World > > Centre which launched an investigation into the loyalty of these > > persons and Covenantal issues were raised. That action, however, only > > confirmed these individuals worst fears over the nature of our > > administrative structure. > > > > Grave errors, it seems to me, were made on many peoples parts, and the > > damage done probably cannot be entirely undone. The question is where > > do we go from here? To what extent might prevailing attitudes within > > the Baha'i community which tend to stifle open discussions lead to > > extreme negative criticisms when people suddenly find they have a > > forum? We all know from our own experience that when we "sit" on our > > anger, it often explodes down the road in an inappropriate manner. How > > do we nuture a "safe" environment within our feasts and on the floors > > of our conventions and within our Institutions in which Baha'is will > > feel encourage to express themselves fully and without recrimination? > > > > I hope these are the issues we can now focus on. > > > > Susan > > > > > > > From - Tue Feb 25 06:19:08 1997 Received: from most.fw.hac.com (151.168.2.3) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 24 Feb 1997 17:00:18 -0500 Received: by most.fw.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA00285; Mon, 24 Feb 97 17:05:47 EST Received: from most.fw.hac.com(151.168.254.82) by gw1.hughes-defense-comm.com via smap (3.2) id xma000222; Mon, 24 Feb 97 17:05:20 -0500 Received: by most (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26942; Mon, 24 Feb 97 17:05:18 EST Received: from ss2.fw.hac.com(151.168.145.200) by most via smap (V1.5khhunt) id sma026708; Mon Feb 24 17:00:07 1997 Received: from 151.168.146.14 (mac-14) by ss2.uiv (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20621; Mon, 24 Feb 97 16:59:56 EST Message-Id: <33120F5A.7A89@most.fw.hac.com> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 16:59:55 -0500 From: Thomas Butler Organization: Hughes Magnavox DACE X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: @MOA.NET Subject: Censorship Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 804 I will support the idea of a talk.religion.bahai newsgroup because I believe that both moderated and non-moderated newsgroups have utility for different individuals. I enjoy both type of environments depending upon my mood. I did take the time to review several of your "censored" items and noted that in some of your submissions, it appears that there have been attacks on the individual as well as the idea. Under the consultative rules of Baha'is that sort of attack is not permitted. It is not surprising to me that those types of submissions were censored by the Baha'i moderator. Once again, I support your position to establish a talk.religion.bahai newsgroup and wish you the very best in its implementation. Best Regards, Tom Butler Home email: tombutler9@aol.com From - Tue Feb 11 15:00:17 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.183) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 11 Feb 1997 13:52:03 -0500 Message-ID: <3300C195.2C61@moa.net> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 13:59:33 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups CC: srb-mods@bcca.org Subject: Re: censorship and a new group References: <5do64e$4f2@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 3499 MR JAMES WOOD wrote: > > This whole thread is a puzzle to me. The instances of censorship that > have been mentioned are never with exact data. No evidence except the > word of the individuals, which is as good as mine, certainly.But that > is anecdotal and not evidence. What has happened here? Are the > moderators well meaning fanatics who will only allow certain views > that coincide with their own? Lets be out front about this. > I have had one or two rejected for TONE. That's all it takes. Just your tone. And THEY are the judge of it. Off with your tone! Imagine! Tone! Just because > I waxed indignant and then enraged at the idea of ritual mutilation > of a woman's body they rejected it! Well! I have never been so > insulted in all my life! But, as a friend once told me,if I really > feel that way then I should give him a call because he could surely > insult me in ways I can not now imagine.And I find it hard to be > threatened in this electronic medium. Or insulted. Or intellectually > hampered. > Ah, some will say, you think of yourself as an intellectual? Hardly. > My education extended beyond high school only with the aid of a > library. Nothing more formal. So who am I to say this? an older guy > who has had experience with CBs and wants no more! > For those of you who may not be familiar with this peculiar > phenomenon, I recommend a tape made in the late 50s by Mr. Sears and > friends in LA. In it he says, "they would extinguish the human soul > if they had the power." I've never forgotten that. Growing in the > Faith was interesting in Santa Fe. They were everywhere in those days. > We were young and eager and sure that nothing could touch us in this > marvelous Revelation that had set our limbs ablaze.After a fairly > short time we found out WHY we are advised to avoid them like a > plague. Friends, CBs spread a spiritual disease that will never be > cure by intellectual discourse. They cannot be convinced, will never > give up and will make you sick if you are around them. > In this medium we are around each other as we cannot be any other > way. Like the ad says, its just the mind here, and it is their minds > that are twisted.Those of you who wish a 'free' forum have that to > look forward to. > There have been a number of messages lately by people who > describe themselves as 'baby bahais', a designation I object to but > is descriptive. Do you really want to expose these fresh wonderful > flowers to that crud? Hold it. What about THEIR feelings? Is it sacriligious to say that? The moderators are all so concerned about everybodys' feelings but permit this religious hatred? I'm a Bahai, and I'm not a covenant breaker, but I find this offensive, inconsistent, disgraceful. Let's hear from the moderators on this one. Why did you permit this to pass your scrutiny? What about this TONE? Probably not. There are some of you who might > benefit from such a forum but i cannot see the use except to > disseminate ideas that are peculiar and therefore have been rejected. > > These moderators MIGHT just want to go to a movie or eat out once > in a while instead of having this load on them. Cool! But I > abstain!!! > with love, > Jim > > ____ > "Say; So great is the glory of the Cause of God that even the blind > can perceive it..." > Baha'u'llah -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 14 08:40:25 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.60) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 14 Feb 1997 08:32:29 -0500 Message-ID: <33046B2B.3A76@moa.net> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 08:39:55 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups To: "Peggy J. Borell" Subject: Re: censorship and a new group References: <5dqa75$s1b@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1862 Peggy J. Borell wrote: > [clip] > > Better, I think to use your vote to let prevent the negative consequences > such an "open" forum could create. To abstain is to let others decide, to > vote one way or the other is to make a choice. > This is not a legitimate reason for voting no. Read the USEnet guidelines posted on news.groups and here for an explanation of the voting process. Given what you say above, you should abstain. That's the only ethical choice under the guidelines for forming newsgroups. > I think it is our duty to do whatever we can to protect the Faith, and to be > sure that it is being presented in a way that attracts others to the > Messenger and the message. Covenant Breakers who are given free reign to > express their opinions on a Baha'i-supported forum will slow down the > progress of the Faith, and indeed, the progress of mankind. > Your assumption here is that talk.religion.bahai would be devoted to attacking the Faith. I don't conceive of it in that way. Surely, there will be some individuals who will or believe it has been attacked. Others will have the opportunity to defend the Faith--no small thing to dismiss.... In my rationale on t.r.bahai, I address the covenant breaker issue. Again, those appointed to that role in the Faith will have to speak up and address them, I suppose. We can't throw out the baby with the bath water. Perhaps someone else has a better solution. To me, it is not to continue with a moderated, censored forum.... Internet is for everyone on this earth, and not just Bahais who want filtered water.... Such an imperfect world.... How do we manage to go on? > Allah'u'abhá! > > Peggy > > "God grant that the light of unity may envelop the whole earth." ~ Bahá'u'lláh -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 07 08:26:51 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.55) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 08:17:26 -0500 Message-ID: <32FB2D27.25ED@moa.net> Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 08:24:55 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups To: ahmadi Subject: Censorship of Dialogue References: <"1BeSf.A.GYG._-R-y"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 2113 ahmadi wrote: > > At 08:54 AM 2/5/97 EST, you wrote: > [clip] > > As it was told on Talisman, the article actually passed review. What > puzzles me is that no one thought the title was inappropriate - You seem to think this is self-evident. Read Swift. It's a masterpiece though perhaps you think it should be burned.... Oh, that upstart satirist! those > invloved are professional writers and must have known about the > original and they were, it seems to me, refering to members of > Insititutions whose members must also have been aware of the > original since most them are also professional writers or > educated with regards to English literature. > Then they should have understood the error of suppressing the Irish.... and not try to micro-manage every thought on the face of the earth.... if that's what they did. > >Certainly the title was provocative and showed poor judgement, but > >the reaction of the NSA does seem extreme. > > > [clip] > > Was the reaction too extreme? I think that judgement, whether > in favor or not, should be expressed directly to the NSA. > Great. So we're creating a new world disorder in which every little thought must pass scrutiny by some assembly or another.... Where will it stop? I suggest only on the rack.... > I was trying to express my personal feelings. And I must > say it hurts me deeply to see young, talented Baha'is leave the > Faith or distance themselves from the Institutions - but it is > not my place to judge their decisions in that regard. > What do you expect? They were driven out.... > I have no doubt about the fortunes of the Baha'i Faith and > I think that our individual actions are irrelevant in the big > picture - the end is known, it's the path that gets rough > at times. > Boy, do I ever have doubts.... Twenty years worth.... I can't understand why people keep dreaming about the troops storming in when the atmosphere seems to be getting increasingly oppressive.... > regards, > -saman -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 07 08:26:47 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.55) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 07:54:45 -0500 Message-ID: <32FB27D4.6252@moa.net> Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 08:02:12 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups To: ahmadi Subject: CENSORSHIP of Dialogue References: <"FOUP8D.A.v4D.7oC-y"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 3388 ahmadi wrote: > > The "Dialogue" matter has been brought up again and I hope something > good can come out of it. > [clip] > > The editors of "Dialgoue" wrote an article in which suggestions > were made to tweek the Baha'i electoral process and named it > "A Modest Proposal". > > 1. Was that an appropriate title? > It was an excellent title alluding to a worthy tradition in Western civilization, where the article was to appear, incidentally. What's the matter, don't you recognize the allusion? > 2. Was attempting to publish such an article, with such a > title an appropriate channel for making suggestions to the > Institutions of the Faith? > I don't see anything wrong with it. No reason why alone the magazine should have been intolerantly crushed. > My answers: > > 1. No - as Susan said the choice for the title is "mischieveous". > The original was a satire and its use, as far as I can see, had > little with the content of the article and therefore, it seems to > me, was a reference to something else. > Such things evoke satire in the human soul. It's a healthy literary response to oppression and tyranny. You're demonizing their intents. Speak your mind. Have the courage to say what you think. That right is guaranteed us in the Bahai Writings, remember? > 2. No - the authors of the article could have made the suggestions > at their respective district conventions or at the national convention > since two were among the delegates. They could have even made the > suggestions directly to the Universal House of Justice. Instead, > it seems, they decided to go public with their ideas and use the > disturbing title of "A Modest Proposal". > The Bahai Faith is going to rule the world, but it can't tolerate a few young men and women expressing their opinions.... Ah, gee, folks, why aren't the masses pouring into this religion? Ooops! Is that satire? (Alas, I know better.... It's my shameful grounding in the Western literary tradition that I need to outgrow and rise above....) > This type of discourse would not be out of place in secular America - > in fact that is how a lot of things are done. Oh EVIL, SECULAR AMERICA! The Wanton of the West! Now, what region of the world is the cradle of spirituality? Any guesses? Preferable any day of the week to the way things are done, let's say, in Iran.... But the Order of Baha > can not be subsumed within how American democracy has developed. > Consultation is, or should be, inherently reverant - not only > reverant to the Holy Figures but reverant to its Instituions > as well as the Baha'i community. Let's put them in a dark pit and rip out their tongues! By God, we all know what reverent means...and they fall short.... What was done, probably with > the best of intentions, I think, created at adverserial atmosphere > which, while at the heart of the relationship between the press and > the government in most Western socities, is alien to the teachings > of Baha'u'llah. > I don't believe Baha'u'llah conceived of the relationship between the press and government as lackies to leaders--propaganda for the annointed. [clip] > > regards, > -saman > I hope some good can come of it too, but have my doubts.... -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Mon Feb 03 19:33:08 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.67) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 03 Feb 1997 19:07:30 -0500 Message-ID: <32F67F80.4304@moa.net> Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 19:14:56 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups To: ahmadi@why.net Subject: Censorship on S.R.B. References: <"Hxa3HB.A.D1G.h0_8y"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1535 Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. You might want to avoid that one. The others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. ------ Subject: CENSORED by s.r.bahai Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 16:20:31 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> To: ahmadi@why.net Newsgroups: news.groups References: 1 Subject: Re: Censorship on s.r.bahai-2 Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 09:51:12 +0000 From: ahmadi@why.net (ahmadi) To: @moa.net You say srb is censored for content, I, and Graham and Isaac say it is not. The only way to settle it is to give an example where you posted an article about, say, the marriages of Baha'u'llah, and the moderators said something like that subject is off limits. In the absence of such a discussion your points are moot. If you can get 100 people to vote yes for your proposal, then that is fine - I, for one, am not going to vote at all because as one disinterested party suggested, I do not want to artificially raise the 100 vote limit. -saman On second thought, sure, I'll post some examples. I am not afraid of letting other people think and decide for themselves. I'll post them to news.groups today in a few minutes. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Mon Feb 03 15:01:10 1997 Received: from where.why.net (206.160.169.4) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 03 Feb 1997 10:45:10 -0500 Received: from technico.why.net ([207.211.120.176]) by where.why.net (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-11525) with SMTP id AAA191 for <@moa.net>; Mon, 3 Feb 1997 09:52:53 -0600 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970203095112.006ab23c@why.net> X-Sender: ahmadi@why.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 09:51:12 +0000 To: @moa.net From: ahmadi@why.net (ahmadi) Subject: Re: Censorship on s.r.bahai-2 X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 561 You say srb is censored for content, I, and Graham and Isaac say it is not. The only way to settle it is to give an example where you posted an article about, say, the marriages of Baha'u'llah, and the moderators said something like that subject is off limits. In the absence of such a discussion your points are moot. If you can get 100 people to vote yes for your proposal, then that is fine - I, for one, am not going to vote at all because as one disinterested party suggested, I do not want to artificially raise the 100 vote limit. -saman From - Tue Feb 04 05:36:56 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.52) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 05:15:58 -0500 Message-ID: <32F70E1E.45AF@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 05:23:26 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: boatright@cjnetworks.com Subject: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------9F9248852BE" X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 2623 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------9F9248852BE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Since my server is still having some trouble, I'm emailing this directly to you. I'd appreciate your posting it on soc.religion.bahai. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA --------------9F9248852BE Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.67) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 03 Feb 1997 19:07:30 -0500 Message-ID: <32F67F80.4304@moa.net> Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 19:14:56 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups To: ahmadi@why.net Subject: Censorship on S.R.B. References: <"Hxa3HB.A.D1G.h0_8y"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. You might want to avoid that one. The others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. ------ Subject: CENSORED by s.r.bahai Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 16:20:31 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> To: ahmadi@why.net Newsgroups: news.groups References: 1 Subject: Re: Censorship on s.r.bahai-2 Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 09:51:12 +0000 From: ahmadi@why.net (ahmadi) To: @moa.net You say srb is censored for content, I, and Graham and Isaac say it is not. The only way to settle it is to give an example where you posted an article about, say, the marriages of Baha'u'llah, and the moderators said something like that subject is off limits. In the absence of such a discussion your points are moot. If you can get 100 people to vote yes for your proposal, then that is fine - I, for one, am not going to vote at all because as one disinterested party suggested, I do not want to artificially raise the 100 vote limit. -saman On second thought, sure, I'll post some examples. I am not afraid of letting other people think and decide for themselves. I'll post them to news.groups today in a few minutes. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA --------------9F9248852BE-- From - Tue Feb 04 05:36:59 1997 Received: from ivan.iecc.com (205.238.207.65) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 05:26:00 -0500 Received: by ivan.iecc.com (Smail3.1.29.1 #15) id m0vriFX-000I6Na; Tue, 4 Feb 97 05:37 EST Message-Id: Date: Tue, 4 Feb 97 05:37 EST Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai From: uu-automod@iecc.com To: @moa.net Precedence: bulk X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 161 Your message to soc.religion.unitarian-univ has been received and has been posted to the newsgroup. Regards, The soc.religion.unitarian.univ reception robot From - Fri Feb 07 08:26:36 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.55) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 05:56:56 -0500 Message-ID: <32FB0C3B.8D7@moa.net> Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:04:27 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: boatright@cjnetworks.com Subject: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 551 [Please reject or post this message.] Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 07 06:04:27 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32FB0C3B.8D7@moa.net> Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:04:27 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: boatright@cjnetworks.com Subject: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 551 [Please reject or post this message.] Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 07 16:22:12 1997 Received: from topeka.cjnetworks.com (206.52.158.250) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 11:49:48 -0500 Received: from rick.cjnetworks.com (Port37.cjnetworks.com [206.52.158.47]) by topeka.cjnetworks.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id KAA06831; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:55:18 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199702071655.KAA06831@topeka.cjnetworks.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Rick Boatright" Organization: Topeka Business Computers To: Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:56:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai Reply-to: boatright@cjnetworks.com CC: srb-mods@bcca.org, smsmith@mail.cybertrails.com Priority: normal In-reply-to: <32FB0C3B.8D7@moa.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.50) X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 945 Fred, I am copying the on-duty mod on this, While I am not on duty this week, it was my understanding that this WAS posted. it is certainly postable, and well within charter, and I thought that it was up. I'll cc michele on this right now, and she will probebly check her news site and it if isn't there, re-post later today. Rick B > [Please reject or post this message.] > > Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on > soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The > file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't > mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The > others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. > > Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > From - Sat Feb 08 16:25:20 1997 Received: from drew.berry.edu (168.31.232.19) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 08 Feb 1997 09:49:06 -0500 Received: from odin.berry.edu (odin.berry.edu [168.31.232.26]) by drew.berry.edu (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id JAA04500 for <@moa.net>; Sat, 8 Feb 1997 09:01:53 -0500 Received: from ODIN/SpoolDir by odin.berry.edu (Mercury 1.21); 8 Feb 97 10:05:28 -400 Received: from SpoolDir by ODIN (Mercury 1.30); 8 Feb 97 10:04:59 -400 From: "Susan Maneck" Organization: Berry College To: Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 10:04:51 EST Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai Reply-to: SManeck@berry.edu Priority: normal In-reply-to: <"amxzC.A.nBG.8lA_y"@bounty> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.52) Message-ID: <2269C063ACD@odin.berry.edu> X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 892 Is this the one you were looking for? Susan > To: bahai-faith@bcca.org > From: FG <@moa.net> > Subject: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai > Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. > Reply-to: @moa.net > Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 22:09:30 +0000 > [Please reject or post this message.] > > Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on > soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The > file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't > mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The > others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. > > Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > From - Sat Feb 08 17:29:29 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.166) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 08 Feb 1997 16:40:11 -0500 Message-ID: <32FCF47F.1C98@moa.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 16:47:43 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: SManeck@berry.edu Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <2269C063ACD@odin.berry.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1624 Susan Maneck wrote: > > Is this the one you were looking for? Actually, it's not. However, I was surprised they posted this one.... I've reposted twenty messages or so of mine in the past that they've rejected. I'm worried my internet server is goofing up. Having you seen them on news.groups? Are you familiar with what that is? It's just another newsgroup like soc.religion.bahai. It's supposed to be the one that discussion about forming a newsgroup takes place in. It's under the news.* hierarchy. I've uploaded the censored messages twice and I'm still not able to find them there though I've told everyone on earth they're there.... > > Susan > > > To: bahai-faith@bcca.org > > From: FG <@moa.net> > > Subject: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai > > Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. > > Reply-to: @moa.net > > Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 22:09:30 +0000 > > > [Please reject or post this message.] > > > > Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on > > soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The > > file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't > > mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The > > others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. > > > > Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > > unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > > > -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sat Feb 08 16:47:43 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32FCF47F.1C98@moa.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 16:47:43 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: SManeck@berry.edu Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <2269C063ACD@odin.berry.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1626 Susan Maneck wrote: > > Is this the one you were looking for? Actually, it's not. However, I was surprised they posted this one.... I've reposted twenty messages or so of mine in the past that they've rejected. I'm worried my internet server is goofing up. Having you seen them on news.groups? Are you familiar with what that is? It's just another newsgroup like soc.religion.bahai. It's supposed to be the one that discussion about forming a newsgroup takes place in. It's under the news.* hierarchy. I've uploaded the censored messages twice and I'm still not able to find them there though I've told everyone on earth they're there.... > > Susan > > > To: bahai-faith@bcca.org > > From: FG <@moa.net> > > Subject: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai > > Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. > > Reply-to: @moa.net > > Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 22:09:30 +0000 > > > [Please reject or post this message.] > > > > Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on > > soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The > > file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't > > mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The > > others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. > > > > Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > > unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > > > -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sat Feb 08 16:25:21 1997 Received: from megspo1.megsinet.net (206.222.62.232) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 08 Feb 1997 14:20:44 -0500 Received: from ns.megsinet.net ([206.222.63.131]) by megspo1.megsinet.net (post.office MTA v1.9.3b ID# 0-11704) with SMTP id AAA284 for <@moa.net>; Sat, 8 Feb 1997 13:26:42 -0600 Message-ID: <32FCD0CC.4862@megsinet.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 13:15:24 -0600 From: jgoldberg@megsinet.net (Jeffrey Goldberg) Reply-To: jgoldberg@megsinet.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: @moa.net Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <"amxzC.A.nBG.8lA_y"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 901 Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > [Please reject or post this message.] > > Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on > soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The > file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't > mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The > others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. > > Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. The discussion is so controlled that no self-respecting Baha'i or anyone else should post there. I don't understand the newsgroup creation process, but I support you in your quest for an unmoderated newsgroup. From - Sat Feb 08 17:29:26 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.166) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 08 Feb 1997 16:30:31 -0500 Message-ID: <32FCF23B.59C5@moa.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 16:38:03 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jgoldberg@megsinet.net Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <"amxzC.A.nBG.8lA_y"@bounty> <32FCD0CC.4862@megsinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1652 Jeffrey Goldberg wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > [Please reject or post this message.] > > > > Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on > > soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The > > file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't > > mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The > > others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. > > > > Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > > unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and > mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. The > discussion is so controlled that no self-respecting Baha'i or anyone > else should post there. I don't understand the newsgroup creation > process, but I support you in your quest for an unmoderated newsgroup. Thanks for having the courage to say so. Would you consider reposting this to news.groups so others can read it? Discussion about forming talk.religion.bahai is supposed to take place there, on soc.religion.bahai, or crossposted always to news.groups. It's very important that people hear srb is "arbitrary and mean-spirited" from someone other than myself. I can get sense many think so, but they're scared to state it..... You have too vote in a week or two for your opinion to count. Watch for the CFV (Call For Votes). I've posted about twenty messages on news.groups censored in the past too. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sun Feb 09 06:21:59 1997 Received: from megspo1.megsinet.net (206.222.62.232) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 08 Feb 1997 18:48:25 -0500 Received: from ns.megsinet.net ([206.222.63.200]) by megspo1.megsinet.net (post.office MTA v1.9.3b ID# 0-11704) with SMTP id AAA103 for <@moa.net>; Sat, 8 Feb 1997 17:54:21 -0600 Message-ID: <32FD0F87.1AFF@megsinet.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 17:43:03 -0600 From: jgoldberg@megsinet.net (Jeffrey Goldberg) Reply-To: jgoldberg@megsinet.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: @moa.net Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <"amxzC.A.nBG.8lA_y"@bounty> <32FCD0CC.4862@megsinet.net> <32FCF23B.59C5@moa.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1832 Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > Jeffrey Goldberg wrote: > > > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > > > [Please reject or post this message.] > > > > > > Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on > > > soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The > > > file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't > > > mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The > > > others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. > > > > > > Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > > > unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > > > > > > -- > > > Frederick Glaysher > > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > > > I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and > > mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. The > > discussion is so controlled that no self-respecting Baha'i or anyone > > else should post there. I don't understand the newsgroup creation > > process, but I support you in your quest for an unmoderated newsgroup. > > Thanks for having the courage to say so. Would you consider reposting > this to news.groups so others can read it? Discussion about forming > talk.religion.bahai is supposed to take place there, on > soc.religion.bahai, > or crossposted always to news.groups. > > It's very important that people hear srb is "arbitrary and > mean-spirited" > from someone other than myself. I can get sense many think so, but > they're scared to state it..... You have too vote in a week or two for > your opinion to count. Watch for the CFV (Call For Votes). > > I've posted about twenty messages on news.groups censored in the past > too. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA it has been posted. let me know when and how to vote. good luck. From - Sun Feb 09 07:11:21 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.47) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 09 Feb 1997 06:21:35 -0500 Message-ID: <32FDB504.634A@moa.net> Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 06:29:08 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jgoldberg@megsinet.net Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <"amxzC.A.nBG.8lA_y"@bounty> <32FCD0CC.4862@megsinet.net> <32FCF23B.59C5@moa.net> <32FD0F87.1AFF@megsinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 450 Jeffrey Goldberg wrote: > > > it has been posted. let me know when and how to vote. good luck. Thanks a lot. I appreciate your courage. Incidentally, last night a fairly well-known Bahai academic emailed me that she's been censored definitely on the basis of content too.... She's hesitant though to let it be known.... Seems absurd to me, to be censored and accept it.... -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sun Feb 09 06:29:08 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32FDB504.634A@moa.net> Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 06:29:08 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jgoldberg@megsinet.net Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <"amxzC.A.nBG.8lA_y"@bounty> <32FCD0CC.4862@megsinet.net> <32FCF23B.59C5@moa.net> <32FD0F87.1AFF@megsinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 452 Jeffrey Goldberg wrote: > > > it has been posted. let me know when and how to vote. good luck. Thanks a lot. I appreciate your courage. Incidentally, last night a fairly well-known Bahai academic emailed me that she's been censored definitely on the basis of content too.... She's hesitant though to let it be known.... Seems absurd to me, to be censored and accept it.... -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sat Feb 08 16:38:03 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32FCF23B.59C5@moa.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 16:38:03 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jgoldberg@megsinet.net Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <"amxzC.A.nBG.8lA_y"@bounty> <32FCD0CC.4862@megsinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1654 Jeffrey Goldberg wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > [Please reject or post this message.] > > > > Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on > > soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The > > file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't > > mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The > > others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. > > > > Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > > unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and > mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. The > discussion is so controlled that no self-respecting Baha'i or anyone > else should post there. I don't understand the newsgroup creation > process, but I support you in your quest for an unmoderated newsgroup. Thanks for having the courage to say so. Would you consider reposting this to news.groups so others can read it? Discussion about forming talk.religion.bahai is supposed to take place there, on soc.religion.bahai, or crossposted always to news.groups. It's very important that people hear srb is "arbitrary and mean-spirited" from someone other than myself. I can get sense many think so, but they're scared to state it..... You have too vote in a week or two for your opinion to count. Watch for the CFV (Call For Votes). I've posted about twenty messages on news.groups censored in the past too. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sat Feb 08 17:29:30 1997 Received: from drew.berry.edu (168.31.232.19) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 08 Feb 1997 16:43:31 -0500 Received: from odin.berry.edu (odin.berry.edu [168.31.232.26]) by drew.berry.edu (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id PAA06645 for <@moa.net>; Sat, 8 Feb 1997 15:56:15 -0500 Received: from ODIN/SpoolDir by odin.berry.edu (Mercury 1.21); 8 Feb 97 16:59:57 -400 Received: from SpoolDir by ODIN (Mercury 1.30); 8 Feb 97 16:59:43 -400 From: "Susan Maneck" Organization: Berry College To: Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 16:59:43 EST Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai Reply-to: SManeck@berry.edu Priority: normal In-reply-to: <32FCF47F.1C98@moa.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.52) Message-ID: <22D85B809D1@odin.berry.edu> X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 93 No, I have no experience with newsgroups whatsoever. I subscribe directly to SRB. Susan From - Sat Feb 08 17:39:49 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.166) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 08 Feb 1997 17:22:56 -0500 Message-ID: <32FCFE85.5951@moa.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 17:30:29 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: SManeck@berry.edu Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <22D85B809D1@odin.berry.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 199 Okay, thanks. Susan Maneck wrote: > > No, I have no experience with newsgroups whatsoever. I subscribe > directly to SRB. > > Susan -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sat Feb 08 17:30:29 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32FCFE85.5951@moa.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 17:30:29 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: SManeck@berry.edu Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <22D85B809D1@odin.berry.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 201 Okay, thanks. Susan Maneck wrote: > > No, I have no experience with newsgroups whatsoever. I subscribe > directly to SRB. > > Susan -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Mon Feb 10 07:11:57 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.47) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 10 Feb 1997 06:36:16 -0500 Message-ID: <32FF09F0.55EF@moa.net> Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 06:43:44 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups To: "Douglas A. McAdam" Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <"PU_hsC.A.KRF.h9r_y"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 4052 Douglas A. McAdam wrote: > > At 6:19 AM 2/9/97, Robert Moldenhauer wrote: > > Personally, I intend to vote no on talk.religion.bahai. A couple years > >ago the > > soc.culture groups were almost killed by someone posting racist attacks on > > Armenians, do we really want to create another forum open to this kind of > > abuse? > That something happened in the past on another group is not evidence that it will happen in the future on a different group. That Hitler invaded Poland does not prove that the president of Brasil will invade South Africa, though in this world, as Robert Hayden was fond of quoting, "One never know, do one?" > Why would I want another kind of talk.religion.bahai when I already have > one. Because all participants would be able to speak freely their conscience on talk.religion.bahai.... It is unmoderated from without the participants but moderated from > within them. It is called consultation, Baha'i consultation. False. True consultation requires a vote of the community to create a body of believers known as an assembly.... The moderators of srb have not been voted for or appointed, and they themselves admit to this crucial fact. So what we have is unappointed and unelected people making extremely important decisions about what gets a hearing and what does not.... I've read the Bahai Writings for over twenty years and know of no passage that justifies that kind of situation.... It has > rules, it has instructions on how best to communicate. All rules can be abused, even by the well-meaning and well-intentioned. It's the very essence of human historical experience, recorded for centuries. Those of us who > participate have made it a practice to be informed as to what it means, how > it works, what its purpose is and how we can best use it for uniting souls > in reality. > Reads all like code words to me justifying something unpalatable. > This talk. religion. baha'i that I have can be taken to any List on the Net > and operate smoothly with no complaints from moderators or participants. > it thrives on encouraging us to express our opinions fully, frankly and > honestly , tempered with courtesy, tact and wisdom and works quite well in > a moderated or unmoderated List. > It seems to me to be a mere strategem now to say that Bahais can use talk.religion.misc or whatever else and don't need a focused unmoderated newsgroup. What is everyone afraid of? I ask in my child-like simplicity. > If a moderated, or censored list it still allows me to fully express what > is in my heart. Not in my heart, or in the heart of others. Other hearts think they know better. If any of you are feeling your opinions are being > suppressed I suggest you study the art of consultation and the purpose of > the acquisition of virtues, obedience to the Covenant which gives us all > the power and freedom in the world and beyond. > A false response, IMO. Consultation is not oppression and manipulation, nor should it be, I believe. You seem to suggest here that anyone in favor of talk.religion.bahai may be "weak" in the Covenant or lacking virtue. I suggest exactly the opposite may be the case. Further, to bring the covenant into this strikes me as a very unseemly tactic. What are you afraid of? Why do you not trust the human soul, the religious conscience God has given humankind? Has not Abdul-Baha assured us that the spark of truth can only be revealed through the clash of varying opinions? Surely he wouldn't approve of suppressing anyone.... > Peace, > Doug > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Foundation for the Science of Reality<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > Box 561, Waitsfield, VT 05673-phone: 802-496-6883 > - email: dmcadam@madriver.com Incidentally, please everyone crosspost your messages to news.groups, where discussion about talk.religion.bahai is also occurring. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Mon Feb 10 07:11:59 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.47) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 10 Feb 1997 06:49:42 -0500 Message-ID: <32FF0D18.3A1F@moa.net> Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 06:57:12 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups To: Robert Moldenhauer Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <"AmAcUD.A.QpF.cQh_y"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 2185 Robert Moldenhauer wrote: > > In article <"amxzC.A.nBG.8lA_y"@bounty>, @moa.net says... > > > > > >Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > >unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > > > > I have at times had messages rejected, and have raised the question of > censorship. And then accepted it.... As from God.... I believe neither.... I believe the moderators have gone beyond conventional moderation to very real censorship of CONTENT.... I don't believe that's justifiable on the basis of the Bahai Writings, and I don't believe it's "Bahai" to accept it.... Quite the reverse. But in thinking about it, in the end, I've always gotten my point > across. In an adulterated form. Sometimes I rephased it, other times I incorporated the ideas in > another message, most often though I had already made the point in a previous > message. > > Unmoderated Usenet is ugly, it's like hanging out in a sleezy bar, people > attack one another personally. It's full of insults, people repeating > themselves endlessly, and foul language. Not to mention the illegal chain > letter schemes... > I agree that there are many ugly things on some newsgroups. Things I disapprove of too. But I have the freedom to listen or go elsewhere, respond and try to elevate, enlighten, whatever, or condemn.... Unmoderated forms take that right of the free will away.... Someone else knows better. > Personally, I intend to vote no on talk.religion.bahai. I invite you first to read and decide for yourself, in the integrity of your own conscience, the censored messages posted to news.groups.... A couple years ago the > soc.culture groups were almost killed by someone posting racist attacks on > Armenians, do we really want to create another forum open to this kind of > abuse? > Not a reasonable argument. We might get in a car accident if we drive, but we do it every day.... No reason not to create another highway, let's call it a free way. > >Frederick Glaysher > >Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Mon Feb 10 07:12:01 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.47) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 10 Feb 1997 06:55:12 -0500 Message-ID: <32FF0E63.6DBE@moa.net> Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 07:02:43 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups To: Graham Sorenson Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai References: <"JDHJ3C.A.UUF.-4g_y"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1341 Graham Sorenson wrote: > > Dear Frederick. > > As at 0800 GMT Saturday 8th February 1997 the articles you mention have > not appeared on the newsgroup news.groups. This is the second time that > messages you say you have send things to news.groups that have not > appeared there. Neither have you replied to the e-mail I sent to you > saying you were welcome to send the messages to my e-mail box. > I've had a technical problem with my ISP that's prevented me from posting them though I've tried at least five times in the last week. I emailed them to you and a few other people hoping someone will post them for me. Sorry. My apologies. > My comments as to the formation of talk.religion.bahai is that this > newsgroup is not needed, as there are plenty of non-moderated newsgroups > that would be suitable for discussion of Baha'i topics. > -- I believe they not suitable because they're not focused on the Bahai Faith. Talk.religion.misc and so on cover everything under God's good earth, as they say. I believe also that this argument has become a ploy covering more profound issues of disagreement over the forming of talk.religion.bahai.... Let's get them out in the open, please. > Graham Sorenson > https://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 28 06:45:19 1997 Received: from bend.madriver.com (206.67.216.15) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Thu, 27 Feb 1997 21:28:59 -0500 Received: from IP157.MADRIVER.COM by bend.madriver.com (5.65v3.2/1.1.10.5/30Jan97-0109PM) id AA15837; Thu, 27 Feb 1997 22:00:37 -0500 X-Sender: dmcadam@bend.madriver.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 21:36:27 -0500 To: @moa.net From: dmcadam@madriver.com (Douglas A. McAdam) Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai Cc: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 7370 Dear friends- I have been away for two weeks and do not know from this message who said what but I do have some additional thoughts. First of all I don't feel that true consultation takes place only in the manner cited below. Constultation is more than just a principle that Administrative Instutions must use, it is to me a way of life, a way of communicating with hearts and minds in all our various interactions. As such it needs moderation of speech, guidelines, rules, regulations and the like for as we all know and what Fred admits all rules have historically been violated by us human critters. On the whole though we must admit that there would have been more violations without these rules and guidelines. Our process is to become spiritual and we are in need of certain parameters, guidances, education, rules and the like to help us keep on the track. Why would the Manifestation reveal Laws if it were possible that we humans could self-regulate? We are in need of a power greater than ourselves to help us become more spiritualized and operate in love and unity. I do not know if srb. is a self-appointed List of moderators but I do know that anyone who starts a list has the right to set down their own guidelines, rules and regulations. If we don't like them we don't subscribe. If we subscribe then we need to be obedient while we are working to have modifications made. My experience on other lists was that the listowner went out to the participants and asked for consultation as to how best to operate the list. The majority wanted a purpose statement, guidelines, and rules to follow. If there are disgruntled and dissatisfied participants on this srb. list then they have several options open to them - start their own unmoderated list or suggest ways of improving the current list, or simply leave the current list. No one is forced to subscribe or abide by the current list guidelines. Personally I favor an self-regulated List but at this point, as experience appears to indicate, we have not had much success with unmoderated lists and strangely enough it seems to be the more educated folks who violate commonly held rules of communication decency. I would say Fred, that if you feel as strongly as you appear to be about all this that you start your own list by privately contacting the friends and gaining support. This is a way of finding out what will work and what will not. Have you contacted an Institution of the Faith to find out what is the best way to conduct these Lists? Just some random thoughts and believe me I am not afraid of an unmoderated list, my concern is that we achieve love and unity and I really do not want to wade through reams of distasteful, disrespectful and undignified postings as a cost of freedom of speech. I read all the postings and as soon as I see a pattern emerging that has appeared on other lists by the same people I begin to feel less like participating. Maybe we all would do well by rereading the Individual Rights and Freedoms letter. Peace, Doug At 6:43 AM 2/10/97, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > Douglas A. McAdam wrote: > > > > At 6:19 AM 2/9/97, Robert Moldenhauer wrote: > > > Personally, I intend to vote no on talk.religion.bahai. A couple years > > >ago the > > > soc.culture groups were almost killed by someone posting racist attacks on > > > Armenians, do we really want to create another forum open to this kind of > > > abuse? > > > > That something happened in the past on another group is not evidence > that > it will happen in the future on a different group. That Hitler invaded > Poland does not prove that the president of Brasil will invade South > Africa, > though in this world, as Robert Hayden was fond of quoting, "One never > know, > do one?" > > > Why would I want another kind of talk.religion.bahai when I already have > > one. > > Because all participants would be able to speak freely their conscience > on talk.religion.bahai.... > > It is unmoderated from without the participants but moderated from > > within them. It is called consultation, Baha'i consultation. > > False. True consultation requires a vote of the community to create a > body of believers known as an assembly.... The moderators of srb have > not been voted for or appointed, and they themselves admit to this > crucial fact. So what we have is unappointed and unelected people > making extremely important decisions about what gets a hearing and > what does not.... I've read the Bahai Writings for over twenty years > and know of no passage that justifies that kind of situation.... > > It has > > rules, it has instructions on how best to communicate. > > All rules can be abused, even by the well-meaning and well-intentioned. > It's the very essence of human historical experience, recorded for > centuries. > > Those of us who > > participate have made it a practice to be informed as to what it means, how > > it works, what its purpose is and how we can best use it for uniting souls > > in reality. > > > > Reads all like code words to me justifying something unpalatable. > > > This talk. religion. baha'i that I have can be taken to any List on the Net > > and operate smoothly with no complaints from moderators or participants. > > it thrives on encouraging us to express our opinions fully, frankly and > > honestly , tempered with courtesy, tact and wisdom and works quite well in > > a moderated or unmoderated List. > > > > It seems to me to be a mere strategem now to say that Bahais can use > talk.religion.misc or whatever else and don't need a focused unmoderated > newsgroup. What is everyone afraid of? I ask in my child-like > simplicity. > > > If a moderated, or censored list it still allows me to fully express what > > is in my heart. > > Not in my heart, or in the heart of others. Other hearts think they > know better. > > If any of you are feeling your opinions are being > > suppressed I suggest you study the art of consultation and the purpose of > > the acquisition of virtues, obedience to the Covenant which gives us all > > the power and freedom in the world and beyond. > > > > A false response, IMO. Consultation is not oppression and manipulation, > nor should it be, I believe. You seem to suggest here that anyone in > favor of talk.religion.bahai may be "weak" in the Covenant or lacking > virtue. I suggest exactly the opposite may be the case. Further, to > bring the covenant into this strikes me as a very unseemly tactic. > > What are you afraid of? Why do you not trust the human soul, the > religious conscience God has given humankind? Has not Abdul-Baha > assured us that the spark of truth can only be revealed through the > clash of varying opinions? Surely he wouldn't approve of suppressing > anyone.... > > > Peace, > > Doug > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Foundation for the Science of Reality<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > > Box 561, Waitsfield, VT 05673-phone: 802-496-6883 > > - email: dmcadam@madriver.com > > Incidentally, please everyone crosspost your messages to news.groups, > where discussion about talk.religion.bahai is also occurring. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 04 14:24:42 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.53) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:16:46 -0500 Message-ID: <32F78CDF.460F@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:24:16 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.rights.human Subject: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <32F69CA2.2439@ozemail.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 452 Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 04 16:59:57 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.53) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:28:55 -0500 Message-ID: <32F78FB8.541D@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:36:24 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian Subject: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <5d7chq$h7a@news3-gui.server.cableol.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 452 Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 04 16:59:58 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.53) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:31:17 -0500 Message-ID: <32F79046.548@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:38:46 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.culture.israel Subject: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <32EF7C81.20FE@mailbag.com> <32F2D983.682B@the.inner.net> <32F5283D.382E@ix.netcom.com> <01bc121c$4307cc20$35f8cbc7@dialup.netvision.net.il> <32F66B76.A85@no.junk.mail> <32f69ba4.251264024@news.idt.net> <32F6ACBA.6F5A@worldnet.att.net> <32f774a4.306814455@news.idt.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 452 Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 04 16:59:59 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.53) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:38:10 -0500 Message-ID: <32F791E4.15EB@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:45:40 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage Subject: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <32F75ECA.4C13@macdaniel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 452 Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 04 17:00:00 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.53) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:43:35 -0500 Message-ID: <32F79328.16D4@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:51:04 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc Subject: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <32AC292C.1259@pilot.infi.net> <32b192ef.671723@news.gte.net> <32B33326.2B4B@ix.netcom.com> <590oac$f4j@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca> <32B41A54.1036@execpc.com> <32B4A7BA.7DCF622B@wco.com> <32BBC00F.61E1@adelaide.on.net> <32BFF5BE.7721@airmail.net> <32C73567.5620@compassnet.com> <32CA21D2.5002@cleveland.freenet.edu> <32CC6CCF.2610@indyvax.iupui.edu> <5ai06u$d0g@camel0.mindspring.com> <32CCC5A0.3655@okla.net> <32CD25DB.4138@airmail.net> <32CD56CF.EFF@okla.net> <5arsn2$hob@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> <32D45AD9.272E@msn.com> <32E60B6F.54BF@zip.com.au> <32E8F16E.73AB@wgs.co.uk> <32E9F0D3.1CDE@popl.usit.net> <32ea17d2.3663635@news.earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 452 Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 04 17:00:01 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.53) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:47:33 -0500 Message-ID: <32F79417.4C4D@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:55:03 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: talk.religion.buddhism Subject: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <01b9be25$db9f0ae0$a2b498ce@darmaman> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 452 Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 07 08:26:46 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.55) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:56:15 -0500 Message-ID: <32FB1A20.147@moa.net> Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 07:03:44 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: talk.religion.buddhism To: robohen Subject: Re: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <01b9be25$db9f0ae0$a2b498ce@darmaman> <32F79417.4C4D@moa.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 827 robohen wrote: > > On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > > unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > > That's right, it's time to explode their brains too. Robohen, Wow! What a metaphor! I'm more sedate....but I think I follow your drift.... I'd really appreciate your voting, yes or no, though I'm on the Yea side. I've been a Bahai for twenty years and believe there's a real tendency at times not to permit freedom of conscience. An unmoderated newsgroup would go a long way perhaps to helping the situation.... Though merely ripples across the surface of the ancient pond.... -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 04 17:00:02 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.53) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:57:23 -0500 Message-ID: <32F79664.7F03@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 15:04:52 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker Subject: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <5bqpid$q5g@news.bu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 452 Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 04 17:00:06 1997 Received: from brewich.brewich.com (207.90.222.2) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 15:02:12 -0500 Received: (from srpbot@localhost) by brewich.brewich.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA22656; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 14:07:00 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 14:07:00 -0600 (CST) From: "soc.religion.paganism Robomoderator" Message-Id: <199702042007.OAA22656@brewich.brewich.com> To: @moa.net Subject: Re: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <5d7lk3$ov0@clarknet.clark.net> <32F7971F.367@moa.net> In-Reply-To: <32F7971F.367@moa.net> Reply-To: srp-admin@brewich.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 3063 Merry Meet! This is an automatic acknowledgment that your message has been RECEIVED by the robomoderation program for newsgroup soc.religion.paganism. This message has been archived and is being forwarded to a human moderator for review. Note that normally after a certain number of posts new posters make it to the PreApproved list of users whose submissions are approved automatically for faster processing. For your own protection, you are encouraged to obtain a copy of PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) and digitally sign your posts. If you already have PGP, you can request srp-admin@brewich.com to add you to the special list of protected posters. It may prevent someone from misusing your name. Do not ask us how to install PGP, but consult this URL: https://world.std.com/~franl/crypto.html It is not hard and there are a number of user-friendly programs for Windows and Unix that make it's use easy. PGP is NOT required to post to soc.religion.paganism. Look for the charter of soc.religion.paganism at https://www.brewich.com/org/srp/charter.html If you do not want to receive automatic acknowledgments in the future, send email to srp-noack@brewich.com. In the body of the message put NOACK: yourname@yoursite.domain This must be your address as it appears on your From: line when you post. Do not put anything else on the line, and do NOT add your full name in parenthesis or surround your address with <>'s or it will NOT work! - RoboModerator. > From news@news2.acs.oakland.edu Tue Feb 4 14:06:45 1997 > Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by brewich.brewich.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA22614 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 14:06:36 -0600 (CST) > Received: from news2.acs.oakland.edu by relay7.UU.NET with ESMTP > (peer crosschecked as: news2.acs.oakland.edu [141.210.10.152]) > id QQcbme08701; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:06:06 -0500 (EST) > Received: (from news@localhost) by news2.acs.oakland.edu (8.8.5/8.7.4) id PAA11344; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:06:06 -0500 > To: soc-religion-paganism@uunet.uu.net > From: FG <@moa.net> > Newsgroups: soc.religion.paganism > Subject: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai > Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. > Message-ID: <32F7971F.367@moa.net> > References: <5d7lk3$ov0@clarknet.clark.net> > Reply-To: @moa.net > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) > > Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on > soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The > file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't > mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The > others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. > > Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > From - Tue Feb 04 17:00:04 1997 Received: from brewich.brewich.com (207.90.222.2) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 15:01:54 -0500 Received: (from srpbot@localhost) by brewich.brewich.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA22662; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 14:07:01 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 14:07:01 -0600 (CST) From: "soc.religion.paganism Robomoderator" Message-Id: <199702042007.OAA22662@brewich.brewich.com> To: @moa.net Subject: Re: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <5d7lk3$ov0@clarknet.clark.net> <32F79731.296D@moa.net> In-Reply-To: <32F79731.296D@moa.net> Reply-To: srp-admin@brewich.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 3064 Merry Meet! This is an automatic acknowledgment that your message has been RECEIVED by the robomoderation program for newsgroup soc.religion.paganism. This message has been archived and is being forwarded to a human moderator for review. Note that normally after a certain number of posts new posters make it to the PreApproved list of users whose submissions are approved automatically for faster processing. For your own protection, you are encouraged to obtain a copy of PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) and digitally sign your posts. If you already have PGP, you can request srp-admin@brewich.com to add you to the special list of protected posters. It may prevent someone from misusing your name. Do not ask us how to install PGP, but consult this URL: https://world.std.com/~franl/crypto.html It is not hard and there are a number of user-friendly programs for Windows and Unix that make it's use easy. PGP is NOT required to post to soc.religion.paganism. Look for the charter of soc.religion.paganism at https://www.brewich.com/org/srp/charter.html If you do not want to receive automatic acknowledgments in the future, send email to srp-noack@brewich.com. In the body of the message put NOACK: yourname@yoursite.domain This must be your address as it appears on your From: line when you post. Do not put anything else on the line, and do NOT add your full name in parenthesis or surround your address with <>'s or it will NOT work! - RoboModerator. > From news@news2.acs.oakland.edu Tue Feb 4 14:06:51 1997 > Received: from relay6.UU.NET (relay6.UU.NET [192.48.96.16]) by brewich.brewich.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA22619 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 14:06:48 -0600 (CST) > Received: from news2.acs.oakland.edu by relay6.UU.NET with ESMTP > (peer crosschecked as: news2.acs.oakland.edu [141.210.10.152]) > id QQcbme10289; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:06:25 -0500 (EST) > Received: (from news@localhost) by news2.acs.oakland.edu (8.8.5/8.7.4) id PAA11351; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:06:25 -0500 > To: soc-religion-paganism@uunet.uu.net > From: FG <@moa.net> > Newsgroups: soc.religion.paganism > Subject: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai > Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. > Message-ID: <32F79731.296D@moa.net> > References: <5d7lk3$ov0@clarknet.clark.net> > Reply-To: @moa.net > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) > > Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on > soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The > file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't > mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The > others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. > > Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > From - Tue Feb 04 17:00:11 1997 Received: from brewich.brewich.com (207.90.222.2) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 16:22:36 -0500 Received: (from srpbot@localhost) by brewich.brewich.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA28803; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:27:46 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:27:46 -0600 (CST) From: "soc.religion.paganism Robomoderator" Message-Id: <199702042127.PAA28803@brewich.brewich.com> To: @moa.net Subject: Re: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <5d7lk3$ov0@clarknet.clark.net> <32F7971F.367@moa.net> In-Reply-To: <32F7971F.367@moa.net> Reply-To: srp-admin@brewich.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 646 Merry Meet! This is an automatic acknowledgment that your message has been APPROVED for posting to moderated newsgroup soc.religion.paganism. Look for the charter of soc.religion.paganism at https://www.brewich.com/org/srp/charter.html If you do not want to receive automatic acknowledgments in the future, send email to srp-noack@brewich.com. In the body of the message put NOACK: yourname@yoursite.domain This must be your address as it appears on your From: line when you post. Do not put anything else on the line, and do NOT add your full name in parenthesis or surround your address with <>'s or it will NOT work! From - Tue Feb 04 17:00:18 1997 Received: from brewich.brewich.com (207.90.222.2) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 16:41:57 -0500 Received: (from srpbot@localhost) by brewich.brewich.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA02587; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:47:03 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:47:03 -0600 (CST) From: "soc.religion.paganism Robomoderator" Message-Id: <199702042147.PAA02587@brewich.brewich.com> To: @moa.net Subject: Re: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <5d7lk3$ov0@clarknet.clark.net> <32F79731.296D@moa.net> In-Reply-To: <32F79731.296D@moa.net> Reply-To: srp-admin@brewich.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 646 Merry Meet! This is an automatic acknowledgment that your message has been APPROVED for posting to moderated newsgroup soc.religion.paganism. Look for the charter of soc.religion.paganism at https://www.brewich.com/org/srp/charter.html If you do not want to receive automatic acknowledgments in the future, send email to srp-noack@brewich.com. In the body of the message put NOACK: yourname@yoursite.domain This must be your address as it appears on your From: line when you post. Do not put anything else on the line, and do NOT add your full name in parenthesis or surround your address with <>'s or it will NOT work! From - Wed Feb 05 07:05:25 1997 Received: from netcom.netcom.com (192.100.81.100) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 22:34:21 -0500 Received: from localhost (ghen@localhost) by netcom.netcom.com (8.6.13/Netcom) id TAA12251; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 19:39:52 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 19:39:52 -0800 (PST) From: Global Hindu Electronic Network X-Sender: ghen@netcom To: Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> Subject: Re: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai In-Reply-To: <32F7979E.7036@moa.net> Message-ID: X-Url: https://www.hindunet.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 965 Hello, Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.hindu. We do not accept postingthat are not directly related to Hindu dharma. The following posting can therefore not be accepted. Please send it to a more rellevent newsgroup regards, ajay shah moderator, soc.religion.hindu On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on > soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The > file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't > mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The > others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. > > Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an > unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > ------------------------------------------------------------------- Mail posts to: ghen@netcom.com : https://www.hindunet.org/srh_home/ From - Mon Feb 10 04:52:56 1997 Received: from alumni.caltech.edu (131.215.50.234) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 10 Feb 1997 02:45:03 -0500 Received: (from mughal@localhost) by alumni.caltech.edu (8.8.3/8.7.3) id XAA08615; Sun, 9 Feb 1997 23:50:34 -0800 (PST) From: Asim Mughal Message-Id: <199702100750.XAA08615@alumni.caltech.edu> Subject: Re: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai To: @moa.net Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 23:50:32 -0800 (PST) Cc: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net, srg-mod@alumni.caltech.edu In-Reply-To: <32F797C7.39FB@moa.net> from "Frederick Glaysher" at Feb 4, 97 03:10:47 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 922 Dear Frederick Glaysher, (Greetings), The discussions on a newsgroups should take place on 'news.groups' not on individual newsgroups. Reason being, each group is for specific discussion of its topic according to its charter. If you are not discussing gnosis, your submission does not belong here. I am returning your submission to soc.religion.gnosis back without approval. Thank you. /Iraj Moderator ] ] Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on ] soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The ] file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. Unless you don't ] mind a long wait, you might want to avoid that one. The ] others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. ] ] Watch for the CFV and please vote YES for the creation of an ] unmoderated, uncensored forum: talk.religion.bahai ] -- ] Frederick Glaysher ] Rochester Hills, Michigan USA ] ] From - Tue Feb 11 13:21:15 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <3300B89A.C20@moa.net> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 13:21:14 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Shumita Subject: Re: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <5d8s39$9oc@news.bu.edu> <19970211155701.KAA29180@ladder01.news.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 407 Shumita wrote: > > Why is this being posted here? I don't read Bahai newsgroup and I don't > care. Its like people complaining > about moderators of our newsgroup on some random forums. > > Shumita Sorry, to annoy you. I've known Sikhs who were interested in discussion about other religions, including the Bahai Faith. That's all. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 11 13:42:32 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.183) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 11 Feb 1997 13:13:40 -0500 Message-ID: <3300B89A.C20@moa.net> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 13:21:14 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Shumita Subject: Re: Censorship on Soc.Religion.Bahai References: <5d8s39$9oc@news.bu.edu> <19970211155701.KAA29180@ladder01.news.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 405 Shumita wrote: > > Why is this being posted here? I don't read Bahai newsgroup and I don't > care. Its like people complaining > about moderators of our newsgroup on some random forums. > > Shumita Sorry, to annoy you. I've known Sikhs who were interested in discussion about other religions, including the Bahai Faith. That's all. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 04 05:36:58 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.52) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 05:22:09 -0500 Message-ID: <32F70F8F.382A@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 05:29:35 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel Subject: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human References: <32DC067C.17DD@post1.com> <19970115040300.XAA21237@ladder01.news.aol.com> <32DD6DC8.5413@interport.net> <5blc21$8k0@news-in.iadfw.net> <32E03D5B.2914@interport.net> <5bsgdi$bn3@library.airnews.net> <32E43E98.37F5@interport.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1827 Subject: Censorship on S.R.B. Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 19:14:56 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> To: ahmadi@why.net Newsgroups: news.groups References: 1 Since a few people have requested examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, I've posted them to news.groups. The file CENSORED#1--S.R.B. is a 740k file. You might want to avoid that one. The others are brief excerpts of 10k or so. ------ Subject: CENSORED by s.r.bahai Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 16:20:31 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> To: ahmadi@why.net Newsgroups: news.groups References: 1 Subject: Re: Censorship on s.r.bahai-2 Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 09:51:12 +0000 From: ahmadi@why.net (ahmadi) To: @moa.net You say srb is censored for content, I, and Graham and Isaac say it is not. The only way to settle it is to give an example where you posted an article about, say, the marriages of Baha'u'llah, and the moderators said something like that subject is off limits. In the absence of such a discussion your points are moot. If you can get 100 people to vote yes for your proposal, then that is fine - I, for one, am not going to vote at all because as one disinterested party suggested, I do not want to artificially raise the 100 vote limit. -saman On second thought, sure, I'll post some examples. I am not afraid of letting other people think and decide for themselves. I'll post them to news.groups today in a few minutes. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 04 05:36:51 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.45) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 05:07:27 -0500 Message-ID: <32F70C1E.2012@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 05:14:55 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: talisman@umich.edu, irfan@umich.edu Subject: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai--examples Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------4D9D2C443F20" X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1822 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------4D9D2C443F20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA --------------4D9D2C443F20 Content-Type: message/news Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-ID: <32F6569F.59E6@moa.net> Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 16:20:31 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups To: ahmadi@why.net Subject: CENSORED by s.r.bahai References: <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Path: zeus.moa.net!ppp-pm01-dy-16.ouhub.moa.net Subject: Re: Censorship on s.r.bahai-2 Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 09:51:12 +0000 From: ahmadi@why.net (ahmadi) To: @moa.net You say srb is censored for content, I, and Graham and Isaac say it is not. The only way to settle it is to give an example where you posted an article about, say, the marriages of Baha'u'llah, and the moderators said something like that subject is off limits. In the absence of such a discussion your points are moot. If you can get 100 people to vote yes for your proposal, then that is fine - I, for one, am not going to vote at all because as one disinterested party suggested, I do not want to artificially raise the 100 vote limit. -saman On second thought, sure, I'll post some examples. I not afraid of letting other people think and decide for themselves. I'll post them to news.groups today in a few minutes. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA --------------4D9D2C443F20-- From - Tue Feb 04 09:02:29 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.38) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 08:22:21 -0500 Message-ID: <32F739CB.402D@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 08:29:47 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Censorship Re: Some Thoughts References: <"rrwi9B.A.QyF.YO-8y"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 2395 Sen McGlinn wrote: > > [clip] > Kavian, > I think you are confusing two quite different things here. > Submissions to journals everywhere are selected in some way. This is > not what Dr Cole is referring to. As you must be aware, most Baha'i > journals are then required to submit the material they have selected > on academic and quality criteria to a review panel of the National > Spiritual Assembly who then vet it again on their own criteria > (which are usually not specified). So, with my publisher's hat on > for the moment, I got some materials for a collection of essays on > Baha'i theology. I rejected some, reworked others in consultation > with the authors, and eventually sent my selection off for the > National Assembly's review. They reply (eventually) saying that 6 > are acceptable and 3 are not. Wipe out 33% of my investment. No > reason, no consultation, no indication of the criteria. And not > accidentally, two of those three were the best papers in the book, > papers which didn't nibble around the edges but took big bites, > conceptually interesting and challenging papers, with a thorough > grounding in history, in one case, and in the texts in the other. > This is the 'review' to which writers and academics and publishers > object. It acts as a deliberate brake on intellectual development, > to prevent ideas which are too far ahead of current understandings > seeing the light. Thank God, it doesn't work - writers just go > around it. That doesn't make it smell any nicer. > > I participate as a reviewer for Baha'i studies journals, but I do > not participate in the later kind of 'review' (but I am not pointing > the finger at those who do). The two systems are quite distinct. This > is one good reason for dropping the euphemism of 'review' and calling > the later system censorship - It seems to be extended to email and newsgroup discussion.... review sounds to the layman like > something that gets written after publication, and to the academic > it sounds like the sort of material selection system which journals > have to raise their *academic* standards. > > Sen > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Sen McGlinn Sen.McGlinn@Bahai.NL > *** -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 04 17:00:20 1997 Received: from cliff.cybertrails.com (205.180.32.134) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 16:44:44 -0500 Message-ID: Received: from smsmith ([205.180.50.69]) by cliff.cybertrails.com (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with SMTP id AAB75; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 14:50:28 -0700 Comments: Authenticated sender is From: smsmith@mail.cybertrails.com To: @moa.net Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 14:55:01 +0000 Subject: Re: Censorship Re: Some Thoughts CC: srb-mods@bcca.org Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42) X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 3223 Mr. Glaysher, Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. However, I am again going to request that you edit down the included text. As the texts to which you are responding have already been posted, it is not necessary to quote them so extensively. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, S. Michele Smith co-moderator, soc.religion.bahai [respond to: srb-mods@bcca.org] > To: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net > From: FG <@moa.net> > Subject: Censorship Re: Some Thoughts > Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 08:29:33 -0500 > Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. > Reply-to: @moa.net > Sen McGlinn wrote: > > > > > [clip] > > Kavian, > > I think you are confusing two quite different things here. > > Submissions to journals everywhere are selected in some way. This is > > not what Dr Cole is referring to. As you must be aware, most Baha'i > > journals are then required to submit the material they have selected > > on academic and quality criteria to a review panel of the National > > Spiritual Assembly who then vet it again on their own criteria > > (which are usually not specified). So, with my publisher's hat on > > for the moment, I got some materials for a collection of essays on > > Baha'i theology. I rejected some, reworked others in consultation > > with the authors, and eventually sent my selection off for the > > National Assembly's review. They reply (eventually) saying that 6 > > are acceptable and 3 are not. Wipe out 33% of my investment. No > > reason, no consultation, no indication of the criteria. And not > > accidentally, two of those three were the best papers in the book, > > papers which didn't nibble around the edges but took big bites, > > conceptually interesting and challenging papers, with a thorough > > grounding in history, in one case, and in the texts in the other. > > This is the 'review' to which writers and academics and publishers > > object. It acts as a deliberate brake on intellectual development, > > to prevent ideas which are too far ahead of current understandings > > seeing the light. Thank God, it doesn't work - writers just go > > around it. That doesn't make it smell any nicer. > > > > I participate as a reviewer for Baha'i studies journals, but I do > > not participate in the later kind of 'review' (but I am not pointing > > the finger at those who do). The two systems are quite distinct. This > > is one good reason for dropping the euphemism of 'review' and calling > > the later system censorship - > > It seems to be extended to email and newsgroup discussion.... > > review sounds to the layman like > > something that gets written after publication, and to the academic > > it sounds like the sort of material selection system which journals > > have to raise their *academic* standards. > > > > Sen > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Sen McGlinn Sen.McGlinn@Bahai.NL > > *** > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > From - Wed Feb 05 07:05:23 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.42) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 17:04:54 -0500 Message-ID: <32F7B448.65C@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 17:12:24 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: smsmith@mail.cybertrails.com Subject: Censorship: Some thoughts Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 915 > Sen McGlinn wrote: > > > > > [clip] > > > > I participate as a reviewer for Baha'i studies journals, but I do > > not participate in the later kind of 'review' (but I am not pointing > > the finger at those who do). The two systems are quite distinct. This > > is one good reason for dropping the euphemism of 'review' and calling > > the later system censorship - > It seems now to be regularly extended to email and newsgroup discussion.... > > review sounds to the layman like > > something that gets written after publication, and to the academic > > it sounds like the sort of material selection system which journals > > have to raise their *academic* standards. > > > > Sen > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Sen McGlinn Sen.McGlinn@Bahai.NL > -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Tue Feb 04 17:12:24 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32F7B448.65C@moa.net> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 17:12:24 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: smsmith@mail.cybertrails.com Subject: Censorship: Some thoughts Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 917 > Sen McGlinn wrote: > > > > > [clip] > > > > I participate as a reviewer for Baha'i studies journals, but I do > > not participate in the later kind of 'review' (but I am not pointing > > the finger at those who do). The two systems are quite distinct. This > > is one good reason for dropping the euphemism of 'review' and calling > > the later system censorship - > It seems now to be regularly extended to email and newsgroup discussion.... > > review sounds to the layman like > > something that gets written after publication, and to the academic > > it sounds like the sort of material selection system which journals > > have to raise their *academic* standards. > > > > Sen > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Sen McGlinn Sen.McGlinn@Bahai.NL > -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Thu Feb 06 09:05:42 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32F9E536.40F8@moa.net> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 09:05:42 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bill@netagw.com CC: cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu Subject: CFV & RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 5748 RFD: talk.religion.bahai I have participated in the required RFD discussion. No changes have been made in the text of the RFD. Response to the RFD usually fell into two categories, for and against. A few people hadn't made up their minds. Several respondents were against the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup simply because it was either about a religion, and people always disagree about religion, or because it was unmoderated and would lead to flame wars. I responded that because people do disagree, from time to time, that alone is no valid reason for opposing the creation of an unmoderated forum. I emphasized that people must be responsible for the expression of their own ideas in a respectful fashion. I pointed out that I believe soc.religion.bahai is heavily censored. My motive for proposing this group is to prevent others from squelching the expression of free religious conscience and belief. I don't advocate flame wars, nor do I advocate censorship. While there may be times in which individuals will go too far, they will at least have the opportunity to express their opinions. Others will have the opportunity to hear them, learn from them, disagree, tell them why, and so. To me, it seems the essence of human communication. Some people stated censorship does not exist on soc.religion.bahai and asked for examples of it. I responded by posting 20 examples of it to news.groups that I have experienced and invited them to read and decide for themselves. Much discussion revolved around the issue to Bahais of covenant breakers, i.e., people who have been declared so by the Bahai administration, a sort of religious ostracism. Soc.religion.bahai is moderated and apparently bans these people from posting to it. The concern was that without a moderator, who would ban them? To me this issue is not a valid one for preventing the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith. I suggested repeatedly that someone can speak up and tell them they're wrong or someone in the Bahai administration appointed to that role can. That seems reasonable to me. Insisting that only moderated or censored newsgroups are appropriate to the Bahai Faith seems to miss the freedom of the human conscience most religions respect. Others felt there are too many newsgroups now or Bahais should use soc.religion.misc for unmoderated discussion. Neither holds water in my opinion because talk.religion.bahai would serve a real need for the internet community, Bahai or not, and soc.religion.misc is just too miscellaneous and not focused on the Bahai Faith, which is what I'm suggesting. No one suggested changes in the RFD. Discussion has all been around the above issues. Several people supported it as much needed and offering Bahais some place else to post to than the moderated newgroup soc.religion.bahai. Others seemed to agree that censorship exists on soc.religion.bahai. Others, I believe, are afraid to express an opinion. talk.religion.bahai unmoderated Proponent: Frederick Glaysher @MOA.net Mentor: Christopher Stone cbstone@phoenix.Princeton.EDU CFV DISTRIBUTION: Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,soc.religion.bahai, soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc They are all moderated except the last one. Pointers will appear in the following newsgroups: soc.religion.unitarian-univ,soc.religion.eastern,soc.religion.gnosis, soc.religion.paganism,soc.religion.quaker,soc.religion.sikhism, soc.religion.vaishnava,soc.atheism,talk.religion.buddhism, talk.religion.newage and the following mailing lists: Talisman@umich.edu Submit directly to: Talisman@umich.edu List honors Reply-To: headers yes List allows non-members to post messages yes Irfan@umich.edu Submit to: jrcole@umich.edu List honors Reply-To: headers yes List allows non-members to post messages yes RATIONALE: talk.religion.bahai All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the Bahai faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this proposed newsgroup would meet that need. The proponent intends that talk.religion.bahai will complement, rather than supplant, the existing moderated group soc.religion.bahai. The establishment of unmoderated companion groups is a well-accepted practice on Usenet. This newsgroup will be part of the talk.* hierarchy, which is exclusively for unmoderated groups. CHARTER: talk.religion.bahai All topics or ideas relevant to the Bahai faith -- its history, teachings, theology -- and so on would be appropriate areas for discussion. Crossposting of articles not specifically relevant to the Bahai faith is strongly discouraged. Also discouraged are personal messages, large ASCII graphics, special-format files, and any postings of a purely commercial nature. Readers are asked not to start or prolong flamewars and excessive crossposts. Articles may be crossposted to soc.religion.bahai -- subject, of course, to the approval of the moderator of that group. Readers may also post articles that have been rejected from soc.religion.bahai, so long as they conform to the charter above. END CHARTER. ------- Bill, I hope I've got it right this time. Formatting 24 spaces is hard in Netscape. There's no ruler bar. Is this the way it should be? -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA @MOA.net From - Thu Feb 06 09:06:48 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.38) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Thu, 06 Feb 1997 08:58:13 -0500 Message-ID: <32F9E536.40F8@moa.net> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 09:05:42 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bill@netagw.com CC: cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu Subject: CFV & RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 5746 RFD: talk.religion.bahai I have participated in the required RFD discussion. No changes have been made in the text of the RFD. Response to the RFD usually fell into two categories, for and against. A few people hadn't made up their minds. Several respondents were against the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup simply because it was either about a religion, and people always disagree about religion, or because it was unmoderated and would lead to flame wars. I responded that because people do disagree, from time to time, that alone is no valid reason for opposing the creation of an unmoderated forum. I emphasized that people must be responsible for the expression of their own ideas in a respectful fashion. I pointed out that I believe soc.religion.bahai is heavily censored. My motive for proposing this group is to prevent others from squelching the expression of free religious conscience and belief. I don't advocate flame wars, nor do I advocate censorship. While there may be times in which individuals will go too far, they will at least have the opportunity to express their opinions. Others will have the opportunity to hear them, learn from them, disagree, tell them why, and so. To me, it seems the essence of human communication. Some people stated censorship does not exist on soc.religion.bahai and asked for examples of it. I responded by posting 20 examples of it to news.groups that I have experienced and invited them to read and decide for themselves. Much discussion revolved around the issue to Bahais of covenant breakers, i.e., people who have been declared so by the Bahai administration, a sort of religious ostracism. Soc.religion.bahai is moderated and apparently bans these people from posting to it. The concern was that without a moderator, who would ban them? To me this issue is not a valid one for preventing the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith. I suggested repeatedly that someone can speak up and tell them they're wrong or someone in the Bahai administration appointed to that role can. That seems reasonable to me. Insisting that only moderated or censored newsgroups are appropriate to the Bahai Faith seems to miss the freedom of the human conscience most religions respect. Others felt there are too many newsgroups now or Bahais should use soc.religion.misc for unmoderated discussion. Neither holds water in my opinion because talk.religion.bahai would serve a real need for the internet community, Bahai or not, and soc.religion.misc is just too miscellaneous and not focused on the Bahai Faith, which is what I'm suggesting. No one suggested changes in the RFD. Discussion has all been around the above issues. Several people supported it as much needed and offering Bahais some place else to post to than the moderated newgroup soc.religion.bahai. Others seemed to agree that censorship exists on soc.religion.bahai. Others, I believe, are afraid to express an opinion. talk.religion.bahai unmoderated Proponent: Frederick Glaysher @MOA.net Mentor: Christopher Stone cbstone@phoenix.Princeton.EDU CFV DISTRIBUTION: Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,soc.religion.bahai, soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc They are all moderated except the last one. Pointers will appear in the following newsgroups: soc.religion.unitarian-univ,soc.religion.eastern,soc.religion.gnosis, soc.religion.paganism,soc.religion.quaker,soc.religion.sikhism, soc.religion.vaishnava,soc.atheism,talk.religion.buddhism, talk.religion.newage and the following mailing lists: Talisman@umich.edu Submit directly to: Talisman@umich.edu List honors Reply-To: headers yes List allows non-members to post messages yes Irfan@umich.edu Submit to: jrcole@umich.edu List honors Reply-To: headers yes List allows non-members to post messages yes RATIONALE: talk.religion.bahai All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the Bahai faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this proposed newsgroup would meet that need. The proponent intends that talk.religion.bahai will complement, rather than supplant, the existing moderated group soc.religion.bahai. The establishment of unmoderated companion groups is a well-accepted practice on Usenet. This newsgroup will be part of the talk.* hierarchy, which is exclusively for unmoderated groups. CHARTER: talk.religion.bahai All topics or ideas relevant to the Bahai faith -- its history, teachings, theology -- and so on would be appropriate areas for discussion. Crossposting of articles not specifically relevant to the Bahai faith is strongly discouraged. Also discouraged are personal messages, large ASCII graphics, special-format files, and any postings of a purely commercial nature. Readers are asked not to start or prolong flamewars and excessive crossposts. Articles may be crossposted to soc.religion.bahai -- subject, of course, to the approval of the moderator of that group. Readers may also post articles that have been rejected from soc.religion.bahai, so long as they conform to the charter above. END CHARTER. ------- Bill, I hope I've got it right this time. Formatting 24 spaces is hard in Netscape. There's no ruler bar. Is this the way it should be? -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA @MOA.net From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:44 1997 >From jjd@primenet.com Fri Mar 7 06:44:08 1997 Received: from usr03.primenet.com (jjd@usr03.primenet.com [206.165.5.103]) by usr03.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id HAA13683 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 1997 07:44:06 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 07:44:06 -0700 (MST) From: Jim Davis To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: CFV for talk.religion.bahai In-Reply-To: <199703071309.FAA27877@f6.hotmail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 608 On Fri, 7 Mar 1997, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > Have you had a chance to post pointers to the listed groups, or > should I? I can't find it on news.announce.newgroup yet though > it's on the other main groups. They're sent. Sometimes it takes a day or two for posts to show up. > > In the CFV, it's mentioned that WWW forms are not acceptable. > I use www.hotmail.com for email. Is that what is referred to? No -- sometimes in the past, people have set up Web pages where clicking on something automatically sent mail to the voting address. That's what the CFV is prohibiting. From - Mon Apr 07 07:28:16 1997 >From jjd@primenet.com Fri Mar 7 06:44:08 1997 Received: from usr03.primenet.com (jjd@usr03.primenet.com [206.165.5.103]) by usr03.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id HAA13683 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 1997 07:44:06 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 07:44:06 -0700 (MST) From: Jim Davis To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: CFV for talk.religion.bahai In-Reply-To: <199703071309.FAA27877@f6.hotmail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 608 On Fri, 7 Mar 1997, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > Have you had a chance to post pointers to the listed groups, or > should I? I can't find it on news.announce.newgroup yet though > it's on the other main groups. They're sent. Sometimes it takes a day or two for posts to show up. > > In the CFV, it's mentioned that WWW forms are not acceptable. > I use www.hotmail.com for email. Is that what is referred to? No -- sometimes in the past, people have set up Web pages where clicking on something automatically sent mail to the voting address. That's what the CFV is prohibiting. From - Mon Feb 03 19:33:10 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.67) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 03 Feb 1997 19:25:26 -0500 Message-ID: <32F683B1.19EC@moa.net> Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 19:32:49 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: contact@uvv.org CC: bill@netagw.com Subject: CFV for talk.religion.bahai--questionnaire Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4739 ATTN: Bill Aten RFD: talk.religion.bahai I have participated in the required RFD discussion. No changes have been made in the text of the RFD. Response to the RFD usually fell into two categories, for and against. One person hadn't made up his mind. Several respondents were against the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup simply because it was either about a religion, and people always disagree about religion, or because it was unmoderated and would lead to flame wars. I responded that because people do disagree, from time to time, that alone is no valid reason for opposing the creation of an unmoderated forum. I emphasized that people must be responsible for the expression of their own ideas in a respectful fashion. I pointed out that I believe Soc.religion.bahai is heavily censored. My motive for proposing this group is to prevent others from squelching the expression of free religious conscience and belief. I don't advocate flame wars, nor do I advocate censorship. While there may be times in which individuals will go too far, they will at least have the opportunity to express their opinions. Others will have the opportunity to hear them, learn from them, disagree, tell them why, and so. To me, it seems the essence of human communication. Much discussion revolved around the issue to Bahais of covenant breakers, i.e., people who have been declared so by the Bahai administration. Soc.religion.bahai is moderated and apparently bans these people from posting to it. The concern was that without a moderator, who would ban them? To me this issue is not a valid one for preventing the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith. I suggested repeatedly that someone can speak up and tell them they're wrong or someone in the Bahai administration appointed to that role can. That seems reasonable to me, Bahai terms. Insisting that only moderated or censored newsgroups are appropriate to the Bahai Faith seems to miss the freedom of the human conscience most religions respect. Others felt there are too many newsgroups now or Bahais should use soc.religion.misc for unmoderated discussion. Neither holds water in my opinion because talk.religion.bahai would serve a real need for the internet community, Bahai or not, and soc.religion.misc is just too miscellaneous and not focused on the Bahai Faith, which is what I'm suggesting. A few people wanted examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai, so I've posted about twenty on news.groups. No one suggested changes in the RFD. Discussion has all been around the above issues. Several people supported it as much needed and offering Bahais some place else to post to than the moderated newgroup soc.religion.bahai. Others seemed to agree that censorship exists on soc.religion.bahai. talk.religion.bahai unmoderated Proponent: Frederick Glaysher @MOA.net OR FG@hotmail.com Mentor: Christopher Stone cbstone@phoenix.Princeton.EDU CFV DISTRIBUTION: Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,soc.religion.bahai, soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc I believe they are all moderated except the last one. Pointers will appear in the following newsgroups: soc.religion.unitarian-univ,soc.religion.eastern,soc.religion.gnosis, soc.religion.hindu,soc.religion.paganism,soc.religion.quaker, soc.religion.sikhism,soc.religion.vaishnava,soc.atheism, talk.religion.buddhism,talk.religion.newage and the following mailing lists: Talisman@umich.edu Subscribe via: jsgreen@umich.edu List honors Reply-To: headers yes List allows non-members to post messages yes Irfan@umich.edu Subscribe via" jrcole@umich.edu List honors Reply-To: headers yes List allows non-members to post messages yes CHARTER & RATIONALE: Talk.Religion.Bahai All newsgroups given to the discussion of the Bahai Faith are moderated. A need for an unmoderated forum exists. This proposed newsgroup would meet that need. All topics or ideas relevant to the Bahai Faith, its history, teachings, theology, and so on would be appropriate areas for discussion. -------------------- [I hope I've done this right. I'm not exactly high tech! Figuring out the timing has been tough too. I hope I'm not too late getting this in to you.] -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA @MOA.net OR FG@hotmail.com From - Mon Apr 07 07:29:00 1997 >From bn872@freenet.carleton.ca Mon Mar 10 15:01:53 1997 Received: from freenet3.carleton.ca (bn872@freenet3.carleton.ca [134.117.136.23]) by freenet.carleton.ca (8.8.3/8.6.4) with ESMTP id SAA03524 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 18:00:55 -0500 (EST) Received: (bn872@localhost) by freenet3.carleton.ca (8.8.4/NCF-Sun-Client) id SAA20072; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 18:00:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 18:00:50 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199703102300.SAA20072@freenet3.carleton.ca> From: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca (McKenny Michael) To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: CFV posted Reply-To: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 948 Greetings from Ottawa. Yes, I've noticed it, though I'm sorry I can't say if on these specific lists. I'll try within 24 hours to post it again myself, as well to vote. I'm going to write you a proper reply within 24 hours. Forgive present haste. Fare ever Well, Michael > >Dear Michael McHenry, > >I'd appreciate it if you could confirm for me whether or not you've >seen the CFV posted on Talisman and Irfan. I know it's been posted >elsewhere now. > >Thanks. > > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > >--------------------------------------------------------- >Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >--------------------------------------------------------- > > -- "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) From - Tue Apr 08 07:20:28 1997 >From bn872@freenet.carleton.ca Mon Mar 10 15:01:53 1997 Received: from freenet3.carleton.ca (bn872@freenet3.carleton.ca [134.117.136.23]) by freenet.carleton.ca (8.8.3/8.6.4) with ESMTP id SAA03524 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 18:00:55 -0500 (EST) Received: (bn872@localhost) by freenet3.carleton.ca (8.8.4/NCF-Sun-Client) id SAA20072; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 18:00:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 18:00:50 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199703102300.SAA20072@freenet3.carleton.ca> From: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca (McKenny Michael) To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: CFV posted Reply-To: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 948 Greetings from Ottawa. Yes, I've noticed it, though I'm sorry I can't say if on these specific lists. I'll try within 24 hours to post it again myself, as well to vote. I'm going to write you a proper reply within 24 hours. Forgive present haste. Fare ever Well, Michael > >Dear Michael McHenry, > >I'd appreciate it if you could confirm for me whether or not you've >seen the CFV posted on Talisman and Irfan. I know it's been posted >elsewhere now. > >Thanks. > > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > >--------------------------------------------------------- >Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >--------------------------------------------------------- > > -- "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) From - Mon Apr 07 07:29:07 1997 >From bn872@freenet.carleton.ca Tue Mar 11 11:30:36 1997 Received: from freenet3.carleton.ca (bn872@freenet3.carleton.ca [134.117.136.23]) by freenet.carleton.ca (8.8.3/8.6.4) with ESMTP id OAA14044 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 1997 14:30:20 -0500 (EST) Received: (bn872@localhost) by freenet3.carleton.ca (8.8.4/NCF-Sun-Client) id OAA08014; Tue, 11 Mar 1997 14:30:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 14:30:12 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199703111930.OAA08014@freenet3.carleton.ca> From: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca (McKenny Michael) To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: CFV posted Reply-To: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1020 Greetings. I checked my archives and can confirm that jjd did post a copy of the cfv to both talisman and irfan. I have just voted yes. I am encouraging some non-baha'i friends who have been following the internet baha'i censorship scene with keen interest, and think there are more yes votes for you from them. Good luck, michael > >Dear Michael McHenry, > >I'd appreciate it if you could confirm for me whether or not you've >seen the CFV posted on Talisman and Irfan. I know it's been posted >elsewhere now. > >Thanks. > > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > >--------------------------------------------------------- >Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >--------------------------------------------------------- > > -- "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) From - Tue Apr 08 07:20:34 1997 >From bn872@freenet.carleton.ca Tue Mar 11 11:30:36 1997 Received: from freenet3.carleton.ca (bn872@freenet3.carleton.ca [134.117.136.23]) by freenet.carleton.ca (8.8.3/8.6.4) with ESMTP id OAA14044 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 1997 14:30:20 -0500 (EST) Received: (bn872@localhost) by freenet3.carleton.ca (8.8.4/NCF-Sun-Client) id OAA08014; Tue, 11 Mar 1997 14:30:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 14:30:12 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199703111930.OAA08014@freenet3.carleton.ca> From: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca (McKenny Michael) To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: CFV posted Reply-To: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1020 Greetings. I checked my archives and can confirm that jjd did post a copy of the cfv to both talisman and irfan. I have just voted yes. I am encouraging some non-baha'i friends who have been following the internet baha'i censorship scene with keen interest, and think there are more yes votes for you from them. Good luck, michael > >Dear Michael McHenry, > >I'd appreciate it if you could confirm for me whether or not you've >seen the CFV posted on Talisman and Irfan. I know it's been posted >elsewhere now. > >Thanks. > > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > >--------------------------------------------------------- >Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >--------------------------------------------------------- > > -- "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) From - Mon Apr 07 07:29:03 1997 >From jrcole@umich.edu Mon Mar 10 16:51:35 1997 Received: from pm117-02.dialip.mich.net by gimantis.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.8.5/2.2) id TAA21062; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 19:49:54 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199703110049.TAA21062@gimantis.rs.itd.umich.edu> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 19:49:54 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: jrcole@j.imap.itd.umich.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: " Frederick Glaysher" From: jrcole@umich.edu (Juan R. I. Cole) Subject: Re: CFV posted to Talisman & Irfan? X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 486 Dear Frederick: I'm not on either list; you'd have to ask them by blind post. good luck - Juan >I'd appreciate your confirming for me that the CFV has been posted >to Talisman and Irfan, if you've seen it. > >Thanks. > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > >--------------------------------------------------------- >Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >--------------------------------------------------------- > > From - Tue Apr 08 07:20:30 1997 >From jrcole@umich.edu Mon Mar 10 16:51:35 1997 Received: from pm117-02.dialip.mich.net by gimantis.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.8.5/2.2) id TAA21062; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 19:49:54 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199703110049.TAA21062@gimantis.rs.itd.umich.edu> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 19:49:54 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: jrcole@j.imap.itd.umich.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: " Frederick Glaysher" From: jrcole@umich.edu (Juan R. I. Cole) Subject: Re: CFV posted to Talisman & Irfan? X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 486 Dear Frederick: I'm not on either list; you'd have to ask them by blind post. good luck - Juan >I'd appreciate your confirming for me that the CFV has been posted >to Talisman and Irfan, if you've seen it. > >Thanks. > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > >--------------------------------------------------------- >Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >--------------------------------------------------------- > > From - Sun Feb 02 17:54:35 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.45) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 17:46:36 -0500 Message-ID: <32F51AFA.1E0D@moa.net> Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 17:54:01 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: @moa.net CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: CFV Rough Draft Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4211 RFD: talk.religion.bahai I have participated in the required RFD discussion. No changes have been made in the text of the RFD. Response to the RFD usually fell into two categories, for and against. One person hadn't made up his mind. Several respondents were against the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup simply because it was either about a religion, and people always disagree about religion, or because it was unmoderated and would lead to flame wars. I responded that because people do disagree, from time to time, that alone is no valid reason for opposing the creation of an unmoderated forum. I emphasized that people must be responsible for the expression of their own ideas in a respectful fashion. I pointed out that I believe Soc.religion.bahai is heavily censored. My motive for proposing this group is to prevent others from squelching the expression of free religious conscience and belief. I don't advocate flame wars, nor do I advocate censorship. While there may be times in which individuals will go too far, they will at least have the opportunity to express their opinions. Others will have the opportunity to hear them, learn from them, disagree, tell them why, and so. To me, it seems the essence of human communication. Much discussion revolved around the issue to Bahais of covenant breakers, i.e., people who have been declared so by the Bahai administration. Soc.religion.bahai is moderated and apparently bans these people from posting to it. The concern was that without a moderator, who would ban them? To me this issue is not a valid one for preventing the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith. I suggested repeatedly that someone can speak up and tell them they're wrong or someone in the Bahai administration appointed to that role can. That seems reasonable to me. Insisting that only moderated or censored newsgroups are appropriate to the Bahai Faith seems to miss the freedom of the human conscience most religions respect. Others felt there are too many newsgroups now or Bahais should use soc.religion.misc for unmoderated discussion. Neither holds water in my opinion because talk.religion.bahai would serve a real need for the internet community, Bahai or not, and soc.religion.misc is just too miscellaneous and not focused on the Bahai Faith, which is what I'm suggesting. No one suggested changes in the RFD. Discussion has all been around the above issues. Several people supported it as much needed and offering Bahais some place else to post to than the moderated newgroup soc.religion.bahai. Others seemed to agree that censorship exists on soc.religion.bahai. talk.religion.bahaiunmoderated Proponent: Frederick Glaysher @MOA.net OR FG@hotmail.com Mentor: Christopher Stonecbstone@phoenix.Princeton.EDU CFV DISTRIBUTION: Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,soc.religion.bahai, soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc I believe they are all moderated except the last one. Pointers will appear in the following newsgroups: soc.religion.unitarian-univ,soc.religion.eastern,soc.religion.gnosis, soc.religion.hindu,soc.religion.paganism,soc.religion.quaker, soc.religion.sikhism,soc.religion.vaishnava,soc.atheism, talk.religion.buddhism,talk.religion.newage and the following mailing lists: Talisman@umich.edu Subscribe via: jsgreen@umich.edu List honors Reply-To: headers yes List allows non-members to post messages yes Irfan@umich.edu Subscribe via" jrcole@umich.edu List honors Reply-To: headers yes List allows non-members to post messages yes CHARTER & RATIONALE: Talk.Religion.Bahai All newsgroups given to the discussion of the Bahai Faith are moderated. A need for an unmoderated forum exists. This proposed newsgroup would meet that need. All topics or ideas relevant to the Bahai Faith, its history, teachings, theology, and so on would be appropriate areas for discussion. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA FG@hotmail.com @MOA.net From - Tue Apr 08 07:20:22 1997 >From eugene@marsweb.com Mon Mar 10 01:45:03 1997 Received: from LOCALNAME ([205.226.97.133]) by mail.marsweb.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-18319) with SMTP id AAA167 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 02:44:22 -0700 Message-ID: <31400EBF.34D2@marsweb.com> Date: Fri, 08 Mar 1996 02:41:03 -0800 From: eugene@marsweb.com (Raymond Armstrong) Organization: Mars Web X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01KIT (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: CFV talk.religion.bahai References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> <857733440.30016@dejanews.com> <857826958.8775@dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 7958 Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > [This is a courtesy copy of an article posted to Usenet via Deja News] > > In article <857733440.30016@dejanews.com>, > eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > > > In article <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com>, > > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers and > > > sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. The only > > > newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. This fact has > > > been an impediment in my attempts to post to the newsgroup and only one > > > post on "The finality of prophethood" that I sent to the newsgroup was > > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another opportunity to > > > reply with their outarageous interpretations of the Quran without me being > > > able to continue the discussion. With the creation of talk.religion.bahai > > > people and other brothers and sisters who are more knowledgable can post > > > on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who have been misled on this > > > very crucial issue.Thank you. > > I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can > take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference > of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so > rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote > before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes > and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. > bahai, soc.culture.iranian, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by > emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com > > > > > I have done some research on messages posted to srb and I have seen just > > what you refer to being done to others. It looks like it will be an open > > discussion but it isn't, it is used instead to get in the 'last word' so > > to say. In most cases the origional poster is not allowed to reply after > > they have their chance to. Not much of a discussion. Even one case is to > > much. Thus censorship is taking place on srb. > > Thanks for having the courage to say so.... > > > > > Thats enough to cause me to vote yes on trb. > > > > I will never support censorship. We here in America still do not fully > > realize the full import of free speech and the right to pratice your > > religion. You as a Muslum, evedently living in Canada enjoy the > > opportunity to avail yourself to these rights. If I were a Baha'i in Iran > > would I have the same opportunity? How many thousands of Bahai's have > > been murdered in Iran? Yes, murdered. > > > > And by the same fact, how many Mulsims have been murdered by Christians > > now? > > > > Murder of others because of diffrences in religious beliefs is evil. > > > > Free speech is the first thing all oppressors of other men seek to stop, > > especialy where religions and governments are concerned. When censorship > > does not work, murder is the next step. > > > > If members of srb want to disagree with the claims of censorship on srb > > then I will post a few examples of the same that other posters to srb > > have experienced to back your claim up even further. As I said before, > > even one time is one time to much. > > I would greatly appreciate your posting examples of censorship on > soc.religion.bahai that you or anyone else has experienced too. The > moderators clear tactic in dealing with my examples of censorship > that I post on news.groups was to characterize them as rude, offensive, > etc.... while ignoring the real content issues that were being > suppressed by them. Others might find it helpful too now that > the CFV has gone out to see something else censored. > > > > > The claims of the Baha'i Faith will have to stand on its own out in the > > open under a FULL and OPEN discussion, which in reallity do not take > > placed on srb. > > Exactly what I've been trying to get people to realize all along! > > > > > Now that I have the followers of Jesus, Muhammad, and Baha'u'llah all mad > > at me(Which is what, about half of the planet or better now?), we might > > as well have trb so they can 'discuss' the issue with me. > > > > I'm looking forward to participating on trb. > > So am I. We have to get 100 YES votes first! It's hard to call > at the moment, given the techniques used by the "moderators" of > character assassination and accussations of my being a covenant > breaker.... (anyone who is not a mindless pawn is a covenant breaker > apparently in their definition). I urge you to post some examples > to help those who perhaps have not yet made up their minds.... > > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet Mr. Glaysher Thank you for cliping out my mudering part. I was a bit over the top there. I did see a post from an Ortohodox (?) Bahai in which he was allowed to ask a set of questions but was not allowed to reply to the srb Bahais afterwards. This happened last year sometime between aug and nov. Have you gotten much back channel stuff? I sure did after that last post of mine. Now I've got to go back to the srb archives and dig out those posts. I'll include some of the statements by srb people who said that trb should not be allowed because cbs (covenant breakers ?) would then have free rein to state their views openly. When I saw that my suspisions about the srb Bahais were immediatly aroused. I'm sorry Mr. Glaysher, but I'm beginning to suspect somethings fishy with their org. This isn't one of those Scientology deals about to break into the open is it? I hate to see this going on. The writings of the Bahai are so marvelous. I am very impresed with the writings of the founders of the Bahai Faith. I have read of the grabs for leadership in Judaisum, Christianity, Islam and in the Bahai Faith. Evedently this seems to be the crux of the whole matter underlieing the resistance to the formation of trb. I have ran across information about a listserver discussion group on the Bahai Faith called Talisman. There is still alot of information for me to finish sifting through but from what I have seen so far it was a pretty nasty situation. My question now is, after reading aobut the Talisman affair aren't you afraid of the Willamett people makeing what seems to be their now fameous late night call's to you? This Burkland guy seems to be a real slick one. I just finished an E-Mail from a person who said very clearly that he wasn't afraid of the boys from Willamett anymore. Very upset. He realy has the need to talk. I have no idea what about but it is very important to him. The only back channel messages I have gotten on this subject from other Baha'is want this trb. No one who is against it being established has sent me anything? That in and of its self is most revealing. Whats wrong here guys? I take it you've been a Bahai for a long time now. This could be a bad situation for you, espicialy if you then become an active partcipator in trb discussions afterwards. As a Bahai you are takeing a big chance here. I will support you and the other Baha'is who want to do this. In the mean time I'll get on that srb archive and see if I can dig out that set of posts again. I'm up to late again. Must stagger off to bed..... Good luck to you sir. BTW. I know of about fifty yes votes right now. It's looking very possable. The Islam group could very well be the main force in voting it in. Is this going to be the Bahais and Islamic groups slugging it out? Or the Bahais and the Bahais? This is going to be very interesting. From - Mon Apr 07 07:28:55 1997 >From eugene@marsweb.com Mon Mar 10 01:45:03 1997 Received: from LOCALNAME ([205.226.97.133]) by mail.marsweb.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-18319) with SMTP id AAA167 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 02:44:22 -0700 Message-ID: <31400EBF.34D2@marsweb.com> Date: Fri, 08 Mar 1996 02:41:03 -0800 From: eugene@marsweb.com (Raymond Armstrong) Organization: Mars Web X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01KIT (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: CFV talk.religion.bahai References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> <857733440.30016@dejanews.com> <857826958.8775@dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 7958 Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > [This is a courtesy copy of an article posted to Usenet via Deja News] > > In article <857733440.30016@dejanews.com>, > eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > > > In article <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com>, > > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers and > > > sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. The only > > > newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. This fact has > > > been an impediment in my attempts to post to the newsgroup and only one > > > post on "The finality of prophethood" that I sent to the newsgroup was > > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another opportunity to > > > reply with their outarageous interpretations of the Quran without me being > > > able to continue the discussion. With the creation of talk.religion.bahai > > > people and other brothers and sisters who are more knowledgable can post > > > on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who have been misled on this > > > very crucial issue.Thank you. > > I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can > take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference > of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so > rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote > before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes > and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. > bahai, soc.culture.iranian, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by > emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com > > > > > I have done some research on messages posted to srb and I have seen just > > what you refer to being done to others. It looks like it will be an open > > discussion but it isn't, it is used instead to get in the 'last word' so > > to say. In most cases the origional poster is not allowed to reply after > > they have their chance to. Not much of a discussion. Even one case is to > > much. Thus censorship is taking place on srb. > > Thanks for having the courage to say so.... > > > > > Thats enough to cause me to vote yes on trb. > > > > I will never support censorship. We here in America still do not fully > > realize the full import of free speech and the right to pratice your > > religion. You as a Muslum, evedently living in Canada enjoy the > > opportunity to avail yourself to these rights. If I were a Baha'i in Iran > > would I have the same opportunity? How many thousands of Bahai's have > > been murdered in Iran? Yes, murdered. > > > > And by the same fact, how many Mulsims have been murdered by Christians > > now? > > > > Murder of others because of diffrences in religious beliefs is evil. > > > > Free speech is the first thing all oppressors of other men seek to stop, > > especialy where religions and governments are concerned. When censorship > > does not work, murder is the next step. > > > > If members of srb want to disagree with the claims of censorship on srb > > then I will post a few examples of the same that other posters to srb > > have experienced to back your claim up even further. As I said before, > > even one time is one time to much. > > I would greatly appreciate your posting examples of censorship on > soc.religion.bahai that you or anyone else has experienced too. The > moderators clear tactic in dealing with my examples of censorship > that I post on news.groups was to characterize them as rude, offensive, > etc.... while ignoring the real content issues that were being > suppressed by them. Others might find it helpful too now that > the CFV has gone out to see something else censored. > > > > > The claims of the Baha'i Faith will have to stand on its own out in the > > open under a FULL and OPEN discussion, which in reallity do not take > > placed on srb. > > Exactly what I've been trying to get people to realize all along! > > > > > Now that I have the followers of Jesus, Muhammad, and Baha'u'llah all mad > > at me(Which is what, about half of the planet or better now?), we might > > as well have trb so they can 'discuss' the issue with me. > > > > I'm looking forward to participating on trb. > > So am I. We have to get 100 YES votes first! It's hard to call > at the moment, given the techniques used by the "moderators" of > character assassination and accussations of my being a covenant > breaker.... (anyone who is not a mindless pawn is a covenant breaker > apparently in their definition). I urge you to post some examples > to help those who perhaps have not yet made up their minds.... > > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet Mr. Glaysher Thank you for cliping out my mudering part. I was a bit over the top there. I did see a post from an Ortohodox (?) Bahai in which he was allowed to ask a set of questions but was not allowed to reply to the srb Bahais afterwards. This happened last year sometime between aug and nov. Have you gotten much back channel stuff? I sure did after that last post of mine. Now I've got to go back to the srb archives and dig out those posts. I'll include some of the statements by srb people who said that trb should not be allowed because cbs (covenant breakers ?) would then have free rein to state their views openly. When I saw that my suspisions about the srb Bahais were immediatly aroused. I'm sorry Mr. Glaysher, but I'm beginning to suspect somethings fishy with their org. This isn't one of those Scientology deals about to break into the open is it? I hate to see this going on. The writings of the Bahai are so marvelous. I am very impresed with the writings of the founders of the Bahai Faith. I have read of the grabs for leadership in Judaisum, Christianity, Islam and in the Bahai Faith. Evedently this seems to be the crux of the whole matter underlieing the resistance to the formation of trb. I have ran across information about a listserver discussion group on the Bahai Faith called Talisman. There is still alot of information for me to finish sifting through but from what I have seen so far it was a pretty nasty situation. My question now is, after reading aobut the Talisman affair aren't you afraid of the Willamett people makeing what seems to be their now fameous late night call's to you? This Burkland guy seems to be a real slick one. I just finished an E-Mail from a person who said very clearly that he wasn't afraid of the boys from Willamett anymore. Very upset. He realy has the need to talk. I have no idea what about but it is very important to him. The only back channel messages I have gotten on this subject from other Baha'is want this trb. No one who is against it being established has sent me anything? That in and of its self is most revealing. Whats wrong here guys? I take it you've been a Bahai for a long time now. This could be a bad situation for you, espicialy if you then become an active partcipator in trb discussions afterwards. As a Bahai you are takeing a big chance here. I will support you and the other Baha'is who want to do this. In the mean time I'll get on that srb archive and see if I can dig out that set of posts again. I'm up to late again. Must stagger off to bed..... Good luck to you sir. BTW. I know of about fifty yes votes right now. It's looking very possable. The Islam group could very well be the main force in voting it in. Is this going to be the Bahais and Islamic groups slugging it out? Or the Bahais and the Bahais? This is going to be very interesting. From - Thu Apr 10 08:10:26 1997 >From jbh5@cornell.edu Wed Mar 12 12:29:54 1997 Received: from 128.253.239.71 ([128.253.239.71]) by cornell.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA09213 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 15:29:45 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199703122029.PAA09213@cornell.edu> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 15:42:36 -0500 From: jbh5@cornell.edu (Jean Hunter) To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: CFV talk.religion.bahai References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> <857733440.30016@dejanews.com> <857826958.8775@dejanews.com> <5g4fo6$gj9$1@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz> <858170943.17383@dejanews.com> Organization: Cornell University X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 875 In article <858170943.17383@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > The evidence of a NO! vote campaign has just been posted to news.groups > and elsewhere, including soc.religion.bahai, though they'll surely > suppress it, using their monopoly to their advantage yet again.... > Mark Towfiq posted a message to the woman's discussion listserv > instructing people on how to vote NO! If you're sincere, sir, > you should follow through and read it.... His fanaticism there is > quite clear, I think.... I urge you to ask Mark to repost his message to news.groups then, so we can all check it out for ourselves. Not everyone is connected to the various Baha'i listservs, nor is everyone willing to take one person's word about the content of an unseen message when they might read it for themselves. Peace, Jean in Ithaca From - Wed Apr 09 08:11:54 1997 >From jbh5@cornell.edu Wed Mar 12 12:29:54 1997 Received: from 128.253.239.71 ([128.253.239.71]) by cornell.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA09213 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 15:29:45 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199703122029.PAA09213@cornell.edu> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 15:42:36 -0500 From: jbh5@cornell.edu (Jean Hunter) To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: CFV talk.religion.bahai References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> <857733440.30016@dejanews.com> <857826958.8775@dejanews.com> <5g4fo6$gj9$1@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz> <858170943.17383@dejanews.com> Organization: Cornell University X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 875 In article <858170943.17383@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > The evidence of a NO! vote campaign has just been posted to news.groups > and elsewhere, including soc.religion.bahai, though they'll surely > suppress it, using their monopoly to their advantage yet again.... > Mark Towfiq posted a message to the woman's discussion listserv > instructing people on how to vote NO! If you're sincere, sir, > you should follow through and read it.... His fanaticism there is > quite clear, I think.... I urge you to ask Mark to repost his message to news.groups then, so we can all check it out for ourselves. Not everyone is connected to the various Baha'i listservs, nor is everyone willing to take one person's word about the content of an unseen message when they might read it for themselves. Peace, Jean in Ithaca From - Mon Apr 07 07:29:27 1997 >From jbh5@cornell.edu Wed Mar 12 12:29:54 1997 Received: from 128.253.239.71 ([128.253.239.71]) by cornell.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA09213 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 15:29:45 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199703122029.PAA09213@cornell.edu> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 15:42:36 -0500 From: jbh5@cornell.edu (Jean Hunter) To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: CFV talk.religion.bahai References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> <857733440.30016@dejanews.com> <857826958.8775@dejanews.com> <5g4fo6$gj9$1@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz> <858170943.17383@dejanews.com> Organization: Cornell University X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 875 In article <858170943.17383@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > The evidence of a NO! vote campaign has just been posted to news.groups > and elsewhere, including soc.religion.bahai, though they'll surely > suppress it, using their monopoly to their advantage yet again.... > Mark Towfiq posted a message to the woman's discussion listserv > instructing people on how to vote NO! If you're sincere, sir, > you should follow through and read it.... His fanaticism there is > quite clear, I think.... I urge you to ask Mark to repost his message to news.groups then, so we can all check it out for ourselves. Not everyone is connected to the various Baha'i listservs, nor is everyone willing to take one person's word about the content of an unseen message when they might read it for themselves. Peace, Jean in Ithaca From - Thu Apr 10 08:14:32 1997 >From eugene@marsweb.com Mon Mar 17 02:25:18 1997 Received: from LOCALNAME ([205.226.97.158]) by mail.marsweb.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-18319) with SMTP id AAA132 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 03:25:37 -0700 Message-ID: <31495317.7433@marsweb.com> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 03:23:03 -0800 From: eugene@marsweb.com (Raymond Armstrong) Organization: Mars Web X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01KIT (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Voting irregularities in CFV talk.religion.bahai References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> <857733440.30016@dejanews.com> <857826958.8775@dejanews.com> <7Ea2yRAlPoIzEwTe@fragrant.demon.co.uk> <3322B3DF.2A96@wwnet.com> <5g7i7a$26o$1@bilbo.reference.com> <3327DF23.10A2@wwnet.com> <858437155.31488@dejanews.com> <199703161201.EAA05772@shadowfax.reference.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 4028 FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > On Sat, 15 Mar 1997 08:51:08 -0600, eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > In article <3327DF23.10A2@wwnet.com>, > > rreini@wwnet.com wrote: > > > > > > FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > Are you only interested in generating spurious NO votes? See > > > > > > > > Mr. Towfiq's NO vote campaign post on news.groups and elsewhere. > > > > > > The so-called campaign was one message. It has since been retracted and > > > apologized for. > > > > > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) > > > > I think the damage has aready been done. Very slick. > > > > Also the idea that talk.reliogion.misc can be used to have an uncesored > > discussion on bahai subjects is a sneaky way of burying it in an out of > > the way place effectivly hiding it while at the same time looking as > > though free and open discussion is supported by followers of the Bahai > > Faith. > > This is the way it has seemed to me all along.... Relegated it > to obscurity, despite the large readership there, since it's > most of Christian interest there would be little focused > exposure.... > > > > > The call to vote ones conscious when that vote would be a no vote based > > on the idea that some supposed cb (covenant breaker?) would have a free > > and open forum on the Bahai Faith (on anythng with the name Bahai in it) > > to present his or hers ideas is unhethical at best and at its worst, it > > leads to the end of free speach (based on ones conscious) for others out > > side of your group as well as any one within. This more than anything > > else is what realy bothers me about this whole thing with the Bahais, the > > underlieing reason for opposition to the establishment of > > talk.religion.bahai is based on the desire to suppress as much as > > possable anyone from discussing it openly with any depth at all. That is > > what I am begining to see as the real issue amoung the Bahais on the > > establishment of trb. > > I have to acknowledge, though I have been a Bahai for 20 years, > it sounds like what all cults have done, doesn't it? Yes. To bad. > > > > > If it were truly based on a disagreement with Mr. Glaysher about > > censorship on srb then this CB stuff from Mr Towfiq and others would not > > be coming out all the time. > > You may be right. I appreciate your making the point too! It > had not occurred to me to look at it that way. Seems obvious > now though. Whats wrong here Mr. Glaysher? I know that leadership is were the prestiege, power and money is. The hearts of men don't have a place in that sceam. Their minds and money that follows is all that matters. I rember something Baha'u'llah said about the desire to be a leader or 'the leader' was the biggest cause of the final corruption of a Religion. I don't have a library full of Bahai Books to dig up the exact writing I had in mind, but it was something along that line. Good luck to you sir. I hope you win this one. Freedom of Religion and speach are the two most important things in sustaining mankind. If we lose free speach then freedom of religious belief will soon follow. Thus I fight along side you in this one. Has the Bahai Faith gone the way of all the other claimants? Their Sacred Writngs are far more preferable to their followers praticies? So close, yet so far. Baha'u'llah is ashamed of someone here. > > > > > This has done nothing but make me very suspisious now. > > For full discussion of the NO vote campaign against forming > an unmoderated newsgroup talk.religion.bahai, please see > news.groups, where fortunately freedom of religious conscience > and speech are allowed.... > > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -- > > Posted using Reference.COM https://www.reference.com > Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. > > InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting. From - Thu Apr 10 08:14:36 1997 >From eugene@marsweb.com Mon Mar 17 03:07:37 1997 Received: from LOCALNAME ([205.226.97.158]) by mail.marsweb.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-18319) with SMTP id AAA140 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 04:07:11 -0700 Message-ID: <31495D06.6996@marsweb.com> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 04:05:26 -0800 From: eugene@marsweb.com (Raymond Armstrong) Organization: Mars Web X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01KIT (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Voting irregularities in CFV talk.religion.bahai References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> <857733440.30016@dejanews.com> <857826958.8775@dejanews.com> <7Ea2yRAlPoIzEwTe@fragrant.demon.co.uk> <3322B3DF.2A96@wwnet.com> <5g7i7a$26o$1@bilbo.reference.com> <3327DF23.10A2@wwnet.com> <858437155.31488@dejanews.com> <199703161201.EAA05772@shadowfax.reference.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1109 Thank you for ccing the message to me Mr. Glayseher. I just haven't been able to devote the time needed to help you out with this. If I see a no vote campaine has taken place I will protest it. I could start an open unmoderated listserver bahai discussion group on my ISPs server. The monthly fee would not be much at all. I'd do that on my own if nothing else. Not as good as an regular news group easly found on the Internet, but, the offers there. It would serve the purpose in a kind of off handed way. Paul wrote me that my last message realy stired it up quite a bit more. He's afraid to post any more. He only posted one message and now just sets back a follows the threads. Freedom of speach and religion are two things I will always fight for, for all of us. I remember the story about how during the time of Hitler, when his followers came for the jews, then the christians without a word of protest, when they came for him there was no one left to speak up in his defence. A Bahai discussion group located on mars (at marsweb.com)seems kind of funny to me. From - Wed Feb 19 07:50:30 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <330AF716.62C1@moa.net> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 07:50:30 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu CC: bill@netagw.com, eagle@cyclone.Stanford.EDU, group-advice@isc.org Subject: CFV: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 586 Thanks again for your postings to s.r.bahai. Someone with the email jimrtex@pipeline.com keeps making lots of accusations about procedural errors on news.groups.... I don't if I've made any, but he won't relent.... Should I be concerned? Do I have to contact UVV or something to get the vote started? There seems to be no reason to wait now that discussion is entirely shunted off to news.groups where nobody is going to see it who's even remotely interested in talk.religion.bahai.... I appreciate your help. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Wed Feb 19 13:05:52 1997 Received: from default (204.38.255.36) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 07:42:59 -0500 Message-ID: <330AF716.62C1@moa.net> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 07:50:30 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu CC: bill@netagw.com, eagle@cyclone.Stanford.EDU, group-advice@isc.org Subject: CFV: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 584 Thanks again for your postings to s.r.bahai. Someone with the email jimrtex@pipeline.com keeps making lots of accusations about procedural errors on news.groups.... I don't if I've made any, but he won't relent.... Should I be concerned? Do I have to contact UVV or something to get the vote started? There seems to be no reason to wait now that discussion is entirely shunted off to news.groups where nobody is going to see it who's even remotely interested in talk.religion.bahai.... I appreciate your help. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Wed Feb 19 13:06:02 1997 Received: from relay3.UU.NET (192.48.96.8) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:56:27 -0500 Received: from alterdial.UU.NET by relay3.UU.NET with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: alterdial.UU.NET [192.48.96.22]) id QQcdoy23738; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:01:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from netagw.com by alterdial.UU.NET with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: Cust44.Max10.Orlando.FL.MS.UU.NET [153.34.158.44]) id QQcdoy29712; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:01:25 -0500 (EST) Received: by netagw.com id KAA16846; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:22:29 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Aten Message-Id: <199702191522.KAA16846@netagw.com> Subject: Re: CFV: talk.religion.bahai To: @moa.net Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:22:29 -0500 (EST) Cc: cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu, eagle@cyclone.Stanford.EDU, group-advice@isc.org In-Reply-To: <330AF716.62C1@moa.net> from "Frederick Glaysher" at Feb 19, 97 07:50:30 am Organization: Usenet Volunteer Votetakers X-Legal-Warning: This is a fax machine as described by Title 47 USC - do not send unsolicited commercial messages. X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1458 > Message ID: <330AF716.62C1@moa.net> > From: FG <@moa.net> > Date: Wed Feb 19 07:50:30 1997 > Subject: CFV: talk.religion.bahai > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Thanks again for your postings to s.r.bahai. > > Someone with the email jimrtex@pipeline.com keeps making lots of > accusations about procedural errors on news.groups.... I don't > if I've made any, but he won't relent.... Should I be concerned? > > Do I have to contact UVV or something to get the vote started? > There seems to be no reason to wait now that discussion is > entirely shunted off to news.groups where nobody is going to see > it who's even remotely interested in talk.religion.bahai.... > > I appreciate your help. Regarding contacting UVV, that is not necessary. The UVV has limited resources and frequently runs a few weeks behind. Proposals are prioritized based on the date the PQ was submitted and the age of the last RFD, and they are usually assigned to a votetaker on a first come, first served basis. Your proposal is currently #6 in a queue of 10 proposals. UVV induced delays will not endanger your proposal, so please be patient and we will process your CFV as quickly as possible. -- Bill Aten Member of UVV ===================================================================== ========= From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:40 1997 >From jjd@primenet.com Wed Mar 5 22:45:35 1997 Received: from usr11.primenet.com (jjd@usr11.primenet.com [206.165.5.111]) by usr05.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id XAA16701; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 23:44:51 -0700 (MST) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 23:44:51 -0700 (MST) From: Jim Davis Reply-To: jdavis@cs.arizona.edu To: proponents , Claude.Gomez@inria.fr, FG@hotmail.com, Ramine.Nikoukhah@inria.fr Subject: CFVs posted Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1116 The news.announce.newgroup moderator has posted the first Call For Votes for your newsgroup proposals, so voting in now underway. Voting ends at 23:59:59 UTC on March 26th ( e.g. 4:59 pm here in Tucson, Arizona). I'll try to have the results submitted to the n.a.n. moderator within a day or two of the voting deadline. Sorry, but I can't disclose voting results before the n.a.n. moderator posts them, and I can't say anything about the voting returns before the deadline either. One thing that often comes up is redistributing the CFV. Votetakers always prefer the proponent not redistribute the CFV, but if you choose to it _must_ be the complete, unedited version as it appeared in news.announce.newgroups. Redistributing a partial or modified CFV and you will risk getting the vote cancelled. 'Pointers' to the CFV are fine; tell people they can get a copy of the CFV from news.announce.newsgroups, or have them mail me at jjd@primenet.com and I'll be glad to send them a copy. If you have any questions about redistributing the CFV or any other procedural stuff, feel free to ask! From - Tue Apr 08 07:08:27 1997 >From jjd@primenet.com Sat Mar 1 11:23:19 1997 Received: from usr05.primenet.com (jjd@usr05.primenet.com [206.165.5.105]) by usr03.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA11956; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 12:21:47 -0700 (MST) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 12:21:47 -0700 (MST) From: Jim Davis To: proponents , Claude.Gomez@inria.fr, FG@hotmail.com, Ramine.Nikoukhah@inria.fr Subject: CFVs submitted Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 445 I've submitted the first Call For Votes for your newsgroup proposals to the news.announce.newgroup moderator. They should be posted in a day or two, though once it did take a week. I'll send you mail when I've been notified they are actually posted, and at that point voting will be underway. Please let me know if you have any questions. It's usually faster to reach me during the day at my work address, jdavis@cs.arizona.edu. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:21 1997 >From jjd@primenet.com Sat Mar 1 11:23:19 1997 Received: from usr05.primenet.com (jjd@usr05.primenet.com [206.165.5.105]) by usr03.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA11956; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 12:21:47 -0700 (MST) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 12:21:47 -0700 (MST) From: Jim Davis To: proponents , Claude.Gomez@inria.fr, FG@hotmail.com, Ramine.Nikoukhah@inria.fr Subject: CFVs submitted Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 445 I've submitted the first Call For Votes for your newsgroup proposals to the news.announce.newgroup moderator. They should be posted in a day or two, though once it did take a week. I'll send you mail when I've been notified they are actually posted, and at that point voting will be underway. Please let me know if you have any questions. It's usually faster to reach me during the day at my work address, jdavis@cs.arizona.edu. From - Wed Apr 09 08:20:03 1997 >From osborndo@pilot.msu.edu Mon Mar 17 12:50:30 1997 Received: from algeria (meke.isp.msu.edu [35.8.242.49]) by pilot18.cl.msu.edu (8.7.5/MSU-2.10) id PAA166656; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 15:49:37 -0500 Message-Id: <199703172049.PAA166656@pilot18.cl.msu.edu> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 97 15:53:20 -0800 From: Donald Zhang Osborn Organization: ---- X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.religion.islam,soc.culture.iranian To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Clarification (was Re: NO! vote campaign: talk.religion.bahai continues?) References: <5gcovi$5bv$1@bilbo.reference.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1113 FG@hotmail.com wrote: >Supposedly Mark Towfiq has posted a "retraction" of his campaign>against talk.religion.bahai. Permit me to ask where has he >poste= d it, Outer Mongolia.... I emailed him days ago and have>seen no retraction.... Let's see it posted BY HIM on >news.groups, if he = means it.... Mr. Towfiq apparently posted his retraction on the same groups where he posted his original message--which is only appropriate. You have been the one to repost his original message (more than once) to Usenet. That certainly shouldn't oblige him to post his retraction on Usenet as well; nor should it be necessary for anyone else to do so. I personnally don't blame Mr. Towfiq if he has decided to cast his vote and to refrain from posting anything further on this topic. If you'll pardon me, it is an example of a non-fanatic approach to the issue that is worth considering. For the record, there is apparently no "no" campaign in the Baha'i community, and unless one chooses to count your efforts, no "yes" campaign either. Don Osborn osborndo@pilot.msu.edu From - Thu Apr 10 08:14:46 1997 >From osborndo@pilot.msu.edu Mon Mar 17 12:50:30 1997 Received: from algeria (meke.isp.msu.edu [35.8.242.49]) by pilot18.cl.msu.edu (8.7.5/MSU-2.10) id PAA166656; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 15:49:37 -0500 Message-Id: <199703172049.PAA166656@pilot18.cl.msu.edu> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 97 15:53:20 -0800 From: Donald Zhang Osborn Organization: ---- X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.religion.islam,soc.culture.iranian To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Clarification (was Re: NO! vote campaign: talk.religion.bahai continues?) References: <5gcovi$5bv$1@bilbo.reference.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1113 FG@hotmail.com wrote: >Supposedly Mark Towfiq has posted a "retraction" of his campaign>against talk.religion.bahai. Permit me to ask where has he >poste= d it, Outer Mongolia.... I emailed him days ago and have>seen no retraction.... Let's see it posted BY HIM on >news.groups, if he = means it.... Mr. Towfiq apparently posted his retraction on the same groups where he posted his original message--which is only appropriate. You have been the one to repost his original message (more than once) to Usenet. That certainly shouldn't oblige him to post his retraction on Usenet as well; nor should it be necessary for anyone else to do so. I personnally don't blame Mr. Towfiq if he has decided to cast his vote and to refrain from posting anything further on this topic. If you'll pardon me, it is an example of a non-fanatic approach to the issue that is worth considering. For the record, there is apparently no "no" campaign in the Baha'i community, and unless one chooses to count your efforts, no "yes" campaign either. Don Osborn osborndo@pilot.msu.edu From - Thu Apr 10 08:14:53 1997 >From spanky9114@aol.com Mon Mar 17 18:47:17 1997 Received: from ladder01.news.aol.com (ladder01.news-fddi.aol.com [172.16.30.168]) by ngeout01.news.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA14329 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 21:53:09 -0500 Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 21:47:07 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <19970318024700.VAA23860@ladder01.news.aol.com> Newsgroups: news.groups To: FG@hotmail.com From: spanky9114@aol.com (Spanky9114) Organization: AOL https://www.aol.com References: <5gcovi$5bv$1@bilbo.reference.com> Subject: Re: NO! vote campaign: talk.religion.bahai continues? X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1608 >Mark Towfiq (towfiq@justice.medford.ma.us) wrote: Subject: RE: Pointer: CFV talk.religion.bahai >Dear friends, a situation which has been developing over the past few >months has finally come to a head. >As many of you may already know, the soc.religion.bahai newsgroup >was created in the Holy Year (1992) to serve as a forum for the >Friends to discuss the Faith on USENET and a non-threatening >place for people investigating the Baha'i Faith to ask questions >and receive answers. As part of its creation, we decided that >it should be moderated, and that the Charter should spell out >very clearly what were unacceptable types of postings. talk.religion.bahai is needed is so that a truly open forum is available for critical analysis of the Bahai administration, writings, and beliefs. This is not available on soc.religion.bahai and a great deal of censorious behavior is engaged by the moderators opf that group, which is their prerogative according to their charter. In most cases dissenting opinions regarding the organization, teachings or beliefs of the Bahai religion are swept out of view or dismissed outright . In order to provide a truly unbiased forum for >"Friends to discuss the Faith on USENET and a non-threatening >place for people investigating the Baha'i Faith to ask questions >and receive answers. and the really hard issues to be discussed, talk.religion.bahai is vital. In a truly pluralistic society, all and any belief system needs to be open to critical inspection, the Bahai religion included. From - Thu Apr 10 08:18:04 1997 >From guymacon@deltanet.com Fri Mar 21 19:14:10 1997 Received: from anx-ana2172.deltanet.com (anx-ana2172.deltanet.com [204.254.68.172]) by mail2.deltanet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA04260 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 19:13:17 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199703220313.TAA04260@mail2.deltanet.com> To: FG@hotmail.com Date: Fri, 21 Mar 97 19:09:54 -0500 Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker,alt.dev.null Subject: Re: NO! vote campaign: talk.religion.bahai continues? From: guymacon@deltanet.com (Guy Macon) Followup-to: news.groups X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.8 (16bit) Organization: None References: <5gcovi$5bv$1@bilbo.reference.com> <19970318024700.VAA23860@ladder01.news.aol.com> <5glv9s$191$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5gnl92$lko$2@news06.deltanet.com> <5gtslj$hki$1@bilbo.reference.com> Approved: guymacon@deltanet.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5086 You are asking Quakers to take your side in a Usenet political battle against those who feel that there is not enough traffic to support both soc.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai, those who are against any moderated talk.* newsgroup, etc. O.K. We got the message. Everyone here has decided to either take my advice and post replies to news.groups where it is on-topic, or to stay out of this battle. Please stop posting about it in soc.religion.quaker. If you won't do that, please stop crossposting and post a seperate post to soc.religion.quaker. Your crossposting drags everyone who replies from talk.religion.misc or talk.religion.newage into our newsgroup. Please stop. Now. In article <5gtslj$hki$1@bilbo.reference.com>, FG@hotmail.com wrote: >Many Quakers have become Bahais or know something about the >religion. I'm not trying to "stuff the ballot box" but reach >people who might be well enough informed to understand the >importance of having an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai >Faith, talk.religion.bahai We did not post our discussion about moderating s.r.q into the Bahai newsgroups just because some bahais might know something about the quaker religion. That would have been rude. Please be polite and respect the boundries of our newsgroup. soc.religion.quaker is about Friends, Quakers, the Religious Society of Friends, Friendly views on various topics, etc. It is not about every religion that Friends might be familiar with, or might have joined. Besides, I doubt that there is a single ex-quaker turned bahai anywhere on usenet. >Sorry, if you find these posts as inappropriate. I haven't >intended them to be so. Do this, then. Post a question in news.groups about whether it is O.K. to troll for votes on a Bahai newsgroup in s.r.q. You will find a lot of people who feel that this is unfair, on the grounds that the other side doesn't have any s.r.q support. They hate this so much that they *will* do everything possible to kill your proposal, and will generate enough "no" votes to swapm any yes votes you get here. You are hurting your cause. Go ahead and ask in news.groups if you doubt me. It *isn't* fair. Why should your side be allowed to gather support all over the net while the other side plays by the rules and tries to get votes in news.groups and the bahai newsgroups? Do you consider that to be just? Or are you really *against* talk.religion.bahai, and are breaking the rules to get the vote to be "no"? You are asking Quakers to take your side in a Usenet political battle against those who feel that there is not enough traffic to support both soc.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai, those who are against any moderated talk.* newsgroup, etc. O.K. We got the message. Everyone here has decided to either take my advice and post replies to news.groups where it is on-topic, or to stay out of this battle. Please stop posting about it in soc.religion.quaker. If you won't do that, please stop crossposting and post a seperate post to soc.religion.quaker. Your crossposting drags everyone who replies from talk.religion.misc or talk.religion.newage into our newsgroup. Please stop. Now. In article <5gtslj$hki$1@bilbo.reference.com>, FG@hotmail.com wrote: >Many Quakers have become Bahais or know something about the >religion. I'm not trying to "stuff the ballot box" but reach >people who might be well enough informed to understand the >importance of having an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai >Faith, talk.religion.bahai We did not post our discussion about moderating s.r.q into the Bahai newsgroups just because some bahais might know something about the quaker religion. That would have been rude. Please be polite and respect the boundries of our newsgroup. soc.religion.quaker is about Friends, Quakers, the Religious Society of Friends, Friendly views on various topics, etc. It is not about every religion that Friends might be familiar with, or might have joined. Besides, I doubt that there is a single ex-quaker turned bahai anywhere on usenet. >Sorry, if you find these posts as inappropriate. I haven't >intended them to be so. Do this, then. Post a question in news.groups about whether it is O.K. to troll for votes on a Bahai newsgroup in s.r.q. You will find a lot of people who feel that this is unfair, on the grounds that the other side doesn't have any s.r.q support. They hate this so much that they *will* do everything possible to kill your proposal, and will generate enough "no" votes to swapm any yes votes you get here. You are hurting your cause. Go ahead and ask in news.groups if you doubt me. It *isn't* fair. Why should your side be allowed to gather support all over the net while the other side plays by the rules and tries to get votes in news.groups and the bahai newsgroups? Do you consider that to be just? Or are you really *against* talk.religion.bahai, and are breaking the rules to get the vote to be "no"? From - Wed Apr 09 08:20:35 1997 >From guymacon@deltanet.com Fri Mar 21 19:14:10 1997 Received: from anx-ana2172.deltanet.com (anx-ana2172.deltanet.com [204.254.68.172]) by mail2.deltanet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA04260 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 19:13:17 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199703220313.TAA04260@mail2.deltanet.com> To: FG@hotmail.com Date: Fri, 21 Mar 97 19:09:54 -0500 Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker,alt.dev.null Subject: Re: NO! vote campaign: talk.religion.bahai continues? From: guymacon@deltanet.com (Guy Macon) Followup-to: news.groups X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.8 (16bit) Organization: None References: <5gcovi$5bv$1@bilbo.reference.com> <19970318024700.VAA23860@ladder01.news.aol.com> <5glv9s$191$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5gnl92$lko$2@news06.deltanet.com> <5gtslj$hki$1@bilbo.reference.com> Approved: guymacon@deltanet.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5086 You are asking Quakers to take your side in a Usenet political battle against those who feel that there is not enough traffic to support both soc.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai, those who are against any moderated talk.* newsgroup, etc. O.K. We got the message. Everyone here has decided to either take my advice and post replies to news.groups where it is on-topic, or to stay out of this battle. Please stop posting about it in soc.religion.quaker. If you won't do that, please stop crossposting and post a seperate post to soc.religion.quaker. Your crossposting drags everyone who replies from talk.religion.misc or talk.religion.newage into our newsgroup. Please stop. Now. In article <5gtslj$hki$1@bilbo.reference.com>, FG@hotmail.com wrote: >Many Quakers have become Bahais or know something about the >religion. I'm not trying to "stuff the ballot box" but reach >people who might be well enough informed to understand the >importance of having an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai >Faith, talk.religion.bahai We did not post our discussion about moderating s.r.q into the Bahai newsgroups just because some bahais might know something about the quaker religion. That would have been rude. Please be polite and respect the boundries of our newsgroup. soc.religion.quaker is about Friends, Quakers, the Religious Society of Friends, Friendly views on various topics, etc. It is not about every religion that Friends might be familiar with, or might have joined. Besides, I doubt that there is a single ex-quaker turned bahai anywhere on usenet. >Sorry, if you find these posts as inappropriate. I haven't >intended them to be so. Do this, then. Post a question in news.groups about whether it is O.K. to troll for votes on a Bahai newsgroup in s.r.q. You will find a lot of people who feel that this is unfair, on the grounds that the other side doesn't have any s.r.q support. They hate this so much that they *will* do everything possible to kill your proposal, and will generate enough "no" votes to swapm any yes votes you get here. You are hurting your cause. Go ahead and ask in news.groups if you doubt me. It *isn't* fair. Why should your side be allowed to gather support all over the net while the other side plays by the rules and tries to get votes in news.groups and the bahai newsgroups? Do you consider that to be just? Or are you really *against* talk.religion.bahai, and are breaking the rules to get the vote to be "no"? You are asking Quakers to take your side in a Usenet political battle against those who feel that there is not enough traffic to support both soc.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai, those who are against any moderated talk.* newsgroup, etc. O.K. We got the message. Everyone here has decided to either take my advice and post replies to news.groups where it is on-topic, or to stay out of this battle. Please stop posting about it in soc.religion.quaker. If you won't do that, please stop crossposting and post a seperate post to soc.religion.quaker. Your crossposting drags everyone who replies from talk.religion.misc or talk.religion.newage into our newsgroup. Please stop. Now. In article <5gtslj$hki$1@bilbo.reference.com>, FG@hotmail.com wrote: >Many Quakers have become Bahais or know something about the >religion. I'm not trying to "stuff the ballot box" but reach >people who might be well enough informed to understand the >importance of having an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai >Faith, talk.religion.bahai We did not post our discussion about moderating s.r.q into the Bahai newsgroups just because some bahais might know something about the quaker religion. That would have been rude. Please be polite and respect the boundries of our newsgroup. soc.religion.quaker is about Friends, Quakers, the Religious Society of Friends, Friendly views on various topics, etc. It is not about every religion that Friends might be familiar with, or might have joined. Besides, I doubt that there is a single ex-quaker turned bahai anywhere on usenet. >Sorry, if you find these posts as inappropriate. I haven't >intended them to be so. Do this, then. Post a question in news.groups about whether it is O.K. to troll for votes on a Bahai newsgroup in s.r.q. You will find a lot of people who feel that this is unfair, on the grounds that the other side doesn't have any s.r.q support. They hate this so much that they *will* do everything possible to kill your proposal, and will generate enough "no" votes to swapm any yes votes you get here. You are hurting your cause. Go ahead and ask in news.groups if you doubt me. It *isn't* fair. Why should your side be allowed to gather support all over the net while the other side plays by the rules and tries to get votes in news.groups and the bahai newsgroups? Do you consider that to be just? Or are you really *against* talk.religion.bahai, and are breaking the rules to get the vote to be "no"? From - Wed Apr 09 08:20:09 1997 >From spanky9114@aol.com Mon Mar 17 18:47:17 1997 Received: from ladder01.news.aol.com (ladder01.news-fddi.aol.com [172.16.30.168]) by ngeout01.news.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA14329 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 21:53:09 -0500 Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 21:47:07 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <19970318024700.VAA23860@ladder01.news.aol.com> Newsgroups: news.groups To: FG@hotmail.com From: spanky9114@aol.com (Spanky9114) Organization: AOL https://www.aol.com References: <5gcovi$5bv$1@bilbo.reference.com> Subject: Re: NO! vote campaign: talk.religion.bahai continues? X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1608 >Mark Towfiq (towfiq@justice.medford.ma.us) wrote: Subject: RE: Pointer: CFV talk.religion.bahai >Dear friends, a situation which has been developing over the past few >months has finally come to a head. >As many of you may already know, the soc.religion.bahai newsgroup >was created in the Holy Year (1992) to serve as a forum for the >Friends to discuss the Faith on USENET and a non-threatening >place for people investigating the Baha'i Faith to ask questions >and receive answers. As part of its creation, we decided that >it should be moderated, and that the Charter should spell out >very clearly what were unacceptable types of postings. talk.religion.bahai is needed is so that a truly open forum is available for critical analysis of the Bahai administration, writings, and beliefs. This is not available on soc.religion.bahai and a great deal of censorious behavior is engaged by the moderators opf that group, which is their prerogative according to their charter. In most cases dissenting opinions regarding the organization, teachings or beliefs of the Bahai religion are swept out of view or dismissed outright . In order to provide a truly unbiased forum for >"Friends to discuss the Faith on USENET and a non-threatening >place for people investigating the Baha'i Faith to ask questions >and receive answers. and the really hard issues to be discussed, talk.religion.bahai is vital. In a truly pluralistic society, all and any belief system needs to be open to critical inspection, the Bahai religion included. From - Thu Apr 10 08:18:12 1997 >From guymacon@deltanet.com Sun Mar 23 11:13:32 1997 Received: from ana1054.deltanet.com (ana2082.deltanet.com [199.171.191.82]) by mail2.deltanet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA28711 for ; Sun, 23 Mar 1997 11:12:07 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199703231912.LAA28711@mail2.deltanet.com> X-Sender: guymacon@mail.deltanet.com (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 23 Mar 1997 12:11:54 -0800 To: FG@hotmail.com From: guymacon@deltanet.com (Guy Macon) Subject: Re: NO! vote campaign: talk.religion.bahai continues? X-Mailer: X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 332 >I posted a message yesterday to soc.religion.quaker that I'd >stop posting there since it seems to bother you so much. Please forgive me if you got the impression that I was criticising you. That post was a reply to a crosspost by graham@fragrant.demon.co.uk, and was not addressed to you. Sorry if it was not clear. From - Mon Apr 07 07:53:39 1997 >From osborndo@pilot.msu.edu Tue Apr 1 08:13:11 1997 Received: from algeria (meke.isp.msu.edu [35.8.242.49]) by pilot04.cl.msu.edu (8.7.5/MSU-2.10) id LAA69846; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 11:13:21 -0500 Message-Id: <199704011613.LAA69846@pilot04.cl.msu.edu> Date: Tue, 01 Apr 97 11:17:32 -0800 From: Donald Zhang Osborn Organization: ---- X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.config,news.groups To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Clarification III (was Re: alt.religion.bahai) References: <5hob40$747$1@bilbo.reference.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 980 FG@hotmail.com wrote (in part): >the unethical defeat of talk.religion.bahai by the NO vote >campaign of M... T..... and other fascist Bahais.... We've been over this several times already. 1) the defeat of t.r.b. was not unethical; 2) there was no "no vote campaign," only a mistake by an individual (who acted honorably to correct it); 3) other factors were certainly more important than that mistake in catalyzing the no vote; 4) you've never mentioned (apologies in advance if I missed it) the "yes vote campaign" which some individuals conducted on several newsgroups. Furthermore resorting to hyperbolic oxymorons like "fascist Baha'is" do nothing to promote any kind of constructive dialogue. I remain of the opinion that there is not currently the need or demand for another Baha'i newsgroup, based in part on the virtual lack of any constructive discussion of the Baha'i faith on the Usenet outside of news:soc.religion.bahai DZO From - Tue Apr 08 15:56:37 1997 >From osborndo@pilot.msu.edu Tue Apr 8 08:44:27 1997 Received: from new586.casid.msu.edu (du1330.casid.msu.edu [35.8.70.3]) by pilot11.cl.msu.edu (8.7.5/MSU-2.10) id LAA72601; Tue, 8 Apr 1997 11:42:03 -0400 Message-ID: <334A674F.1B14@pilot.msu.edu> Date: Tue, 08 Apr 1997 11:42:07 -0400 From: Donald Zhang Osborn Reply-To: ----@pilot.msu.edu Organization: ---- X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.religion.bahai To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Clarification VII (was Re: Shame on ...) References: <5hp2id$636@murrow.corp.sgi.com> <5hs3bm$9oq$1@bilbo.reference.com> <860103395.10314@dejanews.com> <5i2olb$hck$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5i9mhu$qum$1@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz> <5idb0s$lov$1@bilbo.reference.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6152 FG@hotmail.com wrote: > On 7 Apr 1997 02:35:42 GMT, math5ijf@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Isaac Freeman) wrote: >> The Baha'i cyber-community did not _organise_ 700 "no" votes. To the very best >> of my knowledge, the Baha'i community did not organise any votes whatsoever. >> >> A post was made to three mailing lists telling people how to vote no, by a single >> individual. He quickly retracted it when advised by others that it was not >> acceptable. >> >> This does not, to my mind, constitute a campaign, and certainly not one >> organised by the "Baha'i community". If you have any evidence of a real >> campaign, I'd like to see it. > > A Bahai institution, the National Spiritual Assembly of Iceland, > DID vote NO, as did four present and former NSA members. Those > facts, coupled with Towfiq's NO vote campaign, call this > seriously into question.... See my message "Bahai institution > participated voter fraud: talk.religion.bahai" on news.groups, > alt.religion.bahai, and elsewhere.... 1) Accepting for a moment that your premise that votes by members of National Spiritual Assemblies and the apparent vote by a National Spiritual Assembly means that there was some sort of campaign, then why would there be so few NSA members (keeping in mind there are 9 per country) and NSAs voting? Sounds like a campaign that couldn't draw much support from NSAs or those currently or formerly serving on NSAs. Or else it was really something more like a grassroots reaction??? 2) That said, I question the notion that the vote of four people, some of whom are and some formerly were members of National Spiritual Assemblies, means anything more than the vote of four people. 3) The apparent vote of the NSA of Iceland is a more complicated issue. First of all, I say apparent because all we know for sure is that a vote came from its E-mail address. (a) Is it certain that the E-mail account was not used by an individual who should have changed the return address line? This question might sem disingenuous, but that was my first question when I saw the vote. (b) If the NSA did vote, is there anything in the Usenet guidelines which advise against that? (c) Finally, and more to Frederick's point, if the NSA of Iceland really was bent on influencing the vote, wouldn't it be more effective to have all nine members vote individually? 4) These points are worth looking into, but from all I've seen, there was never any such "no-vote campaign." In addition, I don't see how the points Frederick raises could be construed as indicating a campaign. [IF]>> >> Like many others, I was surprised to see so many people vote "no", and I doubt >> that they all understood the issues involved. On the other hand, I was >> surprised that so many people voted "yes", and likewise doubt their full >> understanding. > > Huh.... I think the point was that there was a "yes vote" effort by some people posting to several newsgroups. Any serious concern with alleged "vote fraud" would have to look at those also. [FG]>>> >>> A very good question. One that none of the "attack dogs," or >>> anyone else, for soc.religion.bahai has yet properly >>> answered.... [snip] >>> Rather, all have rushed to justify their perfidy >>> and have attacked me and maligned my character..... Frederick, yesterday (in "a.r.bahai/t.r.bahai clarifications") I pledged to try to treat your use of inflammatory and insulting terms with a "sin covering eye." So here I will try to limit my comments to your accusations. If I understand you correctly, you are implying that there is some group of people acting somehow on behalf of s.r.b. to attack you and malign your character. This is a rather serious accusation. If you have any evidence of such a plot, you should organize it and present it in a serious and specific manner. I can only speak for myself. I am aware of no organized effort of any sort--I certainly don't have time to conspire with anyone regarding your ideas or image (I'm sacrificing enough time already trying to in my own imperfect way contribute to these sometimes maddening discussions). There have been some profane & insulting attacks on you, but not from a Baha'i. Aside from these regrettable outbursts, there have been postings by Baha'is (& perhaps others) questioning various of your statements (part of a normal discussion) and comments by others (mostly non-Baha'is it seems) concerning your net behavior. None of these involved attacks or maligning of character. Moreover, the latter indicate the strong possibility that your image of your own making and not from attacks or malignment. [IF]>> >> If I have ever attacked you or maligned your character, it was unintentional. >> I apologise sincerely if you've ever received this impression. >> I don't think it's acceptable behaviour for anyone to make abusive posts, even >> if they feel angry or frustrated. > > tsk,tsk,tsk.... All you're doing is chanting the same song, in > my opinion.... So someone apologizes if they've in any way wronged you and stated a standard of behavior that they believe we all should adhere to, and you just dismiss it like that? What was amiss or objectionable in what he wrote? >>>[FG] >>> and not reluctant to resort to the lowest, dirtest tactics >>> to achieve.... All this in the name of Baha'u'llah.... >> >> What tactics are these? >> All I can see is that it's a surprisingly large number. If you think that >> low, dirty, tactics have been used, please tell us what they are. > > Ever hear of T.....? This individual, who has been made nearly famous by your repeated repostings (of his unfortunate appeal for no votes) and references to him made a mistake. Baha'i friends wrote him about that and he did the noble thing in apologizing and retracting the appeal. This is not to excuse his action, but was your course of action really justified? Does it not amount to maligning his character? Permit me to repeat Isaac's question: what were these low & dirty tactics you refer to? DZO From - Tue Apr 08 15:56:42 1997 >From osborndo@pilot.msu.edu Tue Apr 8 10:48:46 1997 Received: from new586.casid.msu.edu (du1330.casid.msu.edu [35.8.70.3]) by pilot11.cl.msu.edu (8.7.5/MSU-2.10) id NAA106616; Tue, 8 Apr 1997 13:49:00 -0400 Message-ID: <334A8516.C68@pilot.msu.edu> Date: Tue, 08 Apr 1997 13:49:10 -0400 From: Donald Zhang Osborn Reply-To: ----@pilot.msu.edu Organization: ---- X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.religion.bahai To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Clarification VII (was Re: Shame on ...) References: <5hp2id$636@murrow.corp.sgi.com> <5hs3bm$9oq$1@bilbo.reference.com> <860103395.10314@dejanews.com> <5i2olb$hck$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5i9mhu$qum$1@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz> <5idb0s$lov$1@bilbo.reference.com> <334A674F.1B14@pilot.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 968 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: >There have been some profane & insulting attacks on you, but not from a >Baha'i. Aside from these regrettable outbursts, there have been >postings by Baha'is (& perhaps others) questioning various of your >statements (part of a normal discussion) and comments by others (mostly >non-Baha'is it seems) concerning your net behavior. None of these >involved attacks or maligning of character. Moreover, the latter Sorry, I neglected to mention that there were at least three intemperate postings (not profane but still "attacks") directed to you by different Baha'is. These are also unjustified, in content & use of language. However, they are certainly not the result of any coordinated effort. And the vast majority of the many postings by Baha'is on the t.r.b. topic, whatever their opinions, was generally reasonable IMHO. My memory is slow (and overburdened these days) but it catches up with me eventually. DZO From - Mon Apr 07 07:52:40 1997 >From eagle@cyclone.stanford.edu Sat Mar 29 16:52:00 1997 Received: (from eagle@localhost) by cyclone.stanford.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA04598; Sat, 29 Mar 1997 16:52:11 -0800 (PST) Sender: eagle@cyclone.Stanford.EDU To: " Frederick Glaysher" Cc: cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu, group-advice@isc.org Subject: Re: Coercion in the Bahai Faith References: <199703281220.EAA24940@f19.hotmail.com> From: Russ Allbery In-Reply-To: " Frederick Glaysher"'s message of Fri, 28 Mar 1997 04:20:41 -0800 (PST) Date: 29 Mar 1997 16:52:11 -0800 Message-ID: Lines: 30 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1542 Frederick Glaysher writes: > This message from what Bahais call an Auxiliary Board Member is clearly > threatening me with some kind of punishment for my attempting to create > a newsgroup where free speech and religious conscience could exist and > "unity" questioned. [snip] | I have been reading your e-mail postings recently. I would like to speak | with you by phone about some of your throughts and opinions regarding | matters relevant to the Baha'i Faith. As an Auxiliary Board members for | Michigan, I am always interested in issues which relate to individual | spiritual responsibility and the Baha'i Faith's principle of unity. My | phone number is 616/789-0590. Whatever threat may exist in that is rather far from obvious, and in any case is *still* irrelevant to the newsgroup creation process. The purpose is to measure demonstrated interest in a new newsgroup. 157 people is not an overwhelming demonstration of interest in a new newsgroup. Given the questions of need and demonstrated traffic, and the concerns over creating a new talk.religion.* group as another home to the endless crossposted religion flamewars unless necessary, as well as the abrasive and confrontational nature of the campaign for the group and the extensive use of ad hominem attacks by the proponent, all of which are more or less valid reasons for voting no, I see very little justification for overturning this vote. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From - Sat Feb 15 10:12:56 1997 Received: from quest.cc.purdue.edu (128.210.250.54) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 15 Feb 1997 10:02:10 -0500 Received: (from keillan@localhost) by quest.cc.purdue.edu (7.2.5/7.2.5) id KAA29180 for @moa.net; Sat, 15 Feb 1997 10:07:46 -0500 From: "Kelly G. Willis" Message-Id: <199702151507.KAA29180@quest.cc.purdue.edu> Subject: Re: Concerning talk.religion.bahai Proposal (or) The '97 Vote To: @moa.net Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1997 10:07:46 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <856001205.108@dejanews.com> from "@moa.net" at Feb 15, 97 05:51:15 am Organization: Purdue University, Department of Chemistry X-URL: https://quest.cc.purdue.edu/~keillan/ X-Geek-Code: GS d- s+:+ a- C+ UA P+ L E? W++ N+ o? K- w+ !O M-- V? PS PE+(-) Y? PGP+ t+ 5++ X R tv+ b+ DI++++ !D G++ e++>++++$ h+ r- y- X-Copyright: 1997, Kelly G. Willis; all rights reserved (I think) X-Incantation: In the Perception of the Universe and by the Nine Dark Moons... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 2385 Using technology of the Second Millenium, thou didst unto me write: [In indirect response to my USENET article] *> I've been a Bahai for over twenty years. I don't believe the need *> for an uncensored, unmoderated newsgroup is going change any time *> soon.... Remember an uncensored forum would not only be for *> Bahais but also for other people to obtain unfiltered discussion *> on the Bahai Faith. Permit me to be honest. I feel that the initial resons that you submitted for the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup stemed for from a personal discomfort with the moderation policies on the soc.religion.bahai newsgroup, to which I have never personally been opposed. Nevertheless, when I initally subscribed to s.r.b., I was concerned over the time delay that the moderation policy inherently introduces. At that time, I felt that an unmoderated group would be beneficial. Since that time, the crossover rate on s.r.b. has diminished, and I learned of the "importance" of consultation that generally would involve a means of maintaining an atmosphere of civility and avoidance of redundancy. Nevertheless, I have chosen to follow the advice of the Baha'i Faith and "see with my own eyes" on this issue. I would tend to favor the creation of an open forum as you have proposed, since this does allow some people to resort to less than civil argumentation, which for some people this is needed. It would also show that the Baha'i Faith is not an esoteric, pseudo-gnostic religion. (This reminds me on an episode of "Perfect Strangers" in which Larry became involved with a sales scheme and told Balki that Balki was not "ready for the `book'".) Of course, that does not mean that I would automatically vote YES, since as I stated before, I fear that a new newsgroup would fall prey to massive crossposts, spammers, and enemies of the Faith who involved themselves in flame-baiting, of which I do not care to be personally involved. I will have to ponder some more over this before I am able to cast a ballot. -- ----- \\\\\\\\\ Only from the mind of Kelly G. Willis // Purdue University ) ( | \\ Email: keillan@purdue.edu // Dept. of Chemistry / \ --O-- /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// (_____) | // "Dead? No excuse for laying off work!" -- The Supreme Being From - Sat Feb 15 10:23:10 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.86) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 15 Feb 1997 10:15:36 -0500 Message-ID: <3305D4D2.2968@moa.net> Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1997 10:22:58 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Kelly G. Willis" Subject: Re: Concerning talk.religion.bahai Proposal (or) The '97 Vote References: <199702151507.KAA29180@quest.cc.purdue.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 3451 Kelly G. Willis wrote: > > Using technology of the Second Millenium, thou didst unto me write: > > [In indirect response to my USENET article] > > *> I've been a Bahai for over twenty years. I don't believe the need > *> for an uncensored, unmoderated newsgroup is going change any time > *> soon.... Remember an uncensored forum would not only be for > *> Bahais but also for other people to obtain unfiltered discussion > *> on the Bahai Faith. > > Permit me to be honest. I feel that the initial resons that you > submitted for the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup stemed for > from a personal discomfort with the moderation policies on the > soc.religion.bahai newsgroup, to which I have never personally been > opposed. I respect your judgment but believe it was more philosophical, on principle. The moderators are unelected and unappointed. What we get on srb is their personal interference. Nevertheless, when I initally subscribed to s.r.b., I > was concerned over the time delay that the moderation policy > inherently introduces. At that time, I felt that an unmoderated > group would be beneficial. > > Since that time, the crossover rate on s.r.b. has diminished, and I > learned of the "importance" of consultation that generally would > involve a means of maintaining an atmosphere of civility and avoidance > of redundancy. See the messages from the moderators and myself regarding TRAFFIC, which they can't keep up with. Nevertheless, I have chosen to follow the advice of > the Baha'i Faith and "see with my own eyes" on this issue. I would > tend to favor the creation of an open forum as you have proposed, > since this does allow some people to resort to less than civil > argumentation, which for some people this is needed. It would > also show that the Baha'i Faith is not an esoteric, pseudo-gnostic > religion. (This reminds me on an episode of "Perfect Strangers" in > which Larry became involved with a sales scheme and told Balki that > Balki was not "ready for the `book'".) > > Of course, that does not mean that I would automatically vote YES, since > as I stated before, I fear that a new newsgroup would fall prey to > massive crossposts, spammers, and enemies of the Faith who involved > themselves in flame-baiting, of which I do not care to be personally > involved. I will have to ponder some more over this before I am able > to cast a ballot. > -- > ----- \\\\\\\\\ Only from the mind of Kelly G. Willis // Purdue University > ) ( | \\ Email: keillan@purdue.edu // Dept. of Chemistry > / \ --O-- /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > (_____) | // "Dead? No excuse for laying off work!" -- The Supreme Being I have not asked you or anyone to automatically vote yes. I've always suggested all along to consider it in your own good conscience. If you're only reading soc.religion.bahai with an email echo, you need to realize you're getting one side of the discussion. The rest is on news.groups along with examples, from people other than myself, of censored messages. I've address all the issue you raise above in my rationale and elsewhere. I don't want to bore again if you've read them. If you do think there's a need, have the courage to say so on srb and elsewhere than just email. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sat Feb 15 10:22:58 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <3305D4D2.2968@moa.net> Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1997 10:22:58 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Kelly G. Willis" Subject: Re: Concerning talk.religion.bahai Proposal (or) The '97 Vote References: <199702151507.KAA29180@quest.cc.purdue.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 3453 Kelly G. Willis wrote: > > Using technology of the Second Millenium, thou didst unto me write: > > [In indirect response to my USENET article] > > *> I've been a Bahai for over twenty years. I don't believe the need > *> for an uncensored, unmoderated newsgroup is going change any time > *> soon.... Remember an uncensored forum would not only be for > *> Bahais but also for other people to obtain unfiltered discussion > *> on the Bahai Faith. > > Permit me to be honest. I feel that the initial resons that you > submitted for the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup stemed for > from a personal discomfort with the moderation policies on the > soc.religion.bahai newsgroup, to which I have never personally been > opposed. I respect your judgment but believe it was more philosophical, on principle. The moderators are unelected and unappointed. What we get on srb is their personal interference. Nevertheless, when I initally subscribed to s.r.b., I > was concerned over the time delay that the moderation policy > inherently introduces. At that time, I felt that an unmoderated > group would be beneficial. > > Since that time, the crossover rate on s.r.b. has diminished, and I > learned of the "importance" of consultation that generally would > involve a means of maintaining an atmosphere of civility and avoidance > of redundancy. See the messages from the moderators and myself regarding TRAFFIC, which they can't keep up with. Nevertheless, I have chosen to follow the advice of > the Baha'i Faith and "see with my own eyes" on this issue. I would > tend to favor the creation of an open forum as you have proposed, > since this does allow some people to resort to less than civil > argumentation, which for some people this is needed. It would > also show that the Baha'i Faith is not an esoteric, pseudo-gnostic > religion. (This reminds me on an episode of "Perfect Strangers" in > which Larry became involved with a sales scheme and told Balki that > Balki was not "ready for the `book'".) > > Of course, that does not mean that I would automatically vote YES, since > as I stated before, I fear that a new newsgroup would fall prey to > massive crossposts, spammers, and enemies of the Faith who involved > themselves in flame-baiting, of which I do not care to be personally > involved. I will have to ponder some more over this before I am able > to cast a ballot. > -- > ----- \\\\\\\\\ Only from the mind of Kelly G. Willis // Purdue University > ) ( | \\ Email: keillan@purdue.edu // Dept. of Chemistry > / \ --O-- /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > (_____) | // "Dead? No excuse for laying off work!" -- The Supreme Being I have not asked you or anyone to automatically vote yes. I've always suggested all along to consider it in your own good conscience. If you're only reading soc.religion.bahai with an email echo, you need to realize you're getting one side of the discussion. The rest is on news.groups along with examples, from people other than myself, of censored messages. I've address all the issue you raise above in my rationale and elsewhere. I don't want to bore again if you've read them. If you do think there's a need, have the courage to say so on srb and elsewhere than just email. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sun Feb 16 08:44:36 1997 Received: from quest.cc.purdue.edu (128.210.250.54) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 16 Feb 1997 06:21:47 -0500 Received: (from keillan@localhost) by quest.cc.purdue.edu (7.2.5/7.2.5) id GAA18828 for @moa.net; Sun, 16 Feb 1997 06:27:23 -0500 From: "Kelly G. Willis" Message-Id: <199702161127.GAA18828@quest.cc.purdue.edu> Subject: Re: Concerning talk.religion.bahai Proposal (or) The '97 Vote (or) The Great Debate To: @moa.net Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1997 06:27:23 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <3305D4D2.2968@moa.net> from "Frederick Glaysher" at Feb 15, 97 10:22:58 am Organization: Purdue University, Department of Chemistry X-URL: https://quest.cc.purdue.edu/~keillan/ X-Geek-Code: GS d- s+:+ a- C+ UA P+ L E? W++ N+ o? K- w+ !O M-- V? PS PE+(-) Y? PGP+ t+ 5++ X R tv+ b+ DI++++ !D G++ e++>++++$ h+ r- y- X-Copyright: 1997, Kelly G. Willis; all rights reserved (I think) X-Incantation: In the Perception of the Universe and by the Nine Dark Moons... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1703 Using technology of the Second Millenium, thou didst unto me write: *> I have not asked you or anyone to automatically vote yes. I've always *> suggested all along to consider it in your own good conscience. If *> you're *> only reading soc.religion.bahai with an email echo, you need to realize *> you're getting one side of the discussion. The rest is on news.groups *> along *> with examples, from people other than myself, of censored messages. *> *> I've address all the issue you raise above in my rationale and *> elsewhere. *> I don't want to bore again if you've read them. I have been able to follow much of the discussion on both s.r.b. and on news.groups, and my current position is reflective of that. *> If you do think there's a need, have the courage to say so on srb and *> elsewhere than just email. I somehow am not sure that a "need" for an unmoderated newsgroup exists. Indeed, I actually don't see a "need" for the entire USENET :-). But within the context that you are stipulating, whether or not a need exists is still open for debate, at least as I am concerned. At least I'm still pondering over it. By the way, if the moderators are unelected and unappointed, then how did they come into their current position? Did they become moderators _ex nihilo_, or were they always moderators from the beginning of time? :-) -- ----- \\\\\\\\\ Only from the mind of Kelly G. Willis // Purdue University ) ( | \\ Email: keillan@purdue.edu // Dept. of Chemistry / \ --O-- /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// (_____) | // "Dead? No excuse for laying off work!" -- The Supreme Being From - Fri Mar 28 07:37:22 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <333BBB82.5E55@moa.net> Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 07:37:22 -0500 From: <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jason.roberts@nospam.mail.admin.wisc.edu Subject: consider Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 772 If you are less than pleased with the unethical NO vote campaign against talk.religion.bahai please make your feelings known to David "Tale" Lawrence, who coordinates the creation of newsgroups. He has the authority to overturn voting abuse. It has been done in the past, and it can be done in this outrageous case. I urge you not to accept the fraudulent RESULT. There is no justifiable reason 157 people, Bahais and non-Bahais, who want an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith should have to wait 6 months because of a clearly orchestrated NO vote campaign. David "Tale" Lawrence at group-advice@uunet.uu.net Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Thu Apr 10 08:18:39 1997 >From rdetweil@usr04.primenet.com Thu Mar 27 07:12:44 1997 Received: (from rdetweil@localhost) by usr04.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA13966; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 08:12:51 -0700 (MST) From: "Richard C. Detweiler" Message-Id: <199703271512.IAA13966@usr04.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Copy of Towfiq's NO vote instructions To: FG@hotmail.com Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 08:12:50 -0700 (MST) Cc: srb-mods@bcca.org In-Reply-To: <199703271509.HAA02926@shadowfax.reference.com> from "FG@hotmail.com" at Mar 27, 97 07:09:06 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 6453 Fred, I won't be posting this to the newsgroup and it was not posted to the newsgroup in its original form - you can check that on DejaNews. Since bahai-faith is fed only through newsgroup submittals, it sbhould not have appeared there. It is my understanding that it went out to the bahai-only lists supported by the Baha'i Computer and Communication Association. If you would like to discuss the vote results on the newsgroup in a way that meets the charter, I would be happy to accomodate you. Dick Detweiler, co-moderator, soc.religion.bahai > from panuser@reference.com Thu Mar 27 08:09:39 1997 > Received: from bcca.org (bounty.bcca.org [208.133.44.40]) > by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA04004 > for ; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 08:09:35 -0700 (MST) > Received: from shadowfax.reference.com by bcca.org with smtp > (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0wAGnu-0003oiC; Thu, 27 Mar 97 10:09 EST > Received: (from panuser@localhost) > by shadowfax.reference.com (8.8.5/8.8.4) > id HAA02926; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 07:09:06 -0800 (PST) > Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 07:09:06 -0800 (PST) > Message-Id: <199703271509.HAA02926@shadowfax.reference.com> > From: FG@hotmail.com > Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.rights.human,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet > Cc: bahai-faith@bcca.org, talisman@umich.edu, irfan@umich.edu > Subject: Copy of Towfiq's NO vote instructions > Organization: Reference.Com Posting Service > Content-Length: 4566 > > [Here's a copy of Towfiq's NO vote instructions now that we > can all see and judge the RESULTS of it. I've yet to read > the names and addresses of the three listservs it was posted > to. I'd appreciate knowing that. Bahai-faith@bcca.org? > I've also yet to see Mr. Towfiq's supposed apology appear > anywhere....] > > > Subject: NO! vote campaign: talk.religion.bahai > From: FG@hotmail.com > Date: 1997/03/12 > Message-Id: <5g674t$6ba$1@bilbo.reference.com> > Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc > [More Headers] > > This appeal for NO votes was apparently posted recently to the > Bahai woman's discussion listserv. > > >Mark Towfiq (towfiq@justice.medford.ma.us) wrote: > > >Subject: RE: Pointer: CFV talk.religion.bahai > > >Dear friends, a situation which has been developing over the past few > >months has finally come to a head. > > > >As many of you may already know, the soc.religion.bahai newsgroup > >was created in the Holy Year (1992) to serve as a forum for the > >Friends to discuss the Faith on USENET and a non-threatening > >place for people investigating the Baha'i Faith to ask questions > >and receive answers. As part of its creation, we decided that > >it should be moderated, and that the Charter should spell out > >very clearly what were unacceptable types of postings. Among > >such unacceptable postings were deemed personal insults and > >attacks on individuals and religious institutions. > >Later last year, the Charter was made more explicit to exclude > >postings which undermine the Covenant. The newsgroup has been > >moderated by a set of Baha'is since its inception who, in my > >opinion, have applied the Charter and Baha'i principles to a > >high degree of fairness, and have maintained a rather good tone > >and environment. We have received numerous compliments about > >this over the years. > > > >Recently, an individual, Frederick Glaysher (I do not know if > >he is a Baha'i or not), > > I have been a member of the Bahai Faith for over 20 years. > > >has accused the moderators of > >soc.religion.bahai of "censorship", claiming that they will not > >allow his point of view to be posted there. > > I am not the only person to accuse, quite accurately, the > "moderators" of censorship. Several people have. Read the > discussion on news.groups > > >As a result, he > >has asked for the creation of a new, unmoderated forum, called > >talk.religion.bahai. The postings which Mr. Glaysher complains > >about were all rejected on the basis of tone; he wanted to > >post open insults and sarcasm, > > Where in the Bahai Writings does it state, THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT > SARCASM! An incisive literary tool for dealing with tyrants > in all ages of human history.... Despots have always feared > it revealing edge.... > > >and the moderators > >asked him to re-phrase his postings. > > "Self-censor" would be more like it.... > > >He refused, and claimed > >he was being censored, and embarked upon this campaign to > >create a new newsgroup. > > I would call it a campaign for human freedom of religious > conscience and dignity against fanatics and extremists in > the Bahai Faith like Mark Towfiq.... > > >Dear Friends, if this new newsgroup is created, in my opinion > >it will cause great confusion; there will now be two, almost > >identical fora to discuss the Faith, but one of them will allow > >any sorts of postings, including postings from Covenant-breakers. > >Besides this fact, such a newsgroup is not necessary, as there > >exist plenty of open forums on USENET (such as > >talk.relgion.misc) where Mr. Glaysher may post his opinions > >"freely". > > The points of the foregoing paragraph have been discussed fully > over the past weeks. See news.groups.... > > > > >HOW TO VOTE NO: Send email to: jjd@primenet.com > > > >With the only text of the message being: > > > > I vote NO on talk.religion.bahai > > > > It's widely considered on USEnet unethical to vote NO when > 100 or more people wish to form a newsgroup on any subject. > To vote NO for ideological reasons, here clearly religious > reasons, would be a disgrace to the Bahai Faith. Are you, > Mr. Towfiq, trying to prove to the world the Bahai Faith is > full of ignorant, contemptible fanatics? You're doing a > good job of it. > > >I would be happy to provide further information or > >answer any questions about this matter. > > > >Regards, > >Mark Towfiq > > > > > > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > > > > > -- > > Posted using Reference.COM https://www.reference.com > Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. > > InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting. > From - Mon Apr 28 08:22:31 1997 >From boatright@cjnetworks.com Sun Apr 27 22:21:03 1997 Received: from rickboat (Port84.cjnetworks.com [199.240.71.71]) by topeka.cjnetworks.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA27713; Mon, 28 Apr 1997 00:20:59 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199704280520.AAA27713@topeka.cjnetworks.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Rick Boatright" Organization: Topeka Business Computers To: FG@hotmail.com Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 00:43:29 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Couldn't shun covenent breakers Reply-to: boatright@cjnetworks.com CC: srb-mods@bcca.org Priority: normal In-reply-to: <5jvgte$843$1@bilbo.reference.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.50) X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 3700 Frederick, I'm returning this one to you. Not a great surprize I'm sure, but allow me to explain just exactly why. 1) You made the original accusation of Roger in the newsgroup. He responded with a source for the original posts, and a counter arguement. That's as far as the mods are prepared to let a personal arguement in the newsgroup go. 2) Again the moderators take the position that your equating accusations of making statements in opposition to positions of the Administrative Order is not equivalent to a return to the dark ages. Your opinion will, no doubt be different, and I apologise in advance for the trouble that this rejection causes you, since you will, do doubt be cross posting it as is your norm. Rick Boatright co-moderator soc.religion.bahai > To: soc-religion-bahai@ncren.net > From: FG@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: Couldn't shun covenent breakers > Date: 27 Apr 1997 12:30:38 GMT > Organization: Reference.Com Posting Service > > On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 21:32:37 -0600, rreini@wwnet.com (Roger > Reini) wrote: > On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 17:49:20 -0600, in > soc.religion.bahai Frederick > Glaysher wrote: > > >While not having > made a study of the claims of people known > >as covenant breakers > by Bahais, I have, like many Bahais, > >occasionally run across one > thing or another published by them. > >Let me say for the record, > since some Bahais over the last few > >months have accused me of > being a covenant breaker, including > >Mr. Reini, that I do not find > their claims persuasive. Indeed, > >I find the claims of both the > Orthodox and Sans-Guardian Bahais > >untenable. I do not believe > burning them at the stake is in > >harmony with the Bahai Writings. > > > > > This statement is not correct. I have never accused Mr. > Glaysher of > being a Covenant breaker. I did say to him (in > private communications > subsequently made public without my > consent) that I believed some > statements of his could be > interpreted as disrespectful to the > Institutions, or possibly > undermining their authority. This is not > the same as accusing > someone of breaking the Covenant, IMHO. > > You definitely and knowingly intimated it twice, Roger. And I > was supposed to allow you to do so in secrecy? > > > > > There is no need to go into the details of what was said. Those > > of you who are interested can use Deja News to search for articles > > related to talk.religion.bahai. > > Search for my "Reponse to a Fanatic." > > > > > Anyone who is interested in discussing this further should either > > e-mail me or post to alt.religion.bahai. IMHO, this discussion > > does not belong here on s.r.b, as it would detract from the other > > good discussions happening here -- and those about to happen here, > > as the Ridvan letter and the Statement on Women have just been > > issued. > > Uh huh.... The problem isn't only Roger. It's Bahais in general who > "witch hunt" when confronted with opinions they don't like or > believe themselves not to be "orthodox." Two other Bahais also > accused me of being a covenant breaker during the past months.... Do > we really want to go back to the Dark Ages? > > > > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) > > https://www.wwnet.com/~rreini/ > > > > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > > -- > > Posted using Reference.COM > https://www.reference.com Browse, Search and Post Usenet and > Mailing list Archive and Catalog. > > InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this > posting. From - Sun Apr 27 08:33:25 1997 >From jgoldberg@megsinet.net Sat Apr 26 20:53:36 1997 Received: from ns.megsinet.net ([208.150.38.213]) by megspo1.megsinet.net (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-11704) with SMTP id AAA127 for ; Sat, 26 Apr 1997 22:51:49 -0500 Message-ID: <3362CD96.6633@megsinet.net> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 22:52:54 -0500 From: jgoldberg@megsinet.net (Jeffrey Goldberg) Reply-To: jgoldberg@megsinet.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: covenent breakers References: <> <5jsvh2$2j0$1@bilbo.reference.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 2485 FG@hotmail.com wrote: > Alt.religion.bahai is an unmoderated newsgroup for discussion > > of the Bahai Faith by anyone who so cares to post to it. > > Although I was not directly responsible for the creation of > > alt.religion.bahai, it did result as a spin off of discussion > > for talk.religion.bahai, which I initiated. Neither was or is > > intended as a site for covenant breakers. > > While not having made a study of the claims of people known > > as covenant breakers by Bahais, I have, like many Bahais, > > occasionally run across one thing or another published by them. Frankly, I find these statements surprising considering all of the criticisms you have leveled about the un-orthodox (that is, the sans-Guardian) believers and their methods of mind control and censorship. It is my understanding that this site is intended as a discussion of the Baha'i Faith -- a discussion that is not controlled or censored. The most blatant form of censorship (but by no means the only one) on soc.religion.bahai is the arrogant refusal to accept different opinions about the Covenant. The fanatical repression of the Orthodox believers cannot occur here in an unmoderated forum. This is what this site is about. Anyone can say anything that they believe about the Baha'i Faith. They do not have to clear it with anyone, not even you. Isn't that what you believe is the "intent" of this site? It is amazing to me that you too, after all that you have said, would imply that the voices of the orthodox faith should not be heard here. I also wonder why you reject the Orthodox Faith when you have admitted that you have not studied it. I would think that you are dis-illusioned enough by now to have begun your search for the truth. Just to say that you are a Baha'i is not enough. Baha'u'llah demands that we evolve spiritually and seek the truth no matter where it might lead us. If you did seek the truth, you might find that the Great Violation of the Covenant of Baha'u'llah was committed by the Hands and is now being carried on by the un-orthodox so-called Baha'is. You might find that the covenant breakers are the sans-Guardian Baha'is and not the Orthodox. You might also find that the reason that the sans-Guardian Baha'is are so paranoid about allowing other voices to be heard is their fear that the truth might come out. I urge you to deepen in the teachings and seek for the Truth. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:02 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 11:20:26 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA17540; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:25:55 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:25:55 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021625.KAA17540@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4124 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:017f30847d95540150b9e3fe0c3e08a7c7bfc6f335c4 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: Rationale: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854900679.17497@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <"Hxa3HB.A.D1G.h0_8y"@bounty> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 16:25:39 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.47 (ppp-pm01-dy-15.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <"Hxa3HB.A.D1G.h0_8y"@bounty>, dmcadam@madriver.com (Douglas McAdam) wrote: > > At 1:17 PM 1/26/97, The McVays wrote: > >Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >> > >> As I conceive talk.religion.bahai, it would be a free and open forum > >> of discussion. No such forum exists in regard to the Bahai Faith. > > > >Every once in a while I look into the newsgroups on Islam and Christianity > >that are unmoderated and I can't believe they are an improvement. The sheer > >volume of noise and profanity alone would keep me from enjoying any > >discussions. > > > >aloha, Terry (tmcvay@aloha.net) > > I certainly agree with Terry about other discussion groups. I must say I > cannot quite comprehend all this talk about freedom. What is meant by a > free and open forum, if not the ones we now have? Does this mean a free > for all, let it all hang out? > > How are we not having freedom? I have never felt so free in all my life. > > Remember the old song line, "Freedom's just another word for nothing left > to lose." > > Maybe we lose everything by giving it all to Baha'u'llah and thus are free. > > Peace, > Doug -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:02 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 11:20:26 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA17540; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:25:55 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:25:55 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021625.KAA17540@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4124 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:017f30847d95540150b9e3fe0c3e08a7c7bfc6f335c4 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: Rationale: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854900679.17497@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <"Hxa3HB.A.D1G.h0_8y"@bounty> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 16:25:39 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.47 (ppp-pm01-dy-15.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <"Hxa3HB.A.D1G.h0_8y"@bounty>, dmcadam@madriver.com (Douglas McAdam) wrote: > > At 1:17 PM 1/26/97, The McVays wrote: > >Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >> > >> As I conceive talk.religion.bahai, it would be a free and open forum > >> of discussion. No such forum exists in regard to the Bahai Faith. > > > >Every once in a while I look into the newsgroups on Islam and Christianity > >that are unmoderated and I can't believe they are an improvement. The sheer > >volume of noise and profanity alone would keep me from enjoying any > >discussions. > > > >aloha, Terry (tmcvay@aloha.net) > > I certainly agree with Terry about other discussion groups. I must say I > cannot quite comprehend all this talk about freedom. What is meant by a > free and open forum, if not the ones we now have? Does this mean a free > for all, let it all hang out? > > How are we not having freedom? I have never felt so free in all my life. > > Remember the old song line, "Freedom's just another word for nothing left > to lose." > > Maybe we lose everything by giving it all to Baha'u'llah and thus are free. > > Peace, > Doug -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:02 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 11:20:26 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA17540; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:25:55 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:25:55 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021625.KAA17540@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4124 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:017f30847d95540150b9e3fe0c3e08a7c7bfc6f335c4 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: Rationale: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854900679.17497@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <"Hxa3HB.A.D1G.h0_8y"@bounty> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 16:25:39 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.47 (ppp-pm01-dy-15.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <"Hxa3HB.A.D1G.h0_8y"@bounty>, dmcadam@madriver.com (Douglas McAdam) wrote: > > At 1:17 PM 1/26/97, The McVays wrote: > >Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >> > >> As I conceive talk.religion.bahai, it would be a free and open forum > >> of discussion. No such forum exists in regard to the Bahai Faith. > > > >Every once in a while I look into the newsgroups on Islam and Christianity > >that are unmoderated and I can't believe they are an improvement. The sheer > >volume of noise and profanity alone would keep me from enjoying any > >discussions. > > > >aloha, Terry (tmcvay@aloha.net) > > I certainly agree with Terry about other discussion groups. I must say I > cannot quite comprehend all this talk about freedom. What is meant by a > free and open forum, if not the ones we now have? Does this mean a free > for all, let it all hang out? > > How are we not having freedom? I have never felt so free in all my life. > > Remember the old song line, "Freedom's just another word for nothing left > to lose." > > Maybe we lose everything by giving it all to Baha'u'llah and thus are free. > > Peace, > Doug -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:05 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 11:45:16 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA18241; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:50:45 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:50:45 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021650.KAA18241@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4650 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:110fa0c4ddc52401c2e95c3caa77e698a73f7bcc3575 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854901890.18095@dejanews.com> Reply-To: @moa.net Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: pjh5u@avery.med.virginia.edu References: <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 16:50:13 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , pjh5u@avery.med.Virginia.EDU (Peter Rabbit) wrote: > > In article <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net>, > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) > > unmoderated group talk.religion.bahai > > > >All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the Bahai > >faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this > >proposed newsgroup would meet that need. > > Can someone explain why a need exists for an unmoderated > newsgroup on the Baha'i faith? > I have in my Rationale. See news.groups. > > > >practice on Usenet. This newsgroup will be part of the talk.* > >hierarchy, which is exclusively for unmoderated groups. > > In other words it will be another religious newsgroup full of > arguments and flame wars. No thank you. Alas, life is full of arguments and differences of opinion. It seems to be the nature of life, as God has created it by giving the human being free will and conscience. I don't believe suppression of those endowments is the way to go. Ideally, at its best, talk,religion.bahai would serve as a forum for the exchange of ideas on the Bahai Faith without someone else intervening and manipulating the discussion. Such a forum does not exist at the moment. Soc.religion.bahai is heavily censored and controled. I don't believe there is any justification in the Bahai Writings for that. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:05 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 11:45:16 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA18241; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:50:45 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:50:45 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021650.KAA18241@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4650 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:110fa0c4ddc52401c2e95c3caa77e698a73f7bcc3575 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854901890.18095@dejanews.com> Reply-To: @moa.net Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: pjh5u@avery.med.virginia.edu References: <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 16:50:13 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , pjh5u@avery.med.Virginia.EDU (Peter Rabbit) wrote: > > In article <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net>, > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) > > unmoderated group talk.religion.bahai > > > >All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the Bahai > >faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this > >proposed newsgroup would meet that need. > > Can someone explain why a need exists for an unmoderated > newsgroup on the Baha'i faith? > I have in my Rationale. See news.groups. > > > >practice on Usenet. This newsgroup will be part of the talk.* > >hierarchy, which is exclusively for unmoderated groups. > > In other words it will be another religious newsgroup full of > arguments and flame wars. No thank you. Alas, life is full of arguments and differences of opinion. It seems to be the nature of life, as God has created it by giving the human being free will and conscience. I don't believe suppression of those endowments is the way to go. Ideally, at its best, talk,religion.bahai would serve as a forum for the exchange of ideas on the Bahai Faith without someone else intervening and manipulating the discussion. Such a forum does not exist at the moment. Soc.religion.bahai is heavily censored and controled. I don't believe there is any justification in the Bahai Writings for that. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:05 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 11:45:16 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA18241; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:50:45 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:50:45 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021650.KAA18241@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4650 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:110fa0c4ddc52401c2e95c3caa77e698a73f7bcc3575 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854901890.18095@dejanews.com> Reply-To: @moa.net Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: pjh5u@avery.med.virginia.edu References: <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 16:50:13 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , pjh5u@avery.med.Virginia.EDU (Peter Rabbit) wrote: > > In article <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net>, > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) > > unmoderated group talk.religion.bahai > > > >All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the Bahai > >faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this > >proposed newsgroup would meet that need. > > Can someone explain why a need exists for an unmoderated > newsgroup on the Baha'i faith? > I have in my Rationale. See news.groups. > > > >practice on Usenet. This newsgroup will be part of the talk.* > >hierarchy, which is exclusively for unmoderated groups. > > In other words it will be another religious newsgroup full of > arguments and flame wars. No thank you. Alas, life is full of arguments and differences of opinion. It seems to be the nature of life, as God has created it by giving the human being free will and conscience. I don't believe suppression of those endowments is the way to go. Ideally, at its best, talk,religion.bahai would serve as a forum for the exchange of ideas on the Bahai Faith without someone else intervening and manipulating the discussion. Such a forum does not exist at the moment. Soc.religion.bahai is heavily censored and controled. I don't believe there is any justification in the Bahai Writings for that. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:08 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 11:48:43 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA18325; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:54:08 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:54:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021654.KAA18325@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 3922 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:313f70d43db564d1c0476012e229b300927c272b1388 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854902300.18250@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net> <32E12A4B.10C2@wwnet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 16:53:53 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , pjh5u@avery.med.Virginia.EDU (Peter Rabbit) wrote: > > In article <32E12A4B.10C2@wwnet.com>, Roger Reini wrote: > >> All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the Bahai > >> faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this > >> proposed newsgroup would meet that need. > > > >I believe that existing newsgroups, especially talk.religion.misc, would > >adequately fill that need, if in fact such a need exists. > > > > I have to agree. I thought that was one of the main purposes of > talk.religion.misc. If a discussion goes off topic or messages > are rejected you can move there to continue. T.r.misc is too miscellaneous. T.r.bahai would be focussed on the Bahai Faith and be different from s.r.bahai in terms of moderation. Frederick Glaysher Rochester HIlls, MIchigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:08 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 11:48:43 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA18325; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:54:08 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:54:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021654.KAA18325@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 3922 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:313f70d43db564d1c0476012e229b300927c272b1388 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854902300.18250@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net> <32E12A4B.10C2@wwnet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 16:53:53 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , pjh5u@avery.med.Virginia.EDU (Peter Rabbit) wrote: > > In article <32E12A4B.10C2@wwnet.com>, Roger Reini wrote: > >> All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the Bahai > >> faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this > >> proposed newsgroup would meet that need. > > > >I believe that existing newsgroups, especially talk.religion.misc, would > >adequately fill that need, if in fact such a need exists. > > > > I have to agree. I thought that was one of the main purposes of > talk.religion.misc. If a discussion goes off topic or messages > are rejected you can move there to continue. T.r.misc is too miscellaneous. T.r.bahai would be focussed on the Bahai Faith and be different from s.r.bahai in terms of moderation. Frederick Glaysher Rochester HIlls, MIchigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:08 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 11:48:43 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA18325; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:54:08 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:54:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021654.KAA18325@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 3922 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:313f70d43db564d1c0476012e229b300927c272b1388 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854902300.18250@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net> <32E12A4B.10C2@wwnet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 16:53:53 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , pjh5u@avery.med.Virginia.EDU (Peter Rabbit) wrote: > > In article <32E12A4B.10C2@wwnet.com>, Roger Reini wrote: > >> All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the Bahai > >> faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this > >> proposed newsgroup would meet that need. > > > >I believe that existing newsgroups, especially talk.religion.misc, would > >adequately fill that need, if in fact such a need exists. > > > > I have to agree. I thought that was one of the main purposes of > talk.religion.misc. If a discussion goes off topic or messages > are rejected you can move there to continue. T.r.misc is too miscellaneous. T.r.bahai would be focussed on the Bahai Faith and be different from s.r.bahai in terms of moderation. Frederick Glaysher Rochester HIlls, MIchigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:11 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 12:01:12 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA18778; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:06:42 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:06:42 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021706.LAA18778@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5185 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f15fa0f44d854471b81e1be5079904d178aa2435267d ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: Rationale: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854902587.18404@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <"_su6mD.A.UvF.sTu7y"@bounty> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 17:06:23 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <"_su6mD.A.UvF.sTu7y"@bounty>, Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > > > It seems to me that if the Faith is so weak it can't withstand a verbal > > attack, or difference of opinion, then something is seriously wrong. > > Fred, the moderators of this newsgroup allow verbal attacks against the > Faith (by non-Baha'is and people professing to be Baha'is alike) all > the time. What the moderators try to avoid however, is argument, > invective, and abuse -- and they do a good job of it. > I don't believe they do. One man's agrument or flame is another's sacred conscience.... Tyranny of the censors takes place all too often on s.r.bahai in my opinion.... > It should be borne in mind by all that offering opinion (when couched > as opinion) is fine, arguing about religion is forbidden. Expressing > opinion is good, insisting that everyone who doesn't share your > opinion is misguided or naive or not being honest is counter to the > spirit of consultation as I understand it. > Does this include your opinions. I'm not sure what you're suggesting. T.r.bahai would be unmoderated and would therefore permit variance of opinion, unlike s.r.b. If Baha'is were afraid of a little bashing, half the posts on a given > day would not be here. Perhaps you don't realize, since you never see them, but there are posts rejected from s.r.b.... I've had the experience, and I believe for extremely trivial, dictatorial reasons.... The moderators are merely hiding behind the smoke screen of "flames" to conceal blatant censorship. I personally, am glad we have moderators. > It would indeed be a tragedy if this newsgroup were to degenerate into > a spiritual mud-wresting contest as some others have done. Censorship is not the answer. I'm not in favor of mud-slinging, I suppose you mean. An unmoderated newgroup requires a high sense of responsibility on the part of its participants. That many fall short, and will fall short, of that standard is not a persuasive reason for voting against it. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:11 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 12:01:12 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA18778; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:06:42 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:06:42 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021706.LAA18778@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 5185 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f15fa0f44d854471b81e1be5079904d178aa2435267d ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: Rationale: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854902587.18404@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <"_su6mD.A.UvF.sTu7y"@bounty> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 17:06:23 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <"_su6mD.A.UvF.sTu7y"@bounty>, Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > > > It seems to me that if the Faith is so weak it can't withstand a verbal > > attack, or difference of opinion, then something is seriously wrong. > > Fred, the moderators of this newsgroup allow verbal attacks against the > Faith (by non-Baha'is and people professing to be Baha'is alike) all > the time. What the moderators try to avoid however, is argument, > invective, and abuse -- and they do a good job of it. > I don't believe they do. One man's agrument or flame is another's sacred conscience.... Tyranny of the censors takes place all too often on s.r.bahai in my opinion.... > It should be borne in mind by all that offering opinion (when couched > as opinion) is fine, arguing about religion is forbidden. Expressing > opinion is good, insisting that everyone who doesn't share your > opinion is misguided or naive or not being honest is counter to the > spirit of consultation as I understand it. > Does this include your opinions. I'm not sure what you're suggesting. T.r.bahai would be unmoderated and would therefore permit variance of opinion, unlike s.r.b. If Baha'is were afraid of a little bashing, half the posts on a given > day would not be here. Perhaps you don't realize, since you never see them, but there are posts rejected from s.r.b.... I've had the experience, and I believe for extremely trivial, dictatorial reasons.... The moderators are merely hiding behind the smoke screen of "flames" to conceal blatant censorship. I personally, am glad we have moderators. > It would indeed be a tragedy if this newsgroup were to degenerate into > a spiritual mud-wresting contest as some others have done. Censorship is not the answer. I'm not in favor of mud-slinging, I suppose you mean. An unmoderated newgroup requires a high sense of responsibility on the part of its participants. That many fall short, and will fall short, of that standard is not a persuasive reason for voting against it. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:11 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 12:01:12 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA18778; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:06:42 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:06:42 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021706.LAA18778@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5185 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f15fa0f44d854471b81e1be5079904d178aa2435267d ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: Rationale: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854902587.18404@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <"_su6mD.A.UvF.sTu7y"@bounty> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 17:06:23 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <"_su6mD.A.UvF.sTu7y"@bounty>, Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > > > It seems to me that if the Faith is so weak it can't withstand a verbal > > attack, or difference of opinion, then something is seriously wrong. > > Fred, the moderators of this newsgroup allow verbal attacks against the > Faith (by non-Baha'is and people professing to be Baha'is alike) all > the time. What the moderators try to avoid however, is argument, > invective, and abuse -- and they do a good job of it. > I don't believe they do. One man's agrument or flame is another's sacred conscience.... Tyranny of the censors takes place all too often on s.r.bahai in my opinion.... > It should be borne in mind by all that offering opinion (when couched > as opinion) is fine, arguing about religion is forbidden. Expressing > opinion is good, insisting that everyone who doesn't share your > opinion is misguided or naive or not being honest is counter to the > spirit of consultation as I understand it. > Does this include your opinions. I'm not sure what you're suggesting. T.r.bahai would be unmoderated and would therefore permit variance of opinion, unlike s.r.b. If Baha'is were afraid of a little bashing, half the posts on a given > day would not be here. Perhaps you don't realize, since you never see them, but there are posts rejected from s.r.b.... I've had the experience, and I believe for extremely trivial, dictatorial reasons.... The moderators are merely hiding behind the smoke screen of "flames" to conceal blatant censorship. I personally, am glad we have moderators. > It would indeed be a tragedy if this newsgroup were to degenerate into > a spiritual mud-wresting contest as some others have done. Censorship is not the answer. I'm not in favor of mud-slinging, I suppose you mean. An unmoderated newgroup requires a high sense of responsibility on the part of its participants. That many fall short, and will fall short, of that standard is not a persuasive reason for voting against it. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:14 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 12:07:25 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA18990; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:12:54 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:12:54 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021712.LAA18990@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4194 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:017f2094cde574210b1f7dbf58c3e187341d8c9c0d7e ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854903376.18857@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 17:12:39 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , Graham Sorenson wrote: > > In article <19970122183401.NAA13696@ladder01.news.aol.com>, JohnWrldPc > writes > > > > > >An unmoderated Bahai newsgroup is a great idea, especially for someone > >like myself who encounters the worries of potential posters to my > >independent investigation of the truth comments. This newsgroup will take > >the leash off a lot of Bahais who I know have something to contribute > >outside a censored format. > > > > >It will also give a true picture of Bahai concerns about the policies and > >doctrine of their faith as opposed to a view skewed by censorship. > > What Censorship?? if the message is not a personal attack and is > on topic of the Baha'i Faith then it is allowed on SRB. > It's not that simply. I believe my messages have been censored and the moderators have hidden behind the smoke screen of "flames." You and everyone else has repeatedly been denied by the censors at s.r.b. from deciding for yourselves on various posts. That's the reality of s.r.b. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > -- > Graham Sorenson > https://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:14 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 12:07:25 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA18990; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:12:54 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:12:54 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021712.LAA18990@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4194 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:017f2094cde574210b1f7dbf58c3e187341d8c9c0d7e ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854903376.18857@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 17:12:39 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , Graham Sorenson wrote: > > In article <19970122183401.NAA13696@ladder01.news.aol.com>, JohnWrldPc > writes > > > > > >An unmoderated Bahai newsgroup is a great idea, especially for someone > >like myself who encounters the worries of potential posters to my > >independent investigation of the truth comments. This newsgroup will take > >the leash off a lot of Bahais who I know have something to contribute > >outside a censored format. > > > > >It will also give a true picture of Bahai concerns about the policies and > >doctrine of their faith as opposed to a view skewed by censorship. > > What Censorship?? if the message is not a personal attack and is > on topic of the Baha'i Faith then it is allowed on SRB. > It's not that simply. I believe my messages have been censored and the moderators have hidden behind the smoke screen of "flames." You and everyone else has repeatedly been denied by the censors at s.r.b. from deciding for yourselves on various posts. That's the reality of s.r.b. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > -- > Graham Sorenson > https://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:14 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 12:07:25 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA18990; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:12:54 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:12:54 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021712.LAA18990@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4194 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:017f2094cde574210b1f7dbf58c3e187341d8c9c0d7e ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854903376.18857@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 17:12:39 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , Graham Sorenson wrote: > > In article <19970122183401.NAA13696@ladder01.news.aol.com>, JohnWrldPc > writes > > > > > >An unmoderated Bahai newsgroup is a great idea, especially for someone > >like myself who encounters the worries of potential posters to my > >independent investigation of the truth comments. This newsgroup will take > >the leash off a lot of Bahais who I know have something to contribute > >outside a censored format. > > > > >It will also give a true picture of Bahai concerns about the policies and > >doctrine of their faith as opposed to a view skewed by censorship. > > What Censorship?? if the message is not a personal attack and is > on topic of the Baha'i Faith then it is allowed on SRB. > It's not that simply. I believe my messages have been censored and the moderators have hidden behind the smoke screen of "flames." You and everyone else has repeatedly been denied by the censors at s.r.b. from deciding for yourselves on various posts. That's the reality of s.r.b. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > -- > Graham Sorenson > https://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:17 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 12:10:47 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA19087; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:16:08 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:16:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021716.LAA19087@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4021 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:117f20042df54451364056567facb7a2eda8e75c9f27 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854903644.19009@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 17:15:54 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5c94dr$dop$1@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz>, math5ijf@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Isaac Freeman) wrote: > > In article <19970122183401.NAA13696@ladder01.news.aol.com>, johnwrldpc@aol.com (JohnWrldPc) writes: > > It will also give a true picture of Bahai concerns about the policies and > > doctrine of their faith as opposed to a view skewed by censorship. > > Can we discuss why you feel that soc.religion.bahai is censored? > > There seem to be two separate issues concerning an unmoderated Baha'i group: > > One, whether there is anybody who would use it, and currently feels they cannot > use soc.religion.bahai (i.e. whether the moderation of soc.religion.bahai > prevents anybody from expressing their ideas) > > Two, whether any other groups (such as talk.religion.misc) already serve > adequately. > > Send me email if you prefer. > > Isaac Freeman I hope I covered these questions in my last post to you. Sorry it's taken me so long to respond. As I explained, my server has some kind of technical problem. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:17 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 12:10:47 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA19087; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:16:08 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:16:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021716.LAA19087@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4021 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:117f20042df54451364056567facb7a2eda8e75c9f27 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854903644.19009@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 17:15:54 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5c94dr$dop$1@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz>, math5ijf@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Isaac Freeman) wrote: > > In article <19970122183401.NAA13696@ladder01.news.aol.com>, johnwrldpc@aol.com (JohnWrldPc) writes: > > It will also give a true picture of Bahai concerns about the policies and > > doctrine of their faith as opposed to a view skewed by censorship. > > Can we discuss why you feel that soc.religion.bahai is censored? > > There seem to be two separate issues concerning an unmoderated Baha'i group: > > One, whether there is anybody who would use it, and currently feels they cannot > use soc.religion.bahai (i.e. whether the moderation of soc.religion.bahai > prevents anybody from expressing their ideas) > > Two, whether any other groups (such as talk.religion.misc) already serve > adequately. > > Send me email if you prefer. > > Isaac Freeman I hope I covered these questions in my last post to you. Sorry it's taken me so long to respond. As I explained, my server has some kind of technical problem. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:17 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 12:10:47 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA19087; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:16:08 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:16:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021716.LAA19087@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4021 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:117f20042df54451364056567facb7a2eda8e75c9f27 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854903644.19009@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 17:15:54 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5c94dr$dop$1@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz>, math5ijf@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Isaac Freeman) wrote: > > In article <19970122183401.NAA13696@ladder01.news.aol.com>, johnwrldpc@aol.com (JohnWrldPc) writes: > > It will also give a true picture of Bahai concerns about the policies and > > doctrine of their faith as opposed to a view skewed by censorship. > > Can we discuss why you feel that soc.religion.bahai is censored? > > There seem to be two separate issues concerning an unmoderated Baha'i group: > > One, whether there is anybody who would use it, and currently feels they cannot > use soc.religion.bahai (i.e. whether the moderation of soc.religion.bahai > prevents anybody from expressing their ideas) > > Two, whether any other groups (such as talk.religion.misc) already serve > adequately. > > Send me email if you prefer. > > Isaac Freeman I hope I covered these questions in my last post to you. Sorry it's taken me so long to respond. As I explained, my server has some kind of technical problem. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Sun Feb 02 14:40:19 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Feb 1997 12:15:20 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA19271; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:20:52 -0600 Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:20:52 -0600 Message-Id: <199702021720.LAA19271@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4166 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header in your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:211f30042dc53441a8e5039fbe0f3b190b1ba461e4be ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: Rationale: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854903866.19116@dejanews.com> Reply-To: @moa.net Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: rdsteph@ibm.net References: <5ceqrc$afh@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> <5ch8jf$q1n@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> <32ED2A7E.5248@ibm.net> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Feb 02 17:20:36 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.36 (ppp-pm01-dy-4.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <32ED2A7E.5248@ibm.net>, rdsteph@ibm.net wrote: > My take on this is, humbly, that while , of course, God does not > NEED our help, and He can certainly ovrcome any harm we may do, still, > to use an overused cliche, "God helps those who help themselves." It > seems that in Nabil's Narrative , and eleswhere, the early pioneers and > Saints of the Faith most certainly DID try earnestly to spread the > Faith, to Grow the Faith, and to spread the Word of the Good News of the > New Dispensations of the Bab and Baha'u'llah. It also seemed to me, from > my reading, that both the Bab and Baha'u'llah clearly encouraged such > devotion to spreading and growing the Faith by these earliest of Babis > and Bahais. So, while God most certainly does not NEED our help; > nonetheless, methinks it is good to TRY to spread the Word and grow the > Bahai Faith. What do your think? Yes, I agree with you. What about t.r.bahai? I see it as another forum for discussion and teaching about the Bahai Faith. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Feb 03 09:07:11 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 03 Feb 1997 08:39:47 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id HAA19246; Mon, 3 Feb 1997 07:45:18 -0600 Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 07:45:18 -0600 Message-Id: <199702031345.HAA19246@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4990 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:e13f0084dd8534714d69c5da7841200eb92cfa6d16c4 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Censorship on s.r.bahai-2 Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854976466.18697@dejanews.com> Reply-To: @moa.net Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: ahmadi@why.net References: <854889179.13648@dejanews.com> <32F4EC46.5EB3@why.net> X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Feb 03 13:43:05 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.35 (ppp-pm01-dy-3.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <32F4EC46.5EB3@why.net>, ahmadi@why.net wrote: > > Folks everybody seems to be repeating themselves - inlcuding > me, therefore "le me esplain... no time, le me sum up": > > do i=1 to 100 > > 1. Fredirck feels srb is cennsored. > The word "feels" reduces the charge to one of emotion. It evokes an implied syllogism: emotion is unreliable, so therefore is the charge. Tried, convicted, and sent to the gas ovens, all in one sentence.... > 2. A few others, including, do not agree and suggest that > talk.religion.misc can be used if there is the need. > Who are these "others"? I don't find any other messages posted or archived that clearly say that. Talk.religion.misc is suggested but not appropriate at all since it is not focused on the Bahai Faith. > 3. Fredrick does not agree. > I do not. And have candidly explained why elsewhere. There's an "e" in there, incidentally. > next > > So, as others have asked: Fredrick why don't you post > one of your posts that was rejected with the reasons given > by the srb moderators? > Again, who are these others? I have yet to read a message asking this. What you're asking here is for a public trial that would become a kangaroo court. It would become a sideshow to what is now the main event. What's your motive? My proposal is to create an alternative, unmoderated newsgroup that cannot be manipulated, controled, abused, or censored for any reason whatsoever. Does that scare you? Do you not trust in the God-given free will of the human soul? The spark of truth to come from the clash of varying opinions Abdul-Baha spoke of? > -saman -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Feb 03 09:07:14 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 03 Feb 1997 08:57:15 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id IAA19772; Mon, 3 Feb 1997 08:02:40 -0600 Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 08:02:40 -0600 Message-Id: <199702031402.IAA19772@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 5944 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:e1cf30046d8514d1c1496702b53f0b629ef77b9d3409 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Censorship: s.r.bahai-3 Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <854977853.19354@dejanews.com> Reply-To: @moa.net Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <854889179.13648@dejanews.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Feb 03 13:59:48 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.35 (ppp-pm01-dy-3.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , Graham Sorenson wrote: > > In article <854889179.13648@dejanews.com>, @MOA.net > writes > >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai > >From: Roger Reini > >Date: 1997/01/18 > >Reply-To: rreini@wwnet.com > >Newsgroups: news.groups > > > > > >Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > >> RATIONALE: talk.religion.bahai > > > >> All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the Bahai > >> faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this > >> proposed newsgroup would meet that need. > > > >>>I believe that existing newsgroups, especially talk.religion.misc, would > >>>adequately fill that need, if in fact such a need exists. > > > >>>IMHO, I don't believe that there would be sufficient volume on the > >>>proposed t.r.b newsgroup to justify its existence. > > > >>>Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) > >>>https://www.wwnet.com/~rreini/ > > > >t.r.misc is too miscellaneous, if you will. It's not focussed > >on the Bahai Faith at all. Soc.religion.bahai has a lot of > >traffic to handle and is heavily censored. > > > > I disagree that soc.religion.bahai is "heavily censored" and, IMO, does > not have a "lot of traffic". > t.r.misc can be as focused as you want it to be and it is already there > for you to use as you wish. > I simply believe this is not true. S.r.b is censored. That you haven't experienced it can be interpreted in a variety of ways, I suppose: good fortune, chance, complicity, or basically you have nothing to say that anyone there is concerned with suppressing.... It does not prove censorship does not exist at s.r.b. That the moderators and their supporters say there is no censorship is also irrelevant and dubious in the extreme. I attempted to post a message or two to s.r.b charging censorship a couple of months ago but they were suppressed, as were other messages from me. Perhaps ipso facto that makes me a transgressor and miscreant? You and others were deprived of deciding for yourselves. I rest my case. In terms of volume, I believe there is every reason to believe that sufficient volume would exist talk.religion.bahai and that the range and depths of topics would increase free of smug, self-righteous, self-appointed guardians of public discussion.... > >Frederick Glaysher > >Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > > > > >-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet > > -- > Graham Sorenson > https://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Thu Feb 06 08:21:40 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Thu, 06 Feb 1997 06:44:46 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA28762; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 05:50:17 -0600 Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 05:50:17 -0600 Message-Id: <199702061150.FAA28762@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6446 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:617f20e40dc53471dad7b249829d8ba2b59e61764fad ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: Mark Towfiq & t.r.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <855229799.28739@dejanews.com> Reply-To: @moa.net Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: towfiq@east.sun.com References: <854889179.13648@dejanews.com> <32F4EC46.5EB3@why.net> <854976466.18697@dejanews.com> <32F66B3F.2C7C@east.sun.com> <5d6qmd$67a@cnn.Princeton.EDU> <32F759C8.7D39@east.sun.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Feb 06 11:49:59 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.38 (ppp-pm01-dy-6.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <32F759C8.7D39@east.sun.com>, Mark Towfiq wrote: > > Christopher B. Stone wrote: > > >What scares me is that USENET will seriously consider creating a new > > >newsgroup because an individual had some postings rejected (or maybe just > > >asked to be re-worked, since we don't know the exact circumstances). >  Examples of the "exact circumstances," censored messages, are posted on news.groups now. > > New groups do not get created unless at least 100 people express an > > interest in them. (Specifically, there must be 100 more YES votes than NO > > votes, and a 2/3 majority of YES votes.) Therefore, you don't need to > > worry about people with an axe to grind creating groups on a whim. > > I'm familiar with the process of how new groups are created; however, based on some > of the comments of readers here, it sounds like people would vote YES even though it > seems to me no demonstrated need for such a newsgroup has been shown. > I believe the examples demonstrate a need for an unmoderated group in order to protect freedom of speech and conscience. I don't believe we should minimize that need. > > I still do not see any point in lobbing NO votes at this proposal. If Mr. > > Glaysher can find enough people who want an unmoderated group dedicated > > *specifically* to the Bahai Faith, why not let them have it? People who > > prefer moderated groups, and I believe most people *will* prefer the > > moderated group, will still have soc.religion.bahai. > > The reason to vote NO is that with USENET readership ever-growing (and the mean > experience of that readership ever-declining), it's just going to be a source of > confusion for people. Undoubtedly people will then start cross-posting between the > two groups, but the moderated ones will be posted later, so separate threads will > develop and then come back together, etc., resulting in a lot of duplicate postings, > people replying in one group to another, etc. > I believe some people, opposed to an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith, would make this argument in order to stop it. Why? Think about it. > Is there any other analogous pair of unmoderated/moderated newsgroups? I doubt it. > I will vote NO for all suggestions at an unmoderated version of a moderated group; if > the problem is in the moderation (and I don't think there is, in this case), FIX THE > MODERATION. Completely misses the point. It can't be fixed.... The very nature of moderated newsgroups is to censor, and it will happen again. Ergo, one that can't be controled and manipulated because of the very form in which it is created is essential. Don't go and create a new group because some individual or handful of > individuals has a problem (still unstated) with the moderators of a newsgroup. > I've stated it repeatedly! Read the examples of censorship I've posted on news.groups.... > Regards, > Mark Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Thu Feb 06 08:23:22 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32F9DB4A.2710@moa.net> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 08:23:22 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: please post References: <199702061150.FAA28762@grunt.dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6785 dopost@grunt.dejanews.com wrote: > > [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, > please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the > bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] > > You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the > Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our > spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following > instructions: > > TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: > --------------------------------------------------------------- > - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in > the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left > hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: > dopost@postnews.dejanews.com > - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the > words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the > Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the > article you wish to have posted). > > [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] > TRANSID:617f20e40dc53471dad7b249829d8ba2b59e61764fad > ===================================================================== ====== > From: @moa.net > Subject: Re: Mark Towfiq & t.r.bahai > Newsgroups: news.groups > Message-Id: <855229799.28739@dejanews.com> > Reply-To: @moa.net > Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service > To: towfiq@east.sun.com > References: <854889179.13648@dejanews.com> <32F4EC46.5EB3@why.net> <854976466.18697@dejanews.com> <32F66B3F.2C7C@east.sun.com> <5d6qmd$67a@cnn.Princeton.EDU> <32F759C8.7D39@east.sun.com> > X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Feb 06 11:49:59 1997 GMT > X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.38 (ppp-pm01-dy-6.ouhub.moa.net) > X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) > > In article <32F759C8.7D39@east.sun.com>, > Mark Towfiq wrote: > > > > Christopher B. Stone wrote: > > > >What scares me is that USENET will seriously consider creating a new > > > >newsgroup because an individual had some postings rejected (or maybe just > > > >asked to be re-worked, since we don't know the exact circumstances). > >  > > Examples of the "exact circumstances," censored messages, are posted on > news.groups now. > > > > New groups do not get created unless at least 100 people express an > > > interest in them. (Specifically, there must be 100 more YES votes than NO > > > votes, and a 2/3 majority of YES votes.) Therefore, you don't need to > > > worry about people with an axe to grind creating groups on a whim. > > > > I'm familiar with the process of how new groups are created; however, based on > some > > of the comments of readers here, it sounds like people would vote YES even > though it > > seems to me no demonstrated need for such a newsgroup has been shown. > > > > I believe the examples demonstrate a need for an unmoderated group in > order to protect freedom of speech and conscience. I don't believe > we should minimize that need. > > > > I still do not see any point in lobbing NO votes at this proposal. If Mr. > > > Glaysher can find enough people who want an unmoderated group dedicated > > > *specifically* to the Bahai Faith, why not let them have it? People who > > > prefer moderated groups, and I believe most people *will* prefer the > > > moderated group, will still have soc.religion.bahai. > > > > The reason to vote NO is that with USENET readership ever-growing (and the > mean > > experience of that readership ever-declining), it's just going to be a source > of > > confusion for people. Undoubtedly people will then start cross-posting > between the > > two groups, but the moderated ones will be posted later, so separate threads > will > > develop and then come back together, etc., resulting in a lot of duplicate > postings, > > people replying in one group to another, etc. > > > > I believe some people, opposed to an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai > Faith, would make this argument in order to stop it. Why? Think about > it. > > > Is there any other analogous pair of unmoderated/moderated newsgroups? I > doubt it. > > I will vote NO for all suggestions at an unmoderated version of a moderated > group; if > > the problem is in the moderation (and I don't think there is, in this case), > FIX THE > > MODERATION. > > Completely misses the point. It can't be fixed.... The very nature of > moderated newsgroups is to censor, and it will happen again. Ergo, one > that can't be controled and manipulated because of the very form in > which it is created is essential. > > Don't go and create a new group because some individual or > handful of > > individuals has a problem (still unstated) with the moderators of a newsgroup. > > > > I've stated it repeatedly! Read the examples of censorship I've posted > on news.groups.... > > > Regards, > > Mark > > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet > > ===================================================================== ====== > > WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: > ---------------------------------------------- > [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this > email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] > > If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News > service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and > attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person > who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: > header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you > contact the system administrator at their site. > > If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, > please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't > write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We > will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and > other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot > promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Thu Feb 06 08:21:44 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Thu, 06 Feb 1997 06:58:02 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA28952; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 06:03:33 -0600 Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 06:03:33 -0600 Message-Id: <199702061203.GAA28952@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 5667 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:616f20d43de504616f9914c578721de502beea73daab ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: talk.religion.bahai--no? Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <855230556.28935@dejanews.com> Reply-To: @moa.net Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: rra@cs.stanford.edu X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Feb 06 12:02:37 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.38 (ppp-pm01-dy-6.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai From: Russ Allbery Date: 1997/02/04 Message-Id: Sender: eagle@cyclone.stanford.edu References: <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net> <32E12A4B.10C2@wwnet.com> Organization: The Eyrie Newsgroups: news.groups Henrietta Thomas writes: > I have just read a number of articles posted on this subject. If you > want an unmoderated group, you should have the right to make your > proposal. But I would suggest keeping the unmoderated group in soc.*. > I see no reason why you can't make a proposal to created paired groups, > soc.religion.bahai and soc.religion.bahai.moderated. All newsgroups in soc.religion.* are moderated except for one historical exception. This policy should continue. talk.religion/soc.religion serve as an unmoderated/moderated pair of hierarchies, guaranteeing that there is a corresponding place for an unmoderated newsgroup on any religion without having to worry about renamings and hierarchies, and ensuring that soc.religion.* is a relatively high-signal, low-noise hierarchy. I will automatically vote no on any unmoderated soc.religion.* newsgroup. I BELIEVE WHAT YOU'RE NEGLECTING IS THE NEED FOR AN UNCENSORED FORUM TO PRESERVE FREEDOM OF RELIGIOUS CONSCIENCE AND BELIEF. SOC.RELIGION.BAHAI IS HEAVILY CENSORED IN MY OPINION. OTHERS FEEL THAT WAY TOO, HAVE EXPRESSED IT, OR ARE AFRAID TO COME FORWARD AND LET THEIR OPINIONS BE HEARD. ONLY AN UNMODERATED NEWSGROUP, IN THIS CASE, WOULD PROVIDE AN OPEN FORUM. > For those interested in the issue, I think _all_ moderated groups should > have the word "moderated" in their name. That will, I think, elimiate a > lot of confusion as to the status of a group. This is an utterly absurd and unworkable proposal that has been refuted at length and in great detail on news.groups numerous times in the past. I, for one, would greatly appreciate you dropping the idea unless you intend to produce some new arguments to address all of the objections to this idea which have been posted in the past. My apologies for being blunt, but I said precisely the same thing in nicer language the last two times you proposed this, and it's obviously not penetrating. -- Russ Allbery (rra@cs.stanford.edu) FREDERICK GLAYSHER PROPONENT FOR TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI Home Power Se -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Thu Feb 06 08:23:54 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32F9DB6A.7E7B@moa.net> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 08:23:54 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: please post References: <199702061203.GAA28952@grunt.dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 5956 dopost@grunt.dejanews.com wrote: > > [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, > please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the > bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] > > You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the > Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our > spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following > instructions: > > TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: > --------------------------------------------------------------- > - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in > the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left > hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: > dopost@postnews.dejanews.com > - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the > words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the > Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the > article you wish to have posted). > > [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] > TRANSID:616f20d43de504616f9914c578721de502beea73daab > ===================================================================== ====== > From: @moa.net > Subject: talk.religion.bahai--no? > Newsgroups: news.groups > Message-Id: <855230556.28935@dejanews.com> > Reply-To: @moa.net > Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service > To: rra@cs.stanford.edu > X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Feb 06 12:02:37 1997 GMT > X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.38 (ppp-pm01-dy-6.ouhub.moa.net) > X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) > > Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai > From: Russ Allbery > Date: 1997/02/04 > Message-Id: > Sender: eagle@cyclone.stanford.edu > References: <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net> <32E12A4B.10C2@wwnet.com> > Organization: The Eyrie > Newsgroups: news.groups > > > Henrietta Thomas writes: > > > I have just read a number of articles posted on this subject. If you > > want an unmoderated group, you should have the right to make your > > proposal. But I would suggest keeping the unmoderated group in soc.*. > > I see no reason why you can't make a proposal to created paired groups, > > soc.religion.bahai and soc.religion.bahai.moderated. > > All newsgroups in soc.religion.* are moderated except for one historical > exception. This policy should continue. talk.religion/soc.religion serve > as an unmoderated/moderated pair of hierarchies, guaranteeing that there > is a corresponding place for an unmoderated newsgroup on any religion > without having to worry about renamings and hierarchies, and ensuring that > soc.religion.* is a relatively high-signal, low-noise hierarchy. > > I will automatically vote no on any unmoderated soc.religion.* newsgroup. > > I BELIEVE WHAT YOU'RE NEGLECTING IS THE NEED FOR AN UNCENSORED > FORUM TO PRESERVE FREEDOM OF RELIGIOUS CONSCIENCE AND BELIEF. > SOC.RELIGION.BAHAI IS HEAVILY CENSORED IN MY OPINION. OTHERS > FEEL THAT WAY TOO, HAVE EXPRESSED IT, OR ARE AFRAID TO COME > FORWARD AND LET THEIR OPINIONS BE HEARD. ONLY AN UNMODERATED > NEWSGROUP, IN THIS CASE, WOULD PROVIDE AN OPEN FORUM. > > > > > For those interested in the issue, I think _all_ moderated groups should > > have the word "moderated" in their name. That will, I think, elimiate a > > lot of confusion as to the status of a group. > > This is an utterly absurd and unworkable proposal that has been refuted at > length and in great detail on news.groups numerous times in the past. I, > for one, would greatly appreciate you dropping the idea unless you intend > to produce some new arguments to address all of the objections to this > idea which have been posted in the past. My apologies for being blunt, > but I said precisely the same thing in nicer language the last two times > you proposed this, and it's obviously not penetrating. > > > > -- > Russ Allbery (rra@cs.stanford.edu) > > > FREDERICK GLAYSHER > PROPONENT FOR TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI > > > Home Power Se > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet > > ===================================================================== ====== > > WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: > ---------------------------------------------- > [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this > email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] > > If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News > service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and > attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person > who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: > header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you > contact the system administrator at their site. > > If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, > please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't > write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We > will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and > other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot > promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Thu Feb 06 08:21:47 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Thu, 06 Feb 1997 07:09:07 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA29111; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 06:14:39 -0600 Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 06:14:39 -0600 Message-Id: <199702061214.GAA29111@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @MOA.NET From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6110 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:610fa0846dc5e42193995a9432376dc55c677e340d0a ===================================================================== ====== From: @MOA.NET Subject: Talk.Religion.BAHAI-NO? Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <855231267.29104@dejanews.com> Reply-To: @moa.net Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: towfiq@east.sun.com, cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu References: <854889179.13648@dejanews.com> <32F4EC46.5EB3@why.net> <854976466.18697@dejanews.com> <32F66B3F.2C7C@east.sun.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Feb 06 12:14:27 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.38 (ppp-pm01-dy-6.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <32F66B3F.2C7C@east.sun.com>, Mark Towfiq wrote: > > Fred Glaysher wrote: > > My proposal is to create an alternative, unmoderated > > newsgroup that cannot be manipulated, controled, abused, > > or censored for any reason whatsoever. Does that scare you? > > What scares me is that USENET will seriously consider creating a new newsgroup because an > individual had some postings rejected (or maybe just asked to be re-worked, since we don't know > the exact circumstances). > They're on news.groups. > What the proponent is calling "censorship" sounds like the whole purpose of moderation to me. The > newsgroup has been running for almost 5 years with the same charter, and relatively no turnover of > moderators, It has not had the same charter all that time.... Last fall the moderators, without opening discussion on it, dictatorially imposed a new charter.... One that allows them to censor much more heavily.... Look it up. It's in the database somewhere. and no other discussion (that I'm aware of) complaining about the moderation. NO ONE DARES! This comment demonstrates you really don't understand the nature of censorship in the Bahai Faith. Or you support it? If > there is genuinely a problem with the moderation, or "censorship", as Mr. Glaysher refers to it, > then wouldn't it make more sense to examine that question first, rather than creating a new > newsgroup because one individual was upset his postings weren't rubber-stamped through? It would turn in to a kangaroo court.... Guess who'd get hung? "Rubber- stamped"? I would the freedom my birthright as an American gives me. That doesn't exist on soc.religion.baha.... If I sent > out an RFD for all of my rejected postings, we'd have a parallel newsgroup for every moderated > one. > The issue is deeper than this. > I'm all for solving problems, and I acknowledge that creating an unmoderated newsgroup could, > potentially, be a solution to some problem (albeit a last resort). There is no other solution than an open and free forum for public discussion on the Bahai Faith. But it seems to me that no > discussion or investigation has even taken place to see whether there is a moderation problem, or > "censorship", at all. CENSORS always deny what they're doing. It's the nature of the beast. I was hoping that USENET was moving more towards moderation and away from > the spam-fests and irrelevent postings I find whether I'm in the Ford Explorer or Basketball > newsgroup. This seems to go against the tide... > > Regards, > Mark Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Thu Feb 06 08:24:28 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32F9DB8C.29DF@moa.net> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 08:24:28 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: please post References: <199702061214.GAA29111@grunt.dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6447 dopost@grunt.dejanews.com wrote: > > [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, > please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the > bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] > > You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the > Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our > spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following > instructions: > > TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: > --------------------------------------------------------------- > - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in > the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left > hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: > dopost@postnews.dejanews.com > - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the > words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the > Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the > article you wish to have posted). > > [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] > TRANSID:610fa0846dc5e42193995a9432376dc55c677e340d0a > ===================================================================== ====== > From: @MOA.NET > Subject: Talk.Religion.BAHAI-NO? > Newsgroups: news.groups > Message-Id: <855231267.29104@dejanews.com> > Reply-To: @moa.net > Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service > To: towfiq@east.sun.com, cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu > References: <854889179.13648@dejanews.com> <32F4EC46.5EB3@why.net> <854976466.18697@dejanews.com> <32F66B3F.2C7C@east.sun.com> > X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Feb 06 12:14:27 1997 GMT > X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.38 (ppp-pm01-dy-6.ouhub.moa.net) > X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) > > In article <32F66B3F.2C7C@east.sun.com>, > Mark Towfiq wrote: > > > > Fred Glaysher wrote: > > > My proposal is to create an alternative, unmoderated > > > newsgroup that cannot be manipulated, controled, abused, > > > or censored for any reason whatsoever. Does that scare you? > > > > What scares me is that USENET will seriously consider creating a new newsgroup > because an > > individual had some postings rejected (or maybe just asked to be re-worked, > since we don't know > > the exact circumstances). > > > > They're on news.groups. > > > What the proponent is calling "censorship" sounds like the whole purpose of > moderation to me. The > > newsgroup has been running for almost 5 years with the same charter, and > relatively no turnover of > > moderators, > > It has not had the same charter all that time.... Last fall the > moderators, without opening discussion on it, dictatorially imposed > a new charter.... One that allows them to censor much more heavily.... > Look it up. It's in the database somewhere. > > and no other discussion (that I'm aware of) complaining about the > moderation. > > NO ONE DARES! This comment demonstrates you really don't understand > the nature of censorship in the Bahai Faith. Or you support it? > > If > > there is genuinely a problem with the moderation, or "censorship", as Mr. > Glaysher refers to it, > > then wouldn't it make more sense to examine that question first, rather than > creating a new > > newsgroup because one individual was upset his postings weren't rubber-stamped > through? > > It would turn in to a kangaroo court.... Guess who'd get hung? "Rubber- > stamped"? I would the freedom my birthright as an American gives me. > That doesn't exist on soc.religion.baha.... > > If I sent > > out an RFD for all of my rejected postings, we'd have a parallel newsgroup for > every moderated > > one. > > > > The issue is deeper than this. > > > I'm all for solving problems, and I acknowledge that creating an unmoderated > newsgroup could, > > potentially, be a solution to some problem (albeit a last resort). > > There is no other solution than an open and free forum for public > discussion on the Bahai Faith. > > But it > seems to me that no > > discussion or investigation has even taken place to see whether there is a > moderation problem, or > > "censorship", at all. > > CENSORS always deny what they're doing. It's the nature of the beast. > > I was hoping that USENET was moving more towards > moderation and away from > > the spam-fests and irrelevent postings I find whether I'm in the Ford Explorer > or Basketball > > newsgroup. This seems to go against the tide... > > > > Regards, > > Mark > > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet > > ===================================================================== ====== > > WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: > ---------------------------------------------- > [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this > email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] > > If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News > service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and > attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person > who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: > header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you > contact the system administrator at their site. > > If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, > please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't > write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We > will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and > other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot > promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 07 18:37:23 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 17:40:43 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id QAA06068; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 16:46:14 -0600 Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 16:46:14 -0600 Message-Id: <199702072246.QAA06068@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6727 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:515fa0f47de504116da6004d70673b32da02002129a1 ===================================================================== ====== From: @moa.net Subject: Re: Talk.Religion.BAHAI-NO? Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <855355482.6002@dejanews.com> Reply-To: @moa.net Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: rreini@wwnet.com References: <854889179.13648@dejanews.com> <32F4EC46.5EB3@why.net> <854976466.18697@dejanews.com> <32F66B3F.2C7C@east.sun.com> <855231267.29104@dejanews.com> <32FA2EE4.50BB@wwnet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Feb 07 22:44:42 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.89 (ppp-pm02-dy-25.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <32FA2EE4.50BB@wwnet.com>, Roger Reini wrote: > > @MOA.NET wrote: > > > In article <32F66B3F.2C7C@east.sun.com>, > > Mark Towfiq wrote: > > > As of 2 PM on Feb. 6, I have yet to see these postings on the news > servers I normally use. Nor have I found them via Alta Vista or Deja > News. Since I am seeing other postings you've made (presumably > subsequent to the rejected postings), I question the likelihood of > propagation delays. I wonder what is going on here. Perhaps if you > supplied the message ID's, I might be able to find them. > > To those of you involved in the discussion: have any of you seen the > postings Frederick is referring to? > I just checked. There on my server under news.groups. > > For the benefit of all, I will quote from the Moderator's Policies for > soc.religion.bahai. I've included two versions, one from April 1995 and > one from October 1996. > Fine. In whose interpretation of all this? THEIRS. Did you vote for them? Who appointed them? > ---------------------------------------------- > MODERATOR POLICIES (Apr. 1995) > > The newsgroup will be subject to standards of Baha'i consultation, a > decision-making process whose salient features include frank yet > respectful statement of views and the concerted, open-minded search > for truth. In practice, the moderators will reject personal attacks > (flames) directed at individual posters, similarly inflammatory > attacks directed at religious institutions, and articles which use > offensive language. These guidelines are intended to regulate only > the tone of the discussions, and not their contents. > False. Read my censored messages. They are censoring CONTENT. > > ------------------------------ > > MODERATOR POLICIES (Oct. 1996) > > [items new to this version are marked with ** - RR] > > o The newsgroup will be subject to standards of Baha'i consultation, a > decision-making process whose salient features include frank yet > respectful statement of views and the concerted, open-minded search > for truth. In practice, the moderators will reject personal attacks > (flames) directed at individual posters, similarly inflammatory > attacks directed at religious institutions, and articles which use > offensive language. These guidelines are intended to regulate only > the tone of the discussions, and not their contents. > ditto...... > ** > o The moderators will weigh the guidance available from the Baha'i > Institutions such as the Universal House of Justice, National Spiritual > Assemblies, Continental Counselors, and Auxiliary Board members in > determining the appropriateness of postings to the newsgroup. > > ** Oh, and flawlessly so.... clip > ** > o Posts which argue for or promote a succession of authority > outside the Covenant of Baha'u'llah will not be posted. This > does NOT preclude posts which ask about, explain or elucidate > the Covenant of Baha'u'llah. > And it's all self-evident, sweet and simply. Hardly. Again, read their own censorious words on news.groups.... Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Feb 17 17:20:39 1997 Received: from grunt.dejanews.com (205.238.157.87) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 17 Feb 1997 17:12:53 -0500 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id QAA01580; Mon, 17 Feb 1997 16:15:21 -0600 Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 16:15:21 -0600 Message-Id: <199702172215.QAA01580@grunt.dejanews.com> To: @moa.net From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6392 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:716f20947da51421b0a155fd6d185eea6da4c6121180 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG <@moa.net> Subject: Response to Sharaf's Honest Questions Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <856217541.1481@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: irfan@umich.edu,talisman@umich.edu,bahai-faith@bcca.org References: <3305fdaf.55314766@news.wwnet.com> <19970216042501.XAA23903@ladder01.news.aol.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Feb 17 22:12:21 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.91 (ppp-pm02-dy-27.ouhub.moa.net) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <19970216042501.XAA23903@ladder01.news.aol.com>, sharaf94@aol.com (Sharaf94) wrote: > > I really do not understand the opposition to an unmoderated discussion of > the Baha'i Faith. I prefer not to pass by what I say to any censor, and I > do not believe the principles of Baha'i consultation support the concept > of having anyone approve what is stated before announcing it to the group. > > I wonder if there is not a hidden agenda by the Baha'is here? Is it > really fear of opposition voices that motivates the naysayers? > > Is this Baha'i unity? squelch the dissenting voices? In all sincerity, God bless you. Either you're one of the most heroic souls in the Bahai Faith today or . . . I don't know what! You're stating exactly how I feel. WHAT is the big deal? How can any thoughtful person watching this spectacle not think there must be a "hidden agenda"? That's precisely what I thought last November when I experienced the arbitrary manner in which the moderators of soc.religion.bahai censored messages.... It is, in my opinion, contrary to Bahai consultation, unless consultation is meant to be a fascist suppression of all views at the least variance with prevailing sentiment among most Bahais.... When in the history of the world have MOST people ever been in the right? Do we lack all historical perspective and humility so badly we can not cautiously weigh our own use of power? These things have concerned me all along, and my posts all demonstrate that for anyone who wants to pull them up to look at them.... I'm not trying to destroy the Bahai Faith. I've been a member of it since 1976; I've sacrificed and taught the Faith in two countries, Japan and the USA; I studied with and edited the collected poems and prose of the poet Robert Hayden partly because as a Bahai I had a deep respect for the vision he evokes in his work; I homefront pioneered on an American Indian reservation for two years, with much sacrifice to myself and family; as a writer myself, I've published and written more than a dozen essays and books that I've tried in to confront the complexity of social and religious history in the modern world from a serious Bahai perspective, in terms of my own conscience.... and so on. I have not tried to destroy the Bahai Faith. I would like to see it do what it has not: spread and flourish. Sadly, "squelching" seems the only way many in this religion seem to be able to choose when confronted with someone who does not babble back to them their own opinion.... If I'm honest about the subtle thoughts that have passed through my mind, watching one Bahai event or another, I would have to say it has often seemed the "unity" is a fraud tacked together with the glue and tape of oppression and coercion.... Nothing that has happened lately with soc.religion.bahai has led me to think otherwise, including its lowering now of an iron, electronic curtain. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Feb 17 17:21:33 1997 Received: from default (204.38.255.91) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 17 Feb 1997 17:13:46 -0500 Message-ID: <3308D9DA.3A2C@moa.net> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 17:21:14 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: please post References: <199702172215.QAA01580@grunt.dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6705 dopost@grunt.dejanews.com wrote: > > [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, > please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the > bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] > > You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the > Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our > spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following > instructions: > > TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: > --------------------------------------------------------------- > - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in > the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left > hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: > dopost@postnews.dejanews.com > - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the > words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the > Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the > article you wish to have posted). > > [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] > TRANSID:716f20947da51421b0a155fd6d185eea6da4c6121180 > ===================================================================== ====== > From: FG <@moa.net> > Subject: Response to Sharaf's Honest Questions > Newsgroups: news.groups > Message-Id: <856217541.1481@dejanews.com> > Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> > Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service > To: irfan@umich.edu,talisman@umich.edu,bahai-faith@bcca.org > References: <3305fdaf.55314766@news.wwnet.com> <19970216042501.XAA23903@ladder01.news.aol.com> > X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Feb 17 22:12:21 1997 GMT > X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.91 (ppp-pm02-dy-27.ouhub.moa.net) > X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) > > In article <19970216042501.XAA23903@ladder01.news.aol.com>, > sharaf94@aol.com (Sharaf94) wrote: > > > > I really do not understand the opposition to an unmoderated discussion of > > the Baha'i Faith. I prefer not to pass by what I say to any censor, and I > > do not believe the principles of Baha'i consultation support the concept > > of having anyone approve what is stated before announcing it to the group. > > > > I wonder if there is not a hidden agenda by the Baha'is here? Is it > > really fear of opposition voices that motivates the naysayers? > > > > Is this Baha'i unity? squelch the dissenting voices? > > In all sincerity, God bless you. Either you're one of the most heroic > souls in the Bahai Faith today or . . . I don't know what! You're > stating exactly how I feel. WHAT is the big deal? How can any > thoughtful person watching this spectacle not think there must be > a "hidden agenda"? That's precisely what I thought last November > when I experienced the arbitrary manner in which the moderators of > soc.religion.bahai censored messages.... It is, in my opinion, > contrary to Bahai consultation, unless consultation is meant to be > a fascist suppression of all views at the least variance with > prevailing sentiment among most Bahais.... When in the history of > the world have MOST people ever been in the right? Do we lack > all historical perspective and humility so badly we can not > cautiously weigh our own use of power? These things have > concerned me all along, and my posts all demonstrate that for > anyone who wants to pull them up to look at them.... > > I'm not trying to destroy the Bahai Faith. I've been a member > of it since 1976; I've sacrificed and taught the Faith in > two countries, Japan and the USA; I studied with and edited > the collected poems and prose of the poet Robert Hayden partly > because as a Bahai I had a deep respect for the vision he > evokes in his work; I homefront pioneered on an American > Indian reservation for two years, with much sacrifice to myself > and family; as a writer myself, I've published and written more > than a dozen essays and books that I've tried in to confront > the complexity of social and religious history in the modern > world from a serious Bahai perspective, in terms of my own > conscience.... and so on. I have not tried to destroy the > Bahai Faith. I would like to see it do what it has not: > spread and flourish. > > Sadly, "squelching" seems the only way many in this religion > seem to be able to choose when confronted with someone who > does not babble back to them their own opinion.... > > If I'm honest about the subtle thoughts that have passed > through my mind, watching one Bahai event or another, I > would have to say it has often seemed the "unity" is a > fraud tacked together with the glue and tape of oppression > and coercion.... Nothing that has happened lately with > soc.religion.bahai has led me to think otherwise, including > its lowering now of an iron, electronic curtain. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet > > ===================================================================== ====== > > WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: > ---------------------------------------------- > [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this > email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] > > If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News > service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and > attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person > who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: > header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you > contact the system administrator at their site. > > If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, > please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't > write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We > will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and > other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot > promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Mon Feb 17 17:21:14 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <3308D9DA.3A2C@moa.net> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 17:21:14 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: please post References: <199702172215.QAA01580@grunt.dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6707 dopost@grunt.dejanews.com wrote: > > [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, > please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the > bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] > > You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the > Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our > spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following > instructions: > > TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: > --------------------------------------------------------------- > - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in > the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left > hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: > dopost@postnews.dejanews.com > - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the > words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the > Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the > article you wish to have posted). > > [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] > TRANSID:716f20947da51421b0a155fd6d185eea6da4c6121180 > ===================================================================== ====== > From: FG <@moa.net> > Subject: Response to Sharaf's Honest Questions > Newsgroups: news.groups > Message-Id: <856217541.1481@dejanews.com> > Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> > Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service > To: irfan@umich.edu,talisman@umich.edu,bahai-faith@bcca.org > References: <3305fdaf.55314766@news.wwnet.com> <19970216042501.XAA23903@ladder01.news.aol.com> > X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Feb 17 22:12:21 1997 GMT > X-Originating-IP-Addr: 204.38.255.91 (ppp-pm02-dy-27.ouhub.moa.net) > X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) > > In article <19970216042501.XAA23903@ladder01.news.aol.com>, > sharaf94@aol.com (Sharaf94) wrote: > > > > I really do not understand the opposition to an unmoderated discussion of > > the Baha'i Faith. I prefer not to pass by what I say to any censor, and I > > do not believe the principles of Baha'i consultation support the concept > > of having anyone approve what is stated before announcing it to the group. > > > > I wonder if there is not a hidden agenda by the Baha'is here? Is it > > really fear of opposition voices that motivates the naysayers? > > > > Is this Baha'i unity? squelch the dissenting voices? > > In all sincerity, God bless you. Either you're one of the most heroic > souls in the Bahai Faith today or . . . I don't know what! You're > stating exactly how I feel. WHAT is the big deal? How can any > thoughtful person watching this spectacle not think there must be > a "hidden agenda"? That's precisely what I thought last November > when I experienced the arbitrary manner in which the moderators of > soc.religion.bahai censored messages.... It is, in my opinion, > contrary to Bahai consultation, unless consultation is meant to be > a fascist suppression of all views at the least variance with > prevailing sentiment among most Bahais.... When in the history of > the world have MOST people ever been in the right? Do we lack > all historical perspective and humility so badly we can not > cautiously weigh our own use of power? These things have > concerned me all along, and my posts all demonstrate that for > anyone who wants to pull them up to look at them.... > > I'm not trying to destroy the Bahai Faith. I've been a member > of it since 1976; I've sacrificed and taught the Faith in > two countries, Japan and the USA; I studied with and edited > the collected poems and prose of the poet Robert Hayden partly > because as a Bahai I had a deep respect for the vision he > evokes in his work; I homefront pioneered on an American > Indian reservation for two years, with much sacrifice to myself > and family; as a writer myself, I've published and written more > than a dozen essays and books that I've tried in to confront > the complexity of social and religious history in the modern > world from a serious Bahai perspective, in terms of my own > conscience.... and so on. I have not tried to destroy the > Bahai Faith. I would like to see it do what it has not: > spread and flourish. > > Sadly, "squelching" seems the only way many in this religion > seem to be able to choose when confronted with someone who > does not babble back to them their own opinion.... > > If I'm honest about the subtle thoughts that have passed > through my mind, watching one Bahai event or another, I > would have to say it has often seemed the "unity" is a > fraud tacked together with the glue and tape of oppression > and coercion.... Nothing that has happened lately with > soc.religion.bahai has led me to think otherwise, including > its lowering now of an iron, electronic curtain. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet > > ===================================================================== ====== > > WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: > ---------------------------------------------- > [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this > email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] > > If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News > service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and > attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person > who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: > header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you > contact the system administrator at their site. > > If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, > please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't > write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We > will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and > other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot > promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Mon Apr 07 07:26:44 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Feb 26 04:05:37 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA29422; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 06:04:24 -0600 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 06:04:24 -0600 Message-Id: <199702261204.GAA29422@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4962 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:510f6004dde564c1e6d3b6e9a19334268e35d51f68ec ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Iron Curtain Imposed 2-16-97 Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <856958639.29394@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Feb 26 12:04:01 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) > > In article <3308D384.2079@wwnet.com>, > > rreini@wwnet.com wrote: > > > > > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > > > > THE ONLY THING I'M CONVINCED OF IS YOUR DETERMINATION TO STRANGLE > > > > ALL DISCUSSION, ESPECIALLY OF LATE, WHILE PERMITTING MESSAGES THAT > > > > ASSASSINATE AND MALIGN MY CHARACTER, AS IN THE POSTING BY > > > > DR. STEVE BURGESS. SINCE YOU DENY ME A JUST RESPONSE TO HIM, I'VE > > > > REPOSTED IT ON NEWS.GROUPS--THE SIBERIA YOU'VE CHOSEN TO RELEGATE > > > > DISCUSSION TO.... > > > > > > Rest assured that the messages you object to (those you believe > > > "assassinate and malign" your character) are also no longer being posted > > > to soc.religion.bahai. > > > > > There's no need to post anymore. The "moderators" accomplished what they wanted, as when they posted Massaglia's nasty message but denied me a response on the same forum.... See my censored response on news.groups.... THEY don't manipulate their control of their niche of cyberspace.... > > > Personally, I did not perceive those messages the same way you did, but > > > that's a different matter. > > > > > I can imagine.... > > > > > > FALSE. AS LONG AS MESSAGES ARE CROSSPOSTED TO NEWS.GROUPS, DISCUSSION > > > > CAN TAKE PLACE, UNDER USENET GUIDELINES, ANYWHERE. > > > > > > I feel it's more effective to have the discussion centralized here. > > > > > More effective for your purposes and those of the moderators is what you really mean but don't have the forthrightness to say.... The relative silence that has now fallen on discussion of talk.religion.bahai bears mute witness to their tactics.... > > > > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) > > Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA FG@hotmail.com -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:07:50 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Feb 26 04:05:37 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA29422; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 06:04:24 -0600 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 06:04:24 -0600 Message-Id: <199702261204.GAA29422@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4962 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:510f6004dde564c1e6d3b6e9a19334268e35d51f68ec ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Iron Curtain Imposed 2-16-97 Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <856958639.29394@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Feb 26 12:04:01 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) > > In article <3308D384.2079@wwnet.com>, > > rreini@wwnet.com wrote: > > > > > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > > > > THE ONLY THING I'M CONVINCED OF IS YOUR DETERMINATION TO STRANGLE > > > > ALL DISCUSSION, ESPECIALLY OF LATE, WHILE PERMITTING MESSAGES THAT > > > > ASSASSINATE AND MALIGN MY CHARACTER, AS IN THE POSTING BY > > > > DR. STEVE BURGESS. SINCE YOU DENY ME A JUST RESPONSE TO HIM, I'VE > > > > REPOSTED IT ON NEWS.GROUPS--THE SIBERIA YOU'VE CHOSEN TO RELEGATE > > > > DISCUSSION TO.... > > > > > > Rest assured that the messages you object to (those you believe > > > "assassinate and malign" your character) are also no longer being posted > > > to soc.religion.bahai. > > > > > There's no need to post anymore. The "moderators" accomplished what they wanted, as when they posted Massaglia's nasty message but denied me a response on the same forum.... See my censored response on news.groups.... THEY don't manipulate their control of their niche of cyberspace.... > > > Personally, I did not perceive those messages the same way you did, but > > > that's a different matter. > > > > > I can imagine.... > > > > > > FALSE. AS LONG AS MESSAGES ARE CROSSPOSTED TO NEWS.GROUPS, DISCUSSION > > > > CAN TAKE PLACE, UNDER USENET GUIDELINES, ANYWHERE. > > > > > > I feel it's more effective to have the discussion centralized here. > > > > > More effective for your purposes and those of the moderators is what you really mean but don't have the forthrightness to say.... The relative silence that has now fallen on discussion of talk.religion.bahai bears mute witness to their tactics.... > > > > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) > > Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA FG@hotmail.com -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:07:50 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Feb 26 04:05:37 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA29422; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 06:04:24 -0600 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 06:04:24 -0600 Message-Id: <199702261204.GAA29422@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4962 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:510f6004dde564c1e6d3b6e9a19334268e35d51f68ec ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Iron Curtain Imposed 2-16-97 Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <856958639.29394@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Feb 26 12:04:01 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) > > In article <3308D384.2079@wwnet.com>, > > rreini@wwnet.com wrote: > > > > > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > > > > THE ONLY THING I'M CONVINCED OF IS YOUR DETERMINATION TO STRANGLE > > > > ALL DISCUSSION, ESPECIALLY OF LATE, WHILE PERMITTING MESSAGES THAT > > > > ASSASSINATE AND MALIGN MY CHARACTER, AS IN THE POSTING BY > > > > DR. STEVE BURGESS. SINCE YOU DENY ME A JUST RESPONSE TO HIM, I'VE > > > > REPOSTED IT ON NEWS.GROUPS--THE SIBERIA YOU'VE CHOSEN TO RELEGATE > > > > DISCUSSION TO.... > > > > > > Rest assured that the messages you object to (those you believe > > > "assassinate and malign" your character) are also no longer being posted > > > to soc.religion.bahai. > > > > > There's no need to post anymore. The "moderators" accomplished what they wanted, as when they posted Massaglia's nasty message but denied me a response on the same forum.... See my censored response on news.groups.... THEY don't manipulate their control of their niche of cyberspace.... > > > Personally, I did not perceive those messages the same way you did, but > > > that's a different matter. > > > > > I can imagine.... > > > > > > FALSE. AS LONG AS MESSAGES ARE CROSSPOSTED TO NEWS.GROUPS, DISCUSSION > > > > CAN TAKE PLACE, UNDER USENET GUIDELINES, ANYWHERE. > > > > > > I feel it's more effective to have the discussion centralized here. > > > > > More effective for your purposes and those of the moderators is what you really mean but don't have the forthrightness to say.... The relative silence that has now fallen on discussion of talk.religion.bahai bears mute witness to their tactics.... > > > > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) > > Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA FG@hotmail.com -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:08:00 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Fri Feb 28 04:56:45 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA03691; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 06:56:07 -0600 Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 06:56:07 -0600 Message-Id: <199702281256.GAA03691@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 12523 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:511f60c41d857431091677cd66d20e8ab8a012d49f70 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: SRB Censored 2-27-97 Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857134517.3664@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: dmcadam@madriver.com X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Feb 28 12:55:25 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.20 (ts_rh.metronet.lib.mi.us) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 21:36:27 -0500 From: dmcadam@madriver.com (Douglas A. McAdam) To: @moa.net CC: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net Dear friends- I have been away for two weeks and do not know from this message who said what but I do have some additional thoughts. IN THE INTERIM, THE DICTATORS AT SRB HAVE BANNED ALL DISCUSSION REGARDING TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI First of all I don't feel that true consultation takes place only in the manner cited below. Constultation is more than just a principle that Administrative Instutions must use, it is to me a way of life, a way of communicating with hearts and minds in all our various interactions. A GOOD POINT.... As such it needs moderation of speech, guidelines, rules, regulations and the like for as we all know and what Fred admits all rules have historically been violated by us human critters. On the whole though we must admit that there would have been more violations without these rules and guidelines. TOO BROAD AND SWEEPING. HOW ABOUT SOME PARTICULARS? HITLER'S RULES AND GUIDELINES? Our process is to become spiritual and we are in need of certain parameters, guidances, education, rules and the like to help us keep on the track. Why would the Manifestation reveal Laws if it were possible that we humans could self-regulate? We are in need of a power greater than ourselves to help us become more spiritualized and operate in love and unity. I do not know if srb. is a self-appointed List of moderators but I do know that anyone who starts a list has the right to set down their own guidelines, rules and regulations. If we don't like them we don't subscribe. JUST GO AWAY AND BUTTON YOUR LIP.... UH HUH.... If we subscribe then we need to be obedient while we are working to have modifications made. My experience on other lists was that the listowner went out to the participants and asked for consultation as to how best to operate the list. The majority wanted a purpose statement, guidelines, and rules to follow. If there are disgruntled and dissatisfied participants on this srb. list then they have several options open to them - start their own unmoderated list or suggest ways of improving the current list, or simply leave the current list. No one is forced to subscribe or abide by the current list guidelines. WRONG. PEOPLE ARE FORCED TO ABIDE BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN ABSOLUTE MONOPOLY ON DISCUSSION, WHAT GETS HEARD AND WHAT GETS SUPPRESSED. Personally I favor an self-regulated List but at this point, as experience appears to indicate, we have not had much success with unmoderated lists and strangely enough it seems to be the more educated folks who violate commonly held rules of communication decency. AND THE UNEDUCATED AND IGNORANT ARE WILLING TO BE LED ALONG LIKE SHEEP TO THE SLAUGHTER.... IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? EDUCATED FOLKS DON'T CARE TO BE BOZOS FOR BAHAULLAH? GEE, WHY NOT? I would say Fred, that if you feel as strongly as you appear to be about all this that you start your own list by privately contacting the friends and gaining support. WHY PRIVATELY? USENET GUIDELINES CLEARLY INDICATE THE PROCESS SHOULD BE OPEN TO EVERYONE, NOT JUST BAHAIS WHO ARE IN FAVOR OF CENSORSHIP AND DECEIT. This is a way of finding out what will work and what will not. Have you contacted an Institution of the Faith to find out what is the best way to conduct these Lists? AND THEY'VE GOT TO MICRO-MANAGE THIS TOO, HUH? WHERE'S IT END? SHOULD WE CONSULT THEM ABOUT WHAT KIND OF TOILET PAPER TO USE? I FEAR THE REASONING PUSHES IN THAT DIRECTION.... SO MUCH FOR INDIVIDUAL INITIATIVE, ETC.... Just some random thoughts and believe me I am not afraid of an unmoderated list, my concern is that we achieve love and unity and I really do not want to wade through reams of distasteful, disrespectful and undignified postings as a cost of freedom of speech. MAYBE YOU COULD CREATE A GAS CHAMBER AND VOLUNTEER ME TO BE THE FIRST HOLY VICTIM FOR THE SAKE OF UNITY AND PEACE WORLDWIDE, THE NEW KINGDOM OF GOD ON EARTH.... AND THEN THE WORLD WILL BE THE FICTITIOUS NIRVANA SOME ENVISION.... I read all the postings and as soon as I see a pattern emerging that has appeared on other lists by the same people I begin to feel less like participating. Maybe we all would do well by rereading the Individual Rights and Freedoms letter. THE BASIC MESSAGE OF WHICH SEEMS TO BE THAT THERE ARE NONE.... Peace, Doug At 6:43 AM 2/10/97, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > Douglas A. McAdam wrote: > > > > At 6:19 AM 2/9/97, Robert Moldenhauer wrote: > > > Personally, I intend to vote no on talk.religion.bahai. A couple years > > >ago the > > > soc.culture groups were almost killed by someone posting racist attacks on > > > Armenians, do we really want to create another forum open to this kind of > > > abuse? > > > > That something happened in the past on another group is not evidence > that > it will happen in the future on a different group. That Hitler invaded > Poland does not prove that the president of Brasil will invade South > Africa, > though in this world, as Robert Hayden was fond of quoting, "One never > know, > do one?" > > > Why would I want another kind of talk.religion.bahai when I already have > > one. > > Because all participants would be able to speak freely their conscience > on talk.religion.bahai.... > > It is unmoderated from without the participants but moderated from > > within them. It is called consultation, Baha'i consultation. > > False. True consultation requires a vote of the community to create a > body of believers known as an assembly.... The moderators of srb have > not been voted for or appointed, and they themselves admit to this > crucial fact. So what we have is unappointed and unelected people > making extremely important decisions about what gets a hearing and > what does not.... I've read the Bahai Writings for over twenty years > and know of no passage that justifies that kind of situation.... > > It has > > rules, it has instructions on how best to communicate. > > All rules can be abused, even by the well-meaning and well-intentioned. > It's the very essence of human historical experience, recorded for > centuries. > > Those of us who > > participate have made it a practice to be informed as to what it means, how > > it works, what its purpose is and how we can best use it for uniting souls > > in reality. > > > > Reads all like code words to me justifying something unpalatable. > > > This talk. religion. baha'i that I have can be taken to any List on the Net > > and operate smoothly with no complaints from moderators or participants. > > it thrives on encouraging us to express our opinions fully, frankly and > > honestly , tempered with courtesy, tact and wisdom and works quite well in > > a moderated or unmoderated List. > > > > It seems to me to be a mere strategem now to say that Bahais can use > talk.religion.misc or whatever else and don't need a focused unmoderated > newsgroup. What is everyone afraid of? I ask in my child-like > simplicity. > > > If a moderated, or censored list it still allows me to fully express what > > is in my heart. > > Not in my heart, or in the heart of others. Other hearts think they > know better. > > If any of you are feeling your opinions are being > > suppressed I suggest you study the art of consultation and the purpose of > > the acquisition of virtues, obedience to the Covenant which gives us all > > the power and freedom in the world and beyond. > > > > A false response, IMO. Consultation is not oppression and manipulation, > nor should it be, I believe. You seem to suggest here that anyone in > favor of talk.religion.bahai may be "weak" in the Covenant or lacking > virtue. I suggest exactly the opposite may be the case. Further, to > bring the covenant into this strikes me as a very unseemly tactic. > > What are you afraid of? Why do you not trust the human soul, the > religious conscience God has given humankind? Has not Abdul-Baha > assured us that the spark of truth can only be revealed through the > clash of varying opinions? Surely he wouldn't approve of suppressing > anyone.... > > > Peace, > > Doug > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Foundation for the Science of Reality<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > > Box 561, Waitsfield, VT 05673-phone: 802-496-6883 > > - email: dmcadam@madriver.com > > Incidentally, please everyone crosspost your messages to news.groups, > where discussion about talk.religion.bahai is also occurring. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA FREDERICK GLAYSHER ROCHESTER HILLS, MICHIGAN USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:26:53 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Fri Feb 28 04:56:45 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA03691; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 06:56:07 -0600 Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 06:56:07 -0600 Message-Id: <199702281256.GAA03691@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 12523 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:511f60c41d857431091677cd66d20e8ab8a012d49f70 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: SRB Censored 2-27-97 Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857134517.3664@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: dmcadam@madriver.com X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Feb 28 12:55:25 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.20 (ts_rh.metronet.lib.mi.us) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 21:36:27 -0500 From: dmcadam@madriver.com (Douglas A. McAdam) To: @moa.net CC: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net Dear friends- I have been away for two weeks and do not know from this message who said what but I do have some additional thoughts. IN THE INTERIM, THE DICTATORS AT SRB HAVE BANNED ALL DISCUSSION REGARDING TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI First of all I don't feel that true consultation takes place only in the manner cited below. Constultation is more than just a principle that Administrative Instutions must use, it is to me a way of life, a way of communicating with hearts and minds in all our various interactions. A GOOD POINT.... As such it needs moderation of speech, guidelines, rules, regulations and the like for as we all know and what Fred admits all rules have historically been violated by us human critters. On the whole though we must admit that there would have been more violations without these rules and guidelines. TOO BROAD AND SWEEPING. HOW ABOUT SOME PARTICULARS? HITLER'S RULES AND GUIDELINES? Our process is to become spiritual and we are in need of certain parameters, guidances, education, rules and the like to help us keep on the track. Why would the Manifestation reveal Laws if it were possible that we humans could self-regulate? We are in need of a power greater than ourselves to help us become more spiritualized and operate in love and unity. I do not know if srb. is a self-appointed List of moderators but I do know that anyone who starts a list has the right to set down their own guidelines, rules and regulations. If we don't like them we don't subscribe. JUST GO AWAY AND BUTTON YOUR LIP.... UH HUH.... If we subscribe then we need to be obedient while we are working to have modifications made. My experience on other lists was that the listowner went out to the participants and asked for consultation as to how best to operate the list. The majority wanted a purpose statement, guidelines, and rules to follow. If there are disgruntled and dissatisfied participants on this srb. list then they have several options open to them - start their own unmoderated list or suggest ways of improving the current list, or simply leave the current list. No one is forced to subscribe or abide by the current list guidelines. WRONG. PEOPLE ARE FORCED TO ABIDE BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN ABSOLUTE MONOPOLY ON DISCUSSION, WHAT GETS HEARD AND WHAT GETS SUPPRESSED. Personally I favor an self-regulated List but at this point, as experience appears to indicate, we have not had much success with unmoderated lists and strangely enough it seems to be the more educated folks who violate commonly held rules of communication decency. AND THE UNEDUCATED AND IGNORANT ARE WILLING TO BE LED ALONG LIKE SHEEP TO THE SLAUGHTER.... IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? EDUCATED FOLKS DON'T CARE TO BE BOZOS FOR BAHAULLAH? GEE, WHY NOT? I would say Fred, that if you feel as strongly as you appear to be about all this that you start your own list by privately contacting the friends and gaining support. WHY PRIVATELY? USENET GUIDELINES CLEARLY INDICATE THE PROCESS SHOULD BE OPEN TO EVERYONE, NOT JUST BAHAIS WHO ARE IN FAVOR OF CENSORSHIP AND DECEIT. This is a way of finding out what will work and what will not. Have you contacted an Institution of the Faith to find out what is the best way to conduct these Lists? AND THEY'VE GOT TO MICRO-MANAGE THIS TOO, HUH? WHERE'S IT END? SHOULD WE CONSULT THEM ABOUT WHAT KIND OF TOILET PAPER TO USE? I FEAR THE REASONING PUSHES IN THAT DIRECTION.... SO MUCH FOR INDIVIDUAL INITIATIVE, ETC.... Just some random thoughts and believe me I am not afraid of an unmoderated list, my concern is that we achieve love and unity and I really do not want to wade through reams of distasteful, disrespectful and undignified postings as a cost of freedom of speech. MAYBE YOU COULD CREATE A GAS CHAMBER AND VOLUNTEER ME TO BE THE FIRST HOLY VICTIM FOR THE SAKE OF UNITY AND PEACE WORLDWIDE, THE NEW KINGDOM OF GOD ON EARTH.... AND THEN THE WORLD WILL BE THE FICTITIOUS NIRVANA SOME ENVISION.... I read all the postings and as soon as I see a pattern emerging that has appeared on other lists by the same people I begin to feel less like participating. Maybe we all would do well by rereading the Individual Rights and Freedoms letter. THE BASIC MESSAGE OF WHICH SEEMS TO BE THAT THERE ARE NONE.... Peace, Doug At 6:43 AM 2/10/97, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > Douglas A. McAdam wrote: > > > > At 6:19 AM 2/9/97, Robert Moldenhauer wrote: > > > Personally, I intend to vote no on talk.religion.bahai. A couple years > > >ago the > > > soc.culture groups were almost killed by someone posting racist attacks on > > > Armenians, do we really want to create another forum open to this kind of > > > abuse? > > > > That something happened in the past on another group is not evidence > that > it will happen in the future on a different group. That Hitler invaded > Poland does not prove that the president of Brasil will invade South > Africa, > though in this world, as Robert Hayden was fond of quoting, "One never > know, > do one?" > > > Why would I want another kind of talk.religion.bahai when I already have > > one. > > Because all participants would be able to speak freely their conscience > on talk.religion.bahai.... > > It is unmoderated from without the participants but moderated from > > within them. It is called consultation, Baha'i consultation. > > False. True consultation requires a vote of the community to create a > body of believers known as an assembly.... The moderators of srb have > not been voted for or appointed, and they themselves admit to this > crucial fact. So what we have is unappointed and unelected people > making extremely important decisions about what gets a hearing and > what does not.... I've read the Bahai Writings for over twenty years > and know of no passage that justifies that kind of situation.... > > It has > > rules, it has instructions on how best to communicate. > > All rules can be abused, even by the well-meaning and well-intentioned. > It's the very essence of human historical experience, recorded for > centuries. > > Those of us who > > participate have made it a practice to be informed as to what it means, how > > it works, what its purpose is and how we can best use it for uniting souls > > in reality. > > > > Reads all like code words to me justifying something unpalatable. > > > This talk. religion. baha'i that I have can be taken to any List on the Net > > and operate smoothly with no complaints from moderators or participants. > > it thrives on encouraging us to express our opinions fully, frankly and > > honestly , tempered with courtesy, tact and wisdom and works quite well in > > a moderated or unmoderated List. > > > > It seems to me to be a mere strategem now to say that Bahais can use > talk.religion.misc or whatever else and don't need a focused unmoderated > newsgroup. What is everyone afraid of? I ask in my child-like > simplicity. > > > If a moderated, or censored list it still allows me to fully express what > > is in my heart. > > Not in my heart, or in the heart of others. Other hearts think they > know better. > > If any of you are feeling your opinions are being > > suppressed I suggest you study the art of consultation and the purpose of > > the acquisition of virtues, obedience to the Covenant which gives us all > > the power and freedom in the world and beyond. > > > > A false response, IMO. Consultation is not oppression and manipulation, > nor should it be, I believe. You seem to suggest here that anyone in > favor of talk.religion.bahai may be "weak" in the Covenant or lacking > virtue. I suggest exactly the opposite may be the case. Further, to > bring the covenant into this strikes me as a very unseemly tactic. > > What are you afraid of? Why do you not trust the human soul, the > religious conscience God has given humankind? Has not Abdul-Baha > assured us that the spark of truth can only be revealed through the > clash of varying opinions? Surely he wouldn't approve of suppressing > anyone.... > > > Peace, > > Doug > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Foundation for the Science of Reality<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > > Box 561, Waitsfield, VT 05673-phone: 802-496-6883 > > - email: dmcadam@madriver.com > > Incidentally, please everyone crosspost your messages to news.groups, > where discussion about talk.religion.bahai is also occurring. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA FREDERICK GLAYSHER ROCHESTER HILLS, MICHIGAN USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:08:00 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Fri Feb 28 04:56:45 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA03691; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 06:56:07 -0600 Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 06:56:07 -0600 Message-Id: <199702281256.GAA03691@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 12523 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:511f60c41d857431091677cd66d20e8ab8a012d49f70 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: SRB Censored 2-27-97 Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857134517.3664@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: dmcadam@madriver.com X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Feb 28 12:55:25 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.20 (ts_rh.metronet.lib.mi.us) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 21:36:27 -0500 From: dmcadam@madriver.com (Douglas A. McAdam) To: @moa.net CC: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net Dear friends- I have been away for two weeks and do not know from this message who said what but I do have some additional thoughts. IN THE INTERIM, THE DICTATORS AT SRB HAVE BANNED ALL DISCUSSION REGARDING TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI First of all I don't feel that true consultation takes place only in the manner cited below. Constultation is more than just a principle that Administrative Instutions must use, it is to me a way of life, a way of communicating with hearts and minds in all our various interactions. A GOOD POINT.... As such it needs moderation of speech, guidelines, rules, regulations and the like for as we all know and what Fred admits all rules have historically been violated by us human critters. On the whole though we must admit that there would have been more violations without these rules and guidelines. TOO BROAD AND SWEEPING. HOW ABOUT SOME PARTICULARS? HITLER'S RULES AND GUIDELINES? Our process is to become spiritual and we are in need of certain parameters, guidances, education, rules and the like to help us keep on the track. Why would the Manifestation reveal Laws if it were possible that we humans could self-regulate? We are in need of a power greater than ourselves to help us become more spiritualized and operate in love and unity. I do not know if srb. is a self-appointed List of moderators but I do know that anyone who starts a list has the right to set down their own guidelines, rules and regulations. If we don't like them we don't subscribe. JUST GO AWAY AND BUTTON YOUR LIP.... UH HUH.... If we subscribe then we need to be obedient while we are working to have modifications made. My experience on other lists was that the listowner went out to the participants and asked for consultation as to how best to operate the list. The majority wanted a purpose statement, guidelines, and rules to follow. If there are disgruntled and dissatisfied participants on this srb. list then they have several options open to them - start their own unmoderated list or suggest ways of improving the current list, or simply leave the current list. No one is forced to subscribe or abide by the current list guidelines. WRONG. PEOPLE ARE FORCED TO ABIDE BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN ABSOLUTE MONOPOLY ON DISCUSSION, WHAT GETS HEARD AND WHAT GETS SUPPRESSED. Personally I favor an self-regulated List but at this point, as experience appears to indicate, we have not had much success with unmoderated lists and strangely enough it seems to be the more educated folks who violate commonly held rules of communication decency. AND THE UNEDUCATED AND IGNORANT ARE WILLING TO BE LED ALONG LIKE SHEEP TO THE SLAUGHTER.... IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? EDUCATED FOLKS DON'T CARE TO BE BOZOS FOR BAHAULLAH? GEE, WHY NOT? I would say Fred, that if you feel as strongly as you appear to be about all this that you start your own list by privately contacting the friends and gaining support. WHY PRIVATELY? USENET GUIDELINES CLEARLY INDICATE THE PROCESS SHOULD BE OPEN TO EVERYONE, NOT JUST BAHAIS WHO ARE IN FAVOR OF CENSORSHIP AND DECEIT. This is a way of finding out what will work and what will not. Have you contacted an Institution of the Faith to find out what is the best way to conduct these Lists? AND THEY'VE GOT TO MICRO-MANAGE THIS TOO, HUH? WHERE'S IT END? SHOULD WE CONSULT THEM ABOUT WHAT KIND OF TOILET PAPER TO USE? I FEAR THE REASONING PUSHES IN THAT DIRECTION.... SO MUCH FOR INDIVIDUAL INITIATIVE, ETC.... Just some random thoughts and believe me I am not afraid of an unmoderated list, my concern is that we achieve love and unity and I really do not want to wade through reams of distasteful, disrespectful and undignified postings as a cost of freedom of speech. MAYBE YOU COULD CREATE A GAS CHAMBER AND VOLUNTEER ME TO BE THE FIRST HOLY VICTIM FOR THE SAKE OF UNITY AND PEACE WORLDWIDE, THE NEW KINGDOM OF GOD ON EARTH.... AND THEN THE WORLD WILL BE THE FICTITIOUS NIRVANA SOME ENVISION.... I read all the postings and as soon as I see a pattern emerging that has appeared on other lists by the same people I begin to feel less like participating. Maybe we all would do well by rereading the Individual Rights and Freedoms letter. THE BASIC MESSAGE OF WHICH SEEMS TO BE THAT THERE ARE NONE.... Peace, Doug At 6:43 AM 2/10/97, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > Douglas A. McAdam wrote: > > > > At 6:19 AM 2/9/97, Robert Moldenhauer wrote: > > > Personally, I intend to vote no on talk.religion.bahai. A couple years > > >ago the > > > soc.culture groups were almost killed by someone posting racist attacks on > > > Armenians, do we really want to create another forum open to this kind of > > > abuse? > > > > That something happened in the past on another group is not evidence > that > it will happen in the future on a different group. That Hitler invaded > Poland does not prove that the president of Brasil will invade South > Africa, > though in this world, as Robert Hayden was fond of quoting, "One never > know, > do one?" > > > Why would I want another kind of talk.religion.bahai when I already have > > one. > > Because all participants would be able to speak freely their conscience > on talk.religion.bahai.... > > It is unmoderated from without the participants but moderated from > > within them. It is called consultation, Baha'i consultation. > > False. True consultation requires a vote of the community to create a > body of believers known as an assembly.... The moderators of srb have > not been voted for or appointed, and they themselves admit to this > crucial fact. So what we have is unappointed and unelected people > making extremely important decisions about what gets a hearing and > what does not.... I've read the Bahai Writings for over twenty years > and know of no passage that justifies that kind of situation.... > > It has > > rules, it has instructions on how best to communicate. > > All rules can be abused, even by the well-meaning and well-intentioned. > It's the very essence of human historical experience, recorded for > centuries. > > Those of us who > > participate have made it a practice to be informed as to what it means, how > > it works, what its purpose is and how we can best use it for uniting souls > > in reality. > > > > Reads all like code words to me justifying something unpalatable. > > > This talk. religion. baha'i that I have can be taken to any List on the Net > > and operate smoothly with no complaints from moderators or participants. > > it thrives on encouraging us to express our opinions fully, frankly and > > honestly , tempered with courtesy, tact and wisdom and works quite well in > > a moderated or unmoderated List. > > > > It seems to me to be a mere strategem now to say that Bahais can use > talk.religion.misc or whatever else and don't need a focused unmoderated > newsgroup. What is everyone afraid of? I ask in my child-like > simplicity. > > > If a moderated, or censored list it still allows me to fully express what > > is in my heart. > > Not in my heart, or in the heart of others. Other hearts think they > know better. > > If any of you are feeling your opinions are being > > suppressed I suggest you study the art of consultation and the purpose of > > the acquisition of virtues, obedience to the Covenant which gives us all > > the power and freedom in the world and beyond. > > > > A false response, IMO. Consultation is not oppression and manipulation, > nor should it be, I believe. You seem to suggest here that anyone in > favor of talk.religion.bahai may be "weak" in the Covenant or lacking > virtue. I suggest exactly the opposite may be the case. Further, to > bring the covenant into this strikes me as a very unseemly tactic. > > What are you afraid of? Why do you not trust the human soul, the > religious conscience God has given humankind? Has not Abdul-Baha > assured us that the spark of truth can only be revealed through the > clash of varying opinions? Surely he wouldn't approve of suppressing > anyone.... > > > Peace, > > Doug > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Foundation for the Science of Reality<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > > Box 561, Waitsfield, VT 05673-phone: 802-496-6883 > > - email: dmcadam@madriver.com > > Incidentally, please everyone crosspost your messages to news.groups, > where discussion about talk.religion.bahai is also occurring. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA FREDERICK GLAYSHER ROCHESTER HILLS, MICHIGAN USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:08:08 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 1 02:20:54 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA13515; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 04:20:22 -0600 Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 04:20:22 -0600 Message-Id: <199703011020.EAA13515@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4990 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:512f40f40dc5e4d1931f7bbbd256fb577c618c44bf19 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Response to Bovine Excreta Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857211611.13507@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857134517.3664@dejanews.com> <$sf3oIAGNwFzEw5$@fragrant.demon.co.uk> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 01 10:20:11 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <$sf3oIAGNwFzEw5$@fragrant.demon.co.uk>, Graham Sorenson wrote: > > In article <857134517.3664@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher > writes > >Subject: > > Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai > > Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 21:36:27 -0500 > > From: dmcadam@madriver.com (Douglas A. McAdam) > > To: @moa.net > > CC: > > soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net > > > > > >Dear friends- > > > >I have been away for two weeks and do not know from this message who said > >what but I do have some additional thoughts. > > > >IN THE INTERIM, THE DICTATORS AT SRB HAVE BANNED ALL DISCUSSION > >REGARDING TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI > > Bovine Excreta.. They have said that discussions about > talk.religion.bahai are releveant on news.groups, which you yourself > asked that they were put here. Early on, I asked for discussion to take place on news.groups not understanding that it could take place on soc.religion.bahai or elsewhere as long as it was crossposted to news.groups.... Far from bovine excreta, the dictators have strangled all discussion about talk.religion.bahai on srb.... A more blatant example of their abuse of moderation could not exist.... Incidentally, because they say something is no proof that it's true.... My experience with them has led me to believe otherwise.... > And Please stop using all caps.. it is difficult to read on screen.... > Sorry the caps bother you but sometimes I and others use them occasionally just to make sure our contribution is distinguished from that of others. > -- > Graham Sorenson > https://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:01 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 1 02:20:54 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA13515; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 04:20:22 -0600 Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 04:20:22 -0600 Message-Id: <199703011020.EAA13515@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4990 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:512f40f40dc5e4d1931f7bbbd256fb577c618c44bf19 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Response to Bovine Excreta Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857211611.13507@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857134517.3664@dejanews.com> <$sf3oIAGNwFzEw5$@fragrant.demon.co.uk> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 01 10:20:11 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <$sf3oIAGNwFzEw5$@fragrant.demon.co.uk>, Graham Sorenson wrote: > > In article <857134517.3664@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher > writes > >Subject: > > Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai > > Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 21:36:27 -0500 > > From: dmcadam@madriver.com (Douglas A. McAdam) > > To: @moa.net > > CC: > > soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net > > > > > >Dear friends- > > > >I have been away for two weeks and do not know from this message who said > >what but I do have some additional thoughts. > > > >IN THE INTERIM, THE DICTATORS AT SRB HAVE BANNED ALL DISCUSSION > >REGARDING TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI > > Bovine Excreta.. They have said that discussions about > talk.religion.bahai are releveant on news.groups, which you yourself > asked that they were put here. Early on, I asked for discussion to take place on news.groups not understanding that it could take place on soc.religion.bahai or elsewhere as long as it was crossposted to news.groups.... Far from bovine excreta, the dictators have strangled all discussion about talk.religion.bahai on srb.... A more blatant example of their abuse of moderation could not exist.... Incidentally, because they say something is no proof that it's true.... My experience with them has led me to believe otherwise.... > And Please stop using all caps.. it is difficult to read on screen.... > Sorry the caps bother you but sometimes I and others use them occasionally just to make sure our contribution is distinguished from that of others. > -- > Graham Sorenson > https://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:08:08 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 1 02:20:54 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA13515; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 04:20:22 -0600 Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 04:20:22 -0600 Message-Id: <199703011020.EAA13515@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4990 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:512f40f40dc5e4d1931f7bbbd256fb577c618c44bf19 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Response to Bovine Excreta Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857211611.13507@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857134517.3664@dejanews.com> <$sf3oIAGNwFzEw5$@fragrant.demon.co.uk> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 01 10:20:11 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <$sf3oIAGNwFzEw5$@fragrant.demon.co.uk>, Graham Sorenson wrote: > > In article <857134517.3664@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher > writes > >Subject: > > Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai > > Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 21:36:27 -0500 > > From: dmcadam@madriver.com (Douglas A. McAdam) > > To: @moa.net > > CC: > > soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net > > > > > >Dear friends- > > > >I have been away for two weeks and do not know from this message who said > >what but I do have some additional thoughts. > > > >IN THE INTERIM, THE DICTATORS AT SRB HAVE BANNED ALL DISCUSSION > >REGARDING TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI > > Bovine Excreta.. They have said that discussions about > talk.religion.bahai are releveant on news.groups, which you yourself > asked that they were put here. Early on, I asked for discussion to take place on news.groups not understanding that it could take place on soc.religion.bahai or elsewhere as long as it was crossposted to news.groups.... Far from bovine excreta, the dictators have strangled all discussion about talk.religion.bahai on srb.... A more blatant example of their abuse of moderation could not exist.... Incidentally, because they say something is no proof that it's true.... My experience with them has led me to believe otherwise.... > And Please stop using all caps.. it is difficult to read on screen.... > Sorry the caps bother you but sometimes I and others use them occasionally just to make sure our contribution is distinguished from that of others. > -- > Graham Sorenson > https://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:06 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 1 02:37:55 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA13693; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 04:37:51 -0600 Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 04:37:51 -0600 Message-Id: <199703011037.EAA13693@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 5725 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:e1cf20f42db51441c7e795d192753219abd030e536be ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Response to a Censor Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857212644.13685@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: srb-mods@bcca.org References: <857134517.3664@dejanews.com> <5f6q5q$fac@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 01 10:37:25 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5f6q5q$fac@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>, rdetweil@primenet.com (Richard C. Detweiler) wrote: > > In article <857134517.3664@dejanews.com>, > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >Douglas MsAdam wrote: > > > >>Dear friends- > >> > >>I have been away for two weeks and do not know from this message who > >>said what but I do have some additional thoughts. > > > >IN THE INTERIM, THE DICTATORS AT SRB HAVE BANNED ALL DISCUSSION > >REGARDING TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI > > > > Fred, can you please at least be honest about this stuff? In my opinion, the "moderators" are the ones who are not being honest. They clearly understood they were suppressing all discussion about talk.religion.bahai and have accomplished it. The moderators > hosted discussion of t.r.b. for several weeks and then asked people to > take it to news.groups. We allowed the discussion there as a favor to > you Fred. In fact, you asked the moderators on January 22 to direct all > discussion to news.groups but in an attempt to be as fair and impartial > as possible, we decided to allow discussion on the newsgroup. So which > way would you like to have it Fred? Are you calling us dictators for > following guidelines you yourself asked the moderators to follow? It is true that I requested that discussin take place on news.groups not understanding that it could take place anywhere on the internet as long as it was crossposted to news.groups. At that time, I also did not realize that 50 percent or more of the people who read soc.religion.bahai do so on an email echo, with no access whatsoever to news.groups.... The "moderators" understood this fact.... > Dick Detweiler The discussion was not over, Mr. Detweiler. You and your fellow fascists began to feel the heat of opinions other than your own and simple couldn't take it.... You therefore chose to suppress discussion about talk.religion.bahai as you chose to suppress all discussion about Dialogue. To pretend to anything else is a laughable sham.... Since you bring up the whole context within which discussion of talk.religion.bahai was banned, I believe it's important to point out that you permitted people to deride my character and intimate I was a covenant breaker without permitting me a fair, full, and honest response.... A shameful way of conducting, manipulating really, the "discussion." Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:08:12 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 1 02:37:55 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA13693; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 04:37:51 -0600 Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 04:37:51 -0600 Message-Id: <199703011037.EAA13693@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5725 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:e1cf20f42db51441c7e795d192753219abd030e536be ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Response to a Censor Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857212644.13685@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: srb-mods@bcca.org References: <857134517.3664@dejanews.com> <5f6q5q$fac@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 01 10:37:25 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5f6q5q$fac@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>, rdetweil@primenet.com (Richard C. Detweiler) wrote: > > In article <857134517.3664@dejanews.com>, > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >Douglas MsAdam wrote: > > > >>Dear friends- > >> > >>I have been away for two weeks and do not know from this message who > >>said what but I do have some additional thoughts. > > > >IN THE INTERIM, THE DICTATORS AT SRB HAVE BANNED ALL DISCUSSION > >REGARDING TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI > > > > Fred, can you please at least be honest about this stuff? In my opinion, the "moderators" are the ones who are not being honest. They clearly understood they were suppressing all discussion about talk.religion.bahai and have accomplished it. The moderators > hosted discussion of t.r.b. for several weeks and then asked people to > take it to news.groups. We allowed the discussion there as a favor to > you Fred. In fact, you asked the moderators on January 22 to direct all > discussion to news.groups but in an attempt to be as fair and impartial > as possible, we decided to allow discussion on the newsgroup. So which > way would you like to have it Fred? Are you calling us dictators for > following guidelines you yourself asked the moderators to follow? It is true that I requested that discussin take place on news.groups not understanding that it could take place anywhere on the internet as long as it was crossposted to news.groups. At that time, I also did not realize that 50 percent or more of the people who read soc.religion.bahai do so on an email echo, with no access whatsoever to news.groups.... The "moderators" understood this fact.... > Dick Detweiler The discussion was not over, Mr. Detweiler. You and your fellow fascists began to feel the heat of opinions other than your own and simple couldn't take it.... You therefore chose to suppress discussion about talk.religion.bahai as you chose to suppress all discussion about Dialogue. To pretend to anything else is a laughable sham.... Since you bring up the whole context within which discussion of talk.religion.bahai was banned, I believe it's important to point out that you permitted people to deride my character and intimate I was a covenant breaker without permitting me a fair, full, and honest response.... A shameful way of conducting, manipulating really, the "discussion." Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:08:12 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 1 02:37:55 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA13693; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 04:37:51 -0600 Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 04:37:51 -0600 Message-Id: <199703011037.EAA13693@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5725 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:e1cf20f42db51441c7e795d192753219abd030e536be ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Response to a Censor Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857212644.13685@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: srb-mods@bcca.org References: <857134517.3664@dejanews.com> <5f6q5q$fac@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 01 10:37:25 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5f6q5q$fac@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>, rdetweil@primenet.com (Richard C. Detweiler) wrote: > > In article <857134517.3664@dejanews.com>, > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >Douglas MsAdam wrote: > > > >>Dear friends- > >> > >>I have been away for two weeks and do not know from this message who > >>said what but I do have some additional thoughts. > > > >IN THE INTERIM, THE DICTATORS AT SRB HAVE BANNED ALL DISCUSSION > >REGARDING TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI > > > > Fred, can you please at least be honest about this stuff? In my opinion, the "moderators" are the ones who are not being honest. They clearly understood they were suppressing all discussion about talk.religion.bahai and have accomplished it. The moderators > hosted discussion of t.r.b. for several weeks and then asked people to > take it to news.groups. We allowed the discussion there as a favor to > you Fred. In fact, you asked the moderators on January 22 to direct all > discussion to news.groups but in an attempt to be as fair and impartial > as possible, we decided to allow discussion on the newsgroup. So which > way would you like to have it Fred? Are you calling us dictators for > following guidelines you yourself asked the moderators to follow? It is true that I requested that discussin take place on news.groups not understanding that it could take place anywhere on the internet as long as it was crossposted to news.groups. At that time, I also did not realize that 50 percent or more of the people who read soc.religion.bahai do so on an email echo, with no access whatsoever to news.groups.... The "moderators" understood this fact.... > Dick Detweiler The discussion was not over, Mr. Detweiler. You and your fellow fascists began to feel the heat of opinions other than your own and simple couldn't take it.... You therefore chose to suppress discussion about talk.religion.bahai as you chose to suppress all discussion about Dialogue. To pretend to anything else is a laughable sham.... Since you bring up the whole context within which discussion of talk.religion.bahai was banned, I believe it's important to point out that you permitted people to deride my character and intimate I was a covenant breaker without permitting me a fair, full, and honest response.... A shameful way of conducting, manipulating really, the "discussion." Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:08:16 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 1 03:19:03 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA14107; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 05:17:46 -0600 Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 05:17:46 -0600 Message-Id: <199703011117.FAA14107@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6271 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:e11f60146d8564d130125beb6182b6af7a603764860f ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 01 11:14:52 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) (FORGIVE THE CAPS, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO DISTINGUISH MY REMARK FROM OTHERS) I'VE DECIDED TO POST A REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME TO TYPIFY THE GROSS FANATICISM AND SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS OF SO MANY BAHAIS.... THIS MENTALITY, I BELIEVE, UNDERLIES MUCH OF THE OPPOSITION TO TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI OVER THE LAST WEEKS. NO HONEST MEMBER OF THE BAHAI FAITH CAN FAIL TO UNDERSTAND THE TACTIC OF INTIMIDATION USED BY SOME FANATICS TO SILENCE ANYONE WHO MIGHT DARE TO EXPRESS AN OPINION OTHER THAN THE CONVENTIONALLY ACCEPTED ONE. AS A BAHAI, FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS, THIS TENDENCY CONCERNS ME DEEPLY. IT IS DIFFICULT FOR ME NOT TO SEE IT AS THE SAME LYING, DISTORTING, AND COERCIVE METHODS USED BY EXTREMISTS IN ALL CULTS AND PSEUDO-RELIGIONS. I BELIEVE THE MODERATORS OF SOC.RELIGION.BAHAI HAVE USED THESE SAME METHODS IN MANIPULATING, THROUGH OTHERS, THE DISCUSSION ABOUT TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI.... I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S JUSTIFIABLE ON THE BASIS OF THE BAHAI WRITINGS.... Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 15:55:19 -0500 From: Roger Reini To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: Response to a Jesuit I am replying privately because I feel it's most appropriate. You do NOT have my permission to post this to Usenet or any other forum. THE REASON I HAVE IS GIVEN ABOVE. In my opinion, this note of yours contained some implied criticism of the Institutions and could be construed as undermining their authority. Specifically, this quote: >This ignores the fact that many Bahais don't accept review and believe >it's censorship.... WHAT RREINI IS INTIMATING HERE, FOR THOSE WHO DON'T PERCEIVE IT, IS THAT I'M A MISCREANT, INFIDEL, ETC.... If this was not your intent, then you might want to rephrase the concept you're trying to get across so that it's clear you're not trying to undermine the Institutions. On the other hand, if that was your intent, then that's something I prefer not to think about. HERE IT IS AGAIN.... THE RED FLAG OF ACCUSATION, OF THE SELF-RIGHTEOUS, USED TO SILENCE AND TERRORIZE OTHERS, TO MANIPULATE AND CONTROL.... ENDING WITH HIS WRAPPING HIMSELF IN THE MANTLE OF PIETY AND PURITY OF MOTIVE.... Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) THIS HAS BEEN THE APPROACH OF OTHERS DURING THIS DISCUSSION PERIOD. IS THIS THE KIND OF KINGDOM OF GOD WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE ON EARTH? THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION WORLDWIDE? IT SEEMS LIKE IT AT TIMES.... FOR OTHER EXAMPLES OF IT, ONE MIGHT LOOK BACK AT THE POSTING BY DR. STEVE BURGESS WHO AFTER MAKING HIS SHAMELESS INTIMATIONS FAILED TO HAVE THE COURAGE TO REPLY TO ME, WHEN I CONFRONTED HIM, IN PUBLIC, WITH HIS CONTEMPTIBLE INSINUATION.... I PRESENT ALL THIS AS EVIDENCE, TO FAIR-MINDED PEOPLE, THAT AN UNCONTROLLED, UNMANIPULATED, UNCENSORED TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI IS WOEFULLY NEEDED TO ENSURE THE FREEDOM OF RELIGIOUS CONSCIENCE GOD HIMSELF HAS BLESSED HUMANKIND WITH.... THERE ARE TOO MANY SELF-RIGHTEOUS FANATICS IN THE BAHAI FAITH FOR IT NOT TO EXIST.... FREDERICK GLAYSHER ROCHESTER HILLS, MICHIGAN USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:10 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 1 03:19:03 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA14107; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 05:17:46 -0600 Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 05:17:46 -0600 Message-Id: <199703011117.FAA14107@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6271 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:e11f60146d8564d130125beb6182b6af7a603764860f ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 01 11:14:52 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) (FORGIVE THE CAPS, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO DISTINGUISH MY REMARK FROM OTHERS) I'VE DECIDED TO POST A REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME TO TYPIFY THE GROSS FANATICISM AND SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS OF SO MANY BAHAIS.... THIS MENTALITY, I BELIEVE, UNDERLIES MUCH OF THE OPPOSITION TO TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI OVER THE LAST WEEKS. NO HONEST MEMBER OF THE BAHAI FAITH CAN FAIL TO UNDERSTAND THE TACTIC OF INTIMIDATION USED BY SOME FANATICS TO SILENCE ANYONE WHO MIGHT DARE TO EXPRESS AN OPINION OTHER THAN THE CONVENTIONALLY ACCEPTED ONE. AS A BAHAI, FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS, THIS TENDENCY CONCERNS ME DEEPLY. IT IS DIFFICULT FOR ME NOT TO SEE IT AS THE SAME LYING, DISTORTING, AND COERCIVE METHODS USED BY EXTREMISTS IN ALL CULTS AND PSEUDO-RELIGIONS. I BELIEVE THE MODERATORS OF SOC.RELIGION.BAHAI HAVE USED THESE SAME METHODS IN MANIPULATING, THROUGH OTHERS, THE DISCUSSION ABOUT TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI.... I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S JUSTIFIABLE ON THE BASIS OF THE BAHAI WRITINGS.... Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 15:55:19 -0500 From: Roger Reini To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: Response to a Jesuit I am replying privately because I feel it's most appropriate. You do NOT have my permission to post this to Usenet or any other forum. THE REASON I HAVE IS GIVEN ABOVE. In my opinion, this note of yours contained some implied criticism of the Institutions and could be construed as undermining their authority. Specifically, this quote: >This ignores the fact that many Bahais don't accept review and believe >it's censorship.... WHAT RREINI IS INTIMATING HERE, FOR THOSE WHO DON'T PERCEIVE IT, IS THAT I'M A MISCREANT, INFIDEL, ETC.... If this was not your intent, then you might want to rephrase the concept you're trying to get across so that it's clear you're not trying to undermine the Institutions. On the other hand, if that was your intent, then that's something I prefer not to think about. HERE IT IS AGAIN.... THE RED FLAG OF ACCUSATION, OF THE SELF-RIGHTEOUS, USED TO SILENCE AND TERRORIZE OTHERS, TO MANIPULATE AND CONTROL.... ENDING WITH HIS WRAPPING HIMSELF IN THE MANTLE OF PIETY AND PURITY OF MOTIVE.... Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) THIS HAS BEEN THE APPROACH OF OTHERS DURING THIS DISCUSSION PERIOD. IS THIS THE KIND OF KINGDOM OF GOD WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE ON EARTH? THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION WORLDWIDE? IT SEEMS LIKE IT AT TIMES.... FOR OTHER EXAMPLES OF IT, ONE MIGHT LOOK BACK AT THE POSTING BY DR. STEVE BURGESS WHO AFTER MAKING HIS SHAMELESS INTIMATIONS FAILED TO HAVE THE COURAGE TO REPLY TO ME, WHEN I CONFRONTED HIM, IN PUBLIC, WITH HIS CONTEMPTIBLE INSINUATION.... I PRESENT ALL THIS AS EVIDENCE, TO FAIR-MINDED PEOPLE, THAT AN UNCONTROLLED, UNMANIPULATED, UNCENSORED TALK.RELIGION.BAHAI IS WOEFULLY NEEDED TO ENSURE THE FREEDOM OF RELIGIOUS CONSCIENCE GOD HIMSELF HAS BLESSED HUMANKIND WITH.... THERE ARE TOO MANY SELF-RIGHTEOUS FANATICS IN THE BAHAI FAITH FOR IT NOT TO EXIST.... FREDERICK GLAYSHER ROCHESTER HILLS, MICHIGAN USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:15 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 1 04:36:01 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA15120; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 06:35:20 -0600 Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 06:35:20 -0600 Message-Id: <199703011235.GAA15120@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4476 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f10fa0d40df534018da15e81339e47509da6535ba3cc ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Talk.Religion.Bahai: Peroration Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857219585.15083@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: irfan@umich.edu,talisman@umich.edu,srb-mods@bcca.org X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 01 12:33:08 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.122 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) "The shining spark of truth cometh forth only after the clash of differing opinions." Abdul-Baha I believe the need exists for an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith. The only newsgroup that does exist is soc.religion.bahai. I and others have experienced, or believe we have experienced, censorship at the hands of the unelected and unappointed moderators. In order to ensure confidence and trust that the Bahai Faith is not an oppressive religion of fanatics, I believe it is essential for an unmanipulated, uncontrolled source to exist for the unhindered exchange of ideas and opinions. There will definitely be clashes of opinion, but I trust, in the long run, the spark of scintillating truth shall blaze out, encircling the globe, via this new God-given bounty of the Internet. We needn't fear those clashes but rather trust the blessing of the ability to speak candidly and honestly with one another, Bahais and non-Bahais, the stirring of our consciences, the greatest gift of human consciousness. How laughable, to those who know nothing of the Bahai Faith, must be this spectacle of fear and anxiety over maintaining a monopoly of control of cyberspace. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA FG@hotmail.com 1 March 1997 -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:08:21 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 1 04:36:01 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA15120; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 06:35:20 -0600 Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 06:35:20 -0600 Message-Id: <199703011235.GAA15120@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4476 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f10fa0d40df534018da15e81339e47509da6535ba3cc ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Talk.Religion.Bahai: Peroration Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857219585.15083@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: irfan@umich.edu,talisman@umich.edu,srb-mods@bcca.org X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 01 12:33:08 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.122 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) "The shining spark of truth cometh forth only after the clash of differing opinions." Abdul-Baha I believe the need exists for an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith. The only newsgroup that does exist is soc.religion.bahai. I and others have experienced, or believe we have experienced, censorship at the hands of the unelected and unappointed moderators. In order to ensure confidence and trust that the Bahai Faith is not an oppressive religion of fanatics, I believe it is essential for an unmanipulated, uncontrolled source to exist for the unhindered exchange of ideas and opinions. There will definitely be clashes of opinion, but I trust, in the long run, the spark of scintillating truth shall blaze out, encircling the globe, via this new God-given bounty of the Internet. We needn't fear those clashes but rather trust the blessing of the ability to speak candidly and honestly with one another, Bahais and non-Bahais, the stirring of our consciences, the greatest gift of human consciousness. How laughable, to those who know nothing of the Bahai Faith, must be this spectacle of fear and anxiety over maintaining a monopoly of control of cyberspace. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA FG@hotmail.com 1 March 1997 -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:08:37 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Mon Mar 3 04:52:37 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA01756; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 06:51:39 -0600 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 06:51:39 -0600 Message-Id: <199703031251.GAA01756@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4452 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:517f50141dd554d1945b648f75fbcd75ecb38358f194 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Mar 03 12:51:29 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.20 (ts_rh.metronet.lib.mi.us) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) AAAhhhhh, I "violated" your trust.... You should be able to accuse anyone of anything you like, and no one else should know.... All fascists and oppressors like to hide in the dark where others can't see their contemptible deeds.... That's how I read your "private" email to me and this response. In article <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com>, rreini@wwnet.com wrote: > > Please note that Mr. Glaysher violated my trust and posted a private > communication from me to him without my permission. In fact, I > expressed forbade him from doing so. Quoting from my original note: > > > I am replying privately because I feel it's most appropriate. You do > > NOT have my permission to post this to Usenet or any other forum. > > Nevertheless, he goes ahead and does so. > > I will not respond to his comments in public. That means I can't really > respond in private, either, for my private comments will be made public. > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) Wrapping himself again in the mantle of piety and purity.... Hitler did that before and while he was murdering Jews in private, if I'm not mistaken.... He didn't want the rest of the world to know either. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:32 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Mon Mar 3 04:52:37 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA01756; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 06:51:39 -0600 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 06:51:39 -0600 Message-Id: <199703031251.GAA01756@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4452 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:517f50141dd554d1945b648f75fbcd75ecb38358f194 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Mar 03 12:51:29 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.20 (ts_rh.metronet.lib.mi.us) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) AAAhhhhh, I "violated" your trust.... You should be able to accuse anyone of anything you like, and no one else should know.... All fascists and oppressors like to hide in the dark where others can't see their contemptible deeds.... That's how I read your "private" email to me and this response. In article <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com>, rreini@wwnet.com wrote: > > Please note that Mr. Glaysher violated my trust and posted a private > communication from me to him without my permission. In fact, I > expressed forbade him from doing so. Quoting from my original note: > > > I am replying privately because I feel it's most appropriate. You do > > NOT have my permission to post this to Usenet or any other forum. > > Nevertheless, he goes ahead and does so. > > I will not respond to his comments in public. That means I can't really > respond in private, either, for my private comments will be made public. > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) Wrapping himself again in the mantle of piety and purity.... Hitler did that before and while he was murdering Jews in private, if I'm not mistaken.... He didn't want the rest of the world to know either. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:36 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Mon Mar 3 05:07:04 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id HAA02109; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 07:06:11 -0600 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 07:06:11 -0600 Message-Id: <199703031306.HAA02109@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 5632 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:011f20041dc574313441e7dfdb2917068dc556f40b3f ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Whining and Crying (was: Betrayal of trust (was: Response to a Fanatic)) Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857394334.2081@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <331A3A88.5E5@wwnet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Mar 03 13:05:36 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.20 (ts_rh.metronet.lib.mi.us) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <331A3A88.5E5@wwnet.com>, rreini@wwnet.com wrote: > > Steven Garman wrote: > > > > Sat, 01 Mar 1997, Roger Reini bawwwwwled like a baby: > > /Please note that Mr. Glaysher violated my trust and posted a private > > /communication from me to him without my permission. In fact, I expressed > > /forbade him from doing so. > > > > In other words: "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!" > > > > Somebody should wipe your snotty nose, little boy. > > I can wipe my nose just fine, thank you. > > > /I will not respond to his comments in public. That means I can't really > > /respond in private, either, for my private comments will be made public. > > > > Yes, this DOES avoid dealing with the topic to being with ... which was > > your aim. > > The topic is a private matter between Mr. Glaysher and myself. It > should remain that way, as it concerns nobody else. Why waste bandwidth > on something that's of no interest to anyone else? I don't consider it a "private matter." I definitely consider it a public one. It typifies the self-righteousness of many Bahais, such as the moderators of soc.religion.bahai..... Mr. Reini's attempt at concealing his tactics of smear and intimidation is exactly what religious fanatics in all cults have always done, e.g., Jim Jones, the Kool-Ade King; Aum Shinryku (sp?) of Japanese sarin gas attack infamy; Bhagwanshuresh (sp?), Waco wackos, etc.... It is because of Bahais like Mr. Reini that I believe a forum, talk.religion.bahai, should exist so that no one can manipulate and control discussion to their own advantage.... I have nothing to hide. Clearly, if you read the words above again, Mr. Reini does. It's interesting to think back about his many postings on talk.religion.bahai over the last four weeks or so in the light of these revelations.... > > > I call you coward. Answer Mr Glaysher in the public forum, if you have the > > balls of a man. > > Call me what you like. But I will not take that discussion public. > > >The Attack Dog of Usenet > > Is your license up to date? Otherwise, he'll have you halled into the pound and gassed to death.... > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:05 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Mon Mar 3 05:07:04 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id HAA02109; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 07:06:11 -0600 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 07:06:11 -0600 Message-Id: <199703031306.HAA02109@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 5632 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:011f20041dc574313441e7dfdb2917068dc556f40b3f ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Whining and Crying (was: Betrayal of trust (was: Response to a Fanatic)) Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857394334.2081@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <331A3A88.5E5@wwnet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Mar 03 13:05:36 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.20 (ts_rh.metronet.lib.mi.us) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <331A3A88.5E5@wwnet.com>, rreini@wwnet.com wrote: > > Steven Garman wrote: > > > > Sat, 01 Mar 1997, Roger Reini bawwwwwled like a baby: > > /Please note that Mr. Glaysher violated my trust and posted a private > > /communication from me to him without my permission. In fact, I expressed > > /forbade him from doing so. > > > > In other words: "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!" > > > > Somebody should wipe your snotty nose, little boy. > > I can wipe my nose just fine, thank you. > > > /I will not respond to his comments in public. That means I can't really > > /respond in private, either, for my private comments will be made public. > > > > Yes, this DOES avoid dealing with the topic to being with ... which was > > your aim. > > The topic is a private matter between Mr. Glaysher and myself. It > should remain that way, as it concerns nobody else. Why waste bandwidth > on something that's of no interest to anyone else? I don't consider it a "private matter." I definitely consider it a public one. It typifies the self-righteousness of many Bahais, such as the moderators of soc.religion.bahai..... Mr. Reini's attempt at concealing his tactics of smear and intimidation is exactly what religious fanatics in all cults have always done, e.g., Jim Jones, the Kool-Ade King; Aum Shinryku (sp?) of Japanese sarin gas attack infamy; Bhagwanshuresh (sp?), Waco wackos, etc.... It is because of Bahais like Mr. Reini that I believe a forum, talk.religion.bahai, should exist so that no one can manipulate and control discussion to their own advantage.... I have nothing to hide. Clearly, if you read the words above again, Mr. Reini does. It's interesting to think back about his many postings on talk.religion.bahai over the last four weeks or so in the light of these revelations.... > > > I call you coward. Answer Mr Glaysher in the public forum, if you have the > > balls of a man. > > Call me what you like. But I will not take that discussion public. > > >The Attack Dog of Usenet > > Is your license up to date? Otherwise, he'll have you halled into the pound and gassed to death.... > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:09 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Mon Mar 3 14:51:50 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id QAA25700; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:50:25 -0600 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:50:25 -0600 Message-Id: <199703032250.QAA25700@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6069 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:e15f30e42dc554718a2e58df0f657098ff6b335abba0 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857429398.25661@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <857394294.2022@dejanews.com> <331AF9CF.22BE@wwnet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Mar 03 22:50:06 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.126 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <331AF9CF.22BE@wwnet.com>, Roger Reini wrote: > > eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > > From what I have read of the several posts on this you have my vote for > > creating talk.religion.bahai. The first step to tranny and slavery is > > censorship. What are they afraid of? Open discussion about the truth? > > What is going on here? > [clip] > IMHO, the posts were rejected not so much on their content as on how > that content was expressed. The discussions on s.r.b are of high caliber > and can become vigorous. They are also free of personal attacks, > name-calling, etc. -- a refreshing island of calm in the storm-tossed > sea which is Usenet. IMHO, the rejected posts did not meet the standards > of the newsgroup because of their tone, not their content. False. The "moderators" suppressed content on the excuse of "tone." There over 20 censored messages posted to news.groups....not only several.... I would characterize soc.religion.bahai as an oppressive concentration camp of smug, self-righteous Jesuits or ayatollahs.... Suitably > rephrased, I would imagine that they would be allowed. To suite the taste of hitlerites, nannies, old biddies, and pollyannas.... There may be a > short cooling off period, but one's that's passed, I would see no > difficulty with revised postings being accepted. Let me give you an example of "offensive language" for which I was banned: "Utterly naive." It's the surrounding content of that message that the censors were after.... If the poster were > unwilling to revise them, then that would be a different matter. Absolutely unwilling then and now.... WHO ARE THEY? for the six thousandth time, I ask.... > > > Get it up. I want to see talk.religiion.bahai established so those people > > can have an open form for their concerns. I will help as well as > > participate in it to see that freedom of speech continues here in > > cyberspace in good ol US of A. > > IMHO, I think the discussion is being driven more by personal grudges > than anything. The personal grudge here of Mr. Reini is quite apparent to anyone who has read his many messages opposing decent freedom of religious conscience to others..... That's not a rational basis for discussion. Perhaps we > should all take a break and cool off. Pretending to be the essence of rationality here doesn't cut it either.... Your biases were clear in the content posted in Response to a Fanatic.... > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) Your real motive here, Mr. Reini, is you can't take someone actually supporting the notion of talk.religion.bahai, and so you just have to jump in and persuade him otherwise.... Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:40 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Mon Mar 3 14:51:50 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id QAA25700; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:50:25 -0600 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:50:25 -0600 Message-Id: <199703032250.QAA25700@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6069 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:e15f30e42dc554718a2e58df0f657098ff6b335abba0 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857429398.25661@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <857394294.2022@dejanews.com> <331AF9CF.22BE@wwnet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Mar 03 22:50:06 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.126 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <331AF9CF.22BE@wwnet.com>, Roger Reini wrote: > > eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > > From what I have read of the several posts on this you have my vote for > > creating talk.religion.bahai. The first step to tranny and slavery is > > censorship. What are they afraid of? Open discussion about the truth? > > What is going on here? > [clip] > IMHO, the posts were rejected not so much on their content as on how > that content was expressed. The discussions on s.r.b are of high caliber > and can become vigorous. They are also free of personal attacks, > name-calling, etc. -- a refreshing island of calm in the storm-tossed > sea which is Usenet. IMHO, the rejected posts did not meet the standards > of the newsgroup because of their tone, not their content. False. The "moderators" suppressed content on the excuse of "tone." There over 20 censored messages posted to news.groups....not only several.... I would characterize soc.religion.bahai as an oppressive concentration camp of smug, self-righteous Jesuits or ayatollahs.... Suitably > rephrased, I would imagine that they would be allowed. To suite the taste of hitlerites, nannies, old biddies, and pollyannas.... There may be a > short cooling off period, but one's that's passed, I would see no > difficulty with revised postings being accepted. Let me give you an example of "offensive language" for which I was banned: "Utterly naive." It's the surrounding content of that message that the censors were after.... If the poster were > unwilling to revise them, then that would be a different matter. Absolutely unwilling then and now.... WHO ARE THEY? for the six thousandth time, I ask.... > > > Get it up. I want to see talk.religiion.bahai established so those people > > can have an open form for their concerns. I will help as well as > > participate in it to see that freedom of speech continues here in > > cyberspace in good ol US of A. > > IMHO, I think the discussion is being driven more by personal grudges > than anything. The personal grudge here of Mr. Reini is quite apparent to anyone who has read his many messages opposing decent freedom of religious conscience to others..... That's not a rational basis for discussion. Perhaps we > should all take a break and cool off. Pretending to be the essence of rationality here doesn't cut it either.... Your biases were clear in the content posted in Response to a Fanatic.... > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) Your real motive here, Mr. Reini, is you can't take someone actually supporting the notion of talk.religion.bahai, and so you just have to jump in and persuade him otherwise.... Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:40 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Mon Mar 3 14:51:50 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id QAA25700; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:50:25 -0600 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:50:25 -0600 Message-Id: <199703032250.QAA25700@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 6069 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:e15f30e42dc554718a2e58df0f657098ff6b335abba0 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857429398.25661@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <857394294.2022@dejanews.com> <331AF9CF.22BE@wwnet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Mar 03 22:50:06 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.126 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <331AF9CF.22BE@wwnet.com>, Roger Reini wrote: > > eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > > From what I have read of the several posts on this you have my vote for > > creating talk.religion.bahai. The first step to tranny and slavery is > > censorship. What are they afraid of? Open discussion about the truth? > > What is going on here? > [clip] > IMHO, the posts were rejected not so much on their content as on how > that content was expressed. The discussions on s.r.b are of high caliber > and can become vigorous. They are also free of personal attacks, > name-calling, etc. -- a refreshing island of calm in the storm-tossed > sea which is Usenet. IMHO, the rejected posts did not meet the standards > of the newsgroup because of their tone, not their content. False. The "moderators" suppressed content on the excuse of "tone." There over 20 censored messages posted to news.groups....not only several.... I would characterize soc.religion.bahai as an oppressive concentration camp of smug, self-righteous Jesuits or ayatollahs.... Suitably > rephrased, I would imagine that they would be allowed. To suite the taste of hitlerites, nannies, old biddies, and pollyannas.... There may be a > short cooling off period, but one's that's passed, I would see no > difficulty with revised postings being accepted. Let me give you an example of "offensive language" for which I was banned: "Utterly naive." It's the surrounding content of that message that the censors were after.... If the poster were > unwilling to revise them, then that would be a different matter. Absolutely unwilling then and now.... WHO ARE THEY? for the six thousandth time, I ask.... > > > Get it up. I want to see talk.religiion.bahai established so those people > > can have an open form for their concerns. I will help as well as > > participate in it to see that freedom of speech continues here in > > cyberspace in good ol US of A. > > IMHO, I think the discussion is being driven more by personal grudges > than anything. The personal grudge here of Mr. Reini is quite apparent to anyone who has read his many messages opposing decent freedom of religious conscience to others..... That's not a rational basis for discussion. Perhaps we > should all take a break and cool off. Pretending to be the essence of rationality here doesn't cut it either.... Your biases were clear in the content posted in Response to a Fanatic.... > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) Your real motive here, Mr. Reini, is you can't take someone actually supporting the notion of talk.religion.bahai, and so you just have to jump in and persuade him otherwise.... Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:14 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Tue Mar 4 04:23:42 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA17305; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 06:09:31 -0600 Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 06:09:31 -0600 Message-Id: <199703041209.GAA17305@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4264 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:317f40e45d35f4716788f6b46eece014b0d7580484d6 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857477342.17294@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Mar 04 12:09:06 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com>, bruce@nospamhere.kenosis.com (Bruce Baugh) wrote: > > In article <857393489.1747@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > >All fascists and oppressors like to hide in the dark where others > >can't see their contemptible deeds.... That's how I read your > >"private" email to me and this response. > > You know, you could save us all some time and effort if you'd not bother with > the extended screeds and just hold up a sign proclaiming "I am an idiot! Vote > against my proposal, because I don't have a clue!" You're entitled to your opinion, though I don't share it. I won't even attempt to get you banned for it. Imagine that. > > *plonk* > > -- > Bruce Baugh <*> https://www.kenosis.com > Moderator, comp.os.ms-windows.win95.moderated > List manager, Christlib, Christian/libertarian mailing list > Host, new sf by S.M. Stirling and George Alec Effing er Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:45 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Tue Mar 4 04:23:42 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA17305; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 06:09:31 -0600 Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 06:09:31 -0600 Message-Id: <199703041209.GAA17305@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4264 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:317f40e45d35f4716788f6b46eece014b0d7580484d6 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857477342.17294@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Mar 04 12:09:06 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com>, bruce@nospamhere.kenosis.com (Bruce Baugh) wrote: > > In article <857393489.1747@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > >All fascists and oppressors like to hide in the dark where others > >can't see their contemptible deeds.... That's how I read your > >"private" email to me and this response. > > You know, you could save us all some time and effort if you'd not bother with > the extended screeds and just hold up a sign proclaiming "I am an idiot! Vote > against my proposal, because I don't have a clue!" You're entitled to your opinion, though I don't share it. I won't even attempt to get you banned for it. Imagine that. > > *plonk* > > -- > Bruce Baugh <*> https://www.kenosis.com > Moderator, comp.os.ms-windows.win95.moderated > List manager, Christlib, Christian/libertarian mailing list > Host, new sf by S.M. Stirling and George Alec Effing er Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:45 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Tue Mar 4 04:23:42 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA17305; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 06:09:31 -0600 Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 06:09:31 -0600 Message-Id: <199703041209.GAA17305@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4264 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:317f40e45d35f4716788f6b46eece014b0d7580484d6 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857477342.17294@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Mar 04 12:09:06 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com>, bruce@nospamhere.kenosis.com (Bruce Baugh) wrote: > > In article <857393489.1747@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > >All fascists and oppressors like to hide in the dark where others > >can't see their contemptible deeds.... That's how I read your > >"private" email to me and this response. > > You know, you could save us all some time and effort if you'd not bother with > the extended screeds and just hold up a sign proclaiming "I am an idiot! Vote > against my proposal, because I don't have a clue!" You're entitled to your opinion, though I don't share it. I won't even attempt to get you banned for it. Imagine that. > > *plonk* > > -- > Bruce Baugh <*> https://www.kenosis.com > Moderator, comp.os.ms-windows.win95.moderated > List manager, Christlib, Christian/libertarian mailing list > Host, new sf by S.M. Stirling and George Alec Effing er Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:45 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Tue Mar 4 04:23:42 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA17305; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 06:09:31 -0600 Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 06:09:31 -0600 Message-Id: <199703041209.GAA17305@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4264 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:317f40e45d35f4716788f6b46eece014b0d7580484d6 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857477342.17294@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Mar 04 12:09:06 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com>, bruce@nospamhere.kenosis.com (Bruce Baugh) wrote: > > In article <857393489.1747@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > >All fascists and oppressors like to hide in the dark where others > >can't see their contemptible deeds.... That's how I read your > >"private" email to me and this response. > > You know, you could save us all some time and effort if you'd not bother with > the extended screeds and just hold up a sign proclaiming "I am an idiot! Vote > against my proposal, because I don't have a clue!" You're entitled to your opinion, though I don't share it. I won't even attempt to get you banned for it. Imagine that. > > *plonk* > > -- > Bruce Baugh <*> https://www.kenosis.com > Moderator, comp.os.ms-windows.win95.moderated > List manager, Christlib, Christian/libertarian mailing list > Host, new sf by S.M. Stirling and George Alec Effing er Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:50 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 03:21:02 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA01138; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:20:00 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:20:00 -0600 Message-Id: <199703051120.FAA01138@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6225 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f11f00c40db56431bc53cd35aa35e8c6bac3acd591a8 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857560787.1131@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 11:19:47 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , emma@Kanpai.Stanford.EDU (Emma Pease) wrote: > > In <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> Frederick Glaysher writes: > > >AAAhhhhh, I "violated" your trust.... You should be able to > >accuse anyone of anything you like, and no one else should know.... > > >All fascists and oppressors like to hide in the dark where others > >can't see their contemptible deeds.... That's how I read your > >"private" email to me and this response. > > Net etiquette frowns upon posting private email without the consent of > the sender just as regular etiquette frowns upon printing letters > meant to be private in the local newspaper without the consent of the > writer. In this case the sender explicitly refused you permission to > repost, but you did so anyway. The issue concerns more than "etiquette." Are you a Bahai? Do you understand what in "private" Mr. Reini accused me of? Can you see how that is tantamount to an attempt to silence me through intimidation and fear? What you are talking about are niceties of discourse that Mr. Reini himself, in my opinion, violated when he "privately" suggested I was covenant breaker or something and did not have the honesty to come out and say so in public where everyone could see what really makes him tick, if you will..... fanaticism. > > It would have been acceptable for you to paraphrase the letter and > publically (and politely) ask him for permission to post the full text > thereby putting the onus on him, but instead you violated etiquette > and marked yourself as someone who cannot be expected to behave > according to the norms of civilized society (or even the uncivilized > society of usenet). It's all right for Mr. Reini to abuse the norms of civilized society (come on, isn't that going too far!), but don't point it out to anyone else.... Allow terror, intimidation, smear, two-faced piety, as long as it's all done for the right cause.... > > talk.religion.bahai may be justified (and I know one person not > participating in this discussion who leans towards that view), but > some of your actions are more damaging to your cause than helpful. I'm not a saint.... I don't pretend to be one.... I'm not the essence of depravity either.... though some may feel otherwise.... Here's something to consider: given the stultifying, censored nature of discussion and conscience in the Bahai Faith, it could not have been any other way.... This is how it has seemed to me all along.... Think about it.... Oh, we human beings, how do we manage to go on? > > Emma Pease > neutral on whether t.r.b should be created > -- > \---- > |\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster > |_\/ emma@csli.stanford.edu Die Luft der Freiheit weht Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:19 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 03:21:02 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA01138; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:20:00 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:20:00 -0600 Message-Id: <199703051120.FAA01138@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6225 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f11f00c40db56431bc53cd35aa35e8c6bac3acd591a8 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857560787.1131@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 11:19:47 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , emma@Kanpai.Stanford.EDU (Emma Pease) wrote: > > In <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> Frederick Glaysher writes: > > >AAAhhhhh, I "violated" your trust.... You should be able to > >accuse anyone of anything you like, and no one else should know.... > > >All fascists and oppressors like to hide in the dark where others > >can't see their contemptible deeds.... That's how I read your > >"private" email to me and this response. > > Net etiquette frowns upon posting private email without the consent of > the sender just as regular etiquette frowns upon printing letters > meant to be private in the local newspaper without the consent of the > writer. In this case the sender explicitly refused you permission to > repost, but you did so anyway. The issue concerns more than "etiquette." Are you a Bahai? Do you understand what in "private" Mr. Reini accused me of? Can you see how that is tantamount to an attempt to silence me through intimidation and fear? What you are talking about are niceties of discourse that Mr. Reini himself, in my opinion, violated when he "privately" suggested I was covenant breaker or something and did not have the honesty to come out and say so in public where everyone could see what really makes him tick, if you will..... fanaticism. > > It would have been acceptable for you to paraphrase the letter and > publically (and politely) ask him for permission to post the full text > thereby putting the onus on him, but instead you violated etiquette > and marked yourself as someone who cannot be expected to behave > according to the norms of civilized society (or even the uncivilized > society of usenet). It's all right for Mr. Reini to abuse the norms of civilized society (come on, isn't that going too far!), but don't point it out to anyone else.... Allow terror, intimidation, smear, two-faced piety, as long as it's all done for the right cause.... > > talk.religion.bahai may be justified (and I know one person not > participating in this discussion who leans towards that view), but > some of your actions are more damaging to your cause than helpful. I'm not a saint.... I don't pretend to be one.... I'm not the essence of depravity either.... though some may feel otherwise.... Here's something to consider: given the stultifying, censored nature of discussion and conscience in the Bahai Faith, it could not have been any other way.... This is how it has seemed to me all along.... Think about it.... Oh, we human beings, how do we manage to go on? > > Emma Pease > neutral on whether t.r.b should be created > -- > \---- > |\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster > |_\/ emma@csli.stanford.edu Die Luft der Freiheit weht Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:50 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 03:21:02 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA01138; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:20:00 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:20:00 -0600 Message-Id: <199703051120.FAA01138@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6225 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f11f00c40db56431bc53cd35aa35e8c6bac3acd591a8 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857560787.1131@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 11:19:47 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , emma@Kanpai.Stanford.EDU (Emma Pease) wrote: > > In <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> Frederick Glaysher writes: > > >AAAhhhhh, I "violated" your trust.... You should be able to > >accuse anyone of anything you like, and no one else should know.... > > >All fascists and oppressors like to hide in the dark where others > >can't see their contemptible deeds.... That's how I read your > >"private" email to me and this response. > > Net etiquette frowns upon posting private email without the consent of > the sender just as regular etiquette frowns upon printing letters > meant to be private in the local newspaper without the consent of the > writer. In this case the sender explicitly refused you permission to > repost, but you did so anyway. The issue concerns more than "etiquette." Are you a Bahai? Do you understand what in "private" Mr. Reini accused me of? Can you see how that is tantamount to an attempt to silence me through intimidation and fear? What you are talking about are niceties of discourse that Mr. Reini himself, in my opinion, violated when he "privately" suggested I was covenant breaker or something and did not have the honesty to come out and say so in public where everyone could see what really makes him tick, if you will..... fanaticism. > > It would have been acceptable for you to paraphrase the letter and > publically (and politely) ask him for permission to post the full text > thereby putting the onus on him, but instead you violated etiquette > and marked yourself as someone who cannot be expected to behave > according to the norms of civilized society (or even the uncivilized > society of usenet). It's all right for Mr. Reini to abuse the norms of civilized society (come on, isn't that going too far!), but don't point it out to anyone else.... Allow terror, intimidation, smear, two-faced piety, as long as it's all done for the right cause.... > > talk.religion.bahai may be justified (and I know one person not > participating in this discussion who leans towards that view), but > some of your actions are more damaging to your cause than helpful. I'm not a saint.... I don't pretend to be one.... I'm not the essence of depravity either.... though some may feel otherwise.... Here's something to consider: given the stultifying, censored nature of discussion and conscience in the Bahai Faith, it could not have been any other way.... This is how it has seemed to me all along.... Think about it.... Oh, we human beings, how do we manage to go on? > > Emma Pease > neutral on whether t.r.b should be created > -- > \---- > |\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster > |_\/ emma@csli.stanford.edu Die Luft der Freiheit weht Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:50 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 03:21:02 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA01138; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:20:00 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:20:00 -0600 Message-Id: <199703051120.FAA01138@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6225 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f11f00c40db56431bc53cd35aa35e8c6bac3acd591a8 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857560787.1131@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 11:19:47 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , emma@Kanpai.Stanford.EDU (Emma Pease) wrote: > > In <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> Frederick Glaysher writes: > > >AAAhhhhh, I "violated" your trust.... You should be able to > >accuse anyone of anything you like, and no one else should know.... > > >All fascists and oppressors like to hide in the dark where others > >can't see their contemptible deeds.... That's how I read your > >"private" email to me and this response. > > Net etiquette frowns upon posting private email without the consent of > the sender just as regular etiquette frowns upon printing letters > meant to be private in the local newspaper without the consent of the > writer. In this case the sender explicitly refused you permission to > repost, but you did so anyway. The issue concerns more than "etiquette." Are you a Bahai? Do you understand what in "private" Mr. Reini accused me of? Can you see how that is tantamount to an attempt to silence me through intimidation and fear? What you are talking about are niceties of discourse that Mr. Reini himself, in my opinion, violated when he "privately" suggested I was covenant breaker or something and did not have the honesty to come out and say so in public where everyone could see what really makes him tick, if you will..... fanaticism. > > It would have been acceptable for you to paraphrase the letter and > publically (and politely) ask him for permission to post the full text > thereby putting the onus on him, but instead you violated etiquette > and marked yourself as someone who cannot be expected to behave > according to the norms of civilized society (or even the uncivilized > society of usenet). It's all right for Mr. Reini to abuse the norms of civilized society (come on, isn't that going too far!), but don't point it out to anyone else.... Allow terror, intimidation, smear, two-faced piety, as long as it's all done for the right cause.... > > talk.religion.bahai may be justified (and I know one person not > participating in this discussion who leans towards that view), but > some of your actions are more damaging to your cause than helpful. I'm not a saint.... I don't pretend to be one.... I'm not the essence of depravity either.... though some may feel otherwise.... Here's something to consider: given the stultifying, censored nature of discussion and conscience in the Bahai Faith, it could not have been any other way.... This is how it has seemed to me all along.... Think about it.... Oh, we human beings, how do we manage to go on? > > Emma Pease > neutral on whether t.r.b should be created > -- > \---- > |\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster > |_\/ emma@csli.stanford.edu Die Luft der Freiheit weht Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:50 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 03:21:02 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA01138; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:20:00 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:20:00 -0600 Message-Id: <199703051120.FAA01138@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6225 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f11f00c40db56431bc53cd35aa35e8c6bac3acd591a8 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857560787.1131@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 11:19:47 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , emma@Kanpai.Stanford.EDU (Emma Pease) wrote: > > In <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> Frederick Glaysher writes: > > >AAAhhhhh, I "violated" your trust.... You should be able to > >accuse anyone of anything you like, and no one else should know.... > > >All fascists and oppressors like to hide in the dark where others > >can't see their contemptible deeds.... That's how I read your > >"private" email to me and this response. > > Net etiquette frowns upon posting private email without the consent of > the sender just as regular etiquette frowns upon printing letters > meant to be private in the local newspaper without the consent of the > writer. In this case the sender explicitly refused you permission to > repost, but you did so anyway. The issue concerns more than "etiquette." Are you a Bahai? Do you understand what in "private" Mr. Reini accused me of? Can you see how that is tantamount to an attempt to silence me through intimidation and fear? What you are talking about are niceties of discourse that Mr. Reini himself, in my opinion, violated when he "privately" suggested I was covenant breaker or something and did not have the honesty to come out and say so in public where everyone could see what really makes him tick, if you will..... fanaticism. > > It would have been acceptable for you to paraphrase the letter and > publically (and politely) ask him for permission to post the full text > thereby putting the onus on him, but instead you violated etiquette > and marked yourself as someone who cannot be expected to behave > according to the norms of civilized society (or even the uncivilized > society of usenet). It's all right for Mr. Reini to abuse the norms of civilized society (come on, isn't that going too far!), but don't point it out to anyone else.... Allow terror, intimidation, smear, two-faced piety, as long as it's all done for the right cause.... > > talk.religion.bahai may be justified (and I know one person not > participating in this discussion who leans towards that view), but > some of your actions are more damaging to your cause than helpful. I'm not a saint.... I don't pretend to be one.... I'm not the essence of depravity either.... though some may feel otherwise.... Here's something to consider: given the stultifying, censored nature of discussion and conscience in the Bahai Faith, it could not have been any other way.... This is how it has seemed to me all along.... Think about it.... Oh, we human beings, how do we manage to go on? > > Emma Pease > neutral on whether t.r.b should be created > -- > \---- > |\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster > |_\/ emma@csli.stanford.edu Die Luft der Freiheit weht Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:55 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 03:34:37 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA01366; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:33:08 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:33:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199703051133.FAA01366@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5098 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:311f40d4cd9544110875df9fbfe680318c18e07d6463 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857561576.1357@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 11:32:56 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , gazissax@netcom.com (Lynn Diana Gazis) wrote: > > John Lowther (jlowther@acusd.edu) wrote: > > : Perhaps Bruce should hold up a sign -- "Hi. I'm biased." > > I hadn't any position, prior to all these threads, on the desirability of > an unmoderated talk.religion.bahai. But I'd have to say, when it comes > to posting private email, I'm biased as well. And see no reason to be > ashamed of that bias. Particularly when an apparently reasonable private > email with a politely made, explicit request not to post it is > deliberately posted accompanied by an odd screed about fascism. May I suggested you go back and read the "apparently reasonable" email. There's more involved in it than the request not to post. WHY would there be a request not to post? Ask yourself that question as you reread it. WHY would Mr. Reini want to hide, conceal, keep in the dark, out of public view, the suggestion that I'm attacking the Bahai institutions? How would that play to, apparently, his advantage in opposing talk.religion.bahai? You need to understand and know something about some people in the Bahai Faith in order to fully perceive what Mr. Reini is doing in that message. Face value, a polite request not to post, won't work.... I'd have to compare it to Hitler terrorizing the Jews by sending them private notes that intimate they're against the Aryan race to convey the real nature of Mr. Reini's "reasonable" little email.... The Jews understood what Hitler was doing.... And the possibility of egregious deeds to come.... He and others are annoyed because I refuse to go to the gas ovens in silence.... > > Lynn Gazis-Sax Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:55 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 03:34:37 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA01366; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:33:08 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:33:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199703051133.FAA01366@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5098 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:311f40d4cd9544110875df9fbfe680318c18e07d6463 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857561576.1357@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 11:32:56 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , gazissax@netcom.com (Lynn Diana Gazis) wrote: > > John Lowther (jlowther@acusd.edu) wrote: > > : Perhaps Bruce should hold up a sign -- "Hi. I'm biased." > > I hadn't any position, prior to all these threads, on the desirability of > an unmoderated talk.religion.bahai. But I'd have to say, when it comes > to posting private email, I'm biased as well. And see no reason to be > ashamed of that bias. Particularly when an apparently reasonable private > email with a politely made, explicit request not to post it is > deliberately posted accompanied by an odd screed about fascism. May I suggested you go back and read the "apparently reasonable" email. There's more involved in it than the request not to post. WHY would there be a request not to post? Ask yourself that question as you reread it. WHY would Mr. Reini want to hide, conceal, keep in the dark, out of public view, the suggestion that I'm attacking the Bahai institutions? How would that play to, apparently, his advantage in opposing talk.religion.bahai? You need to understand and know something about some people in the Bahai Faith in order to fully perceive what Mr. Reini is doing in that message. Face value, a polite request not to post, won't work.... I'd have to compare it to Hitler terrorizing the Jews by sending them private notes that intimate they're against the Aryan race to convey the real nature of Mr. Reini's "reasonable" little email.... The Jews understood what Hitler was doing.... And the possibility of egregious deeds to come.... He and others are annoyed because I refuse to go to the gas ovens in silence.... > > Lynn Gazis-Sax Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:24 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 03:34:37 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA01366; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:33:08 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:33:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199703051133.FAA01366@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5098 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:311f40d4cd9544110875df9fbfe680318c18e07d6463 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857561576.1357@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 11:32:56 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , gazissax@netcom.com (Lynn Diana Gazis) wrote: > > John Lowther (jlowther@acusd.edu) wrote: > > : Perhaps Bruce should hold up a sign -- "Hi. I'm biased." > > I hadn't any position, prior to all these threads, on the desirability of > an unmoderated talk.religion.bahai. But I'd have to say, when it comes > to posting private email, I'm biased as well. And see no reason to be > ashamed of that bias. Particularly when an apparently reasonable private > email with a politely made, explicit request not to post it is > deliberately posted accompanied by an odd screed about fascism. May I suggested you go back and read the "apparently reasonable" email. There's more involved in it than the request not to post. WHY would there be a request not to post? Ask yourself that question as you reread it. WHY would Mr. Reini want to hide, conceal, keep in the dark, out of public view, the suggestion that I'm attacking the Bahai institutions? How would that play to, apparently, his advantage in opposing talk.religion.bahai? You need to understand and know something about some people in the Bahai Faith in order to fully perceive what Mr. Reini is doing in that message. Face value, a polite request not to post, won't work.... I'd have to compare it to Hitler terrorizing the Jews by sending them private notes that intimate they're against the Aryan race to convey the real nature of Mr. Reini's "reasonable" little email.... The Jews understood what Hitler was doing.... And the possibility of egregious deeds to come.... He and others are annoyed because I refuse to go to the gas ovens in silence.... > > Lynn Gazis-Sax Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:55 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 03:34:37 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA01366; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:33:08 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:33:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199703051133.FAA01366@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5098 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:311f40d4cd9544110875df9fbfe680318c18e07d6463 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857561576.1357@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 11:32:56 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , gazissax@netcom.com (Lynn Diana Gazis) wrote: > > John Lowther (jlowther@acusd.edu) wrote: > > : Perhaps Bruce should hold up a sign -- "Hi. I'm biased." > > I hadn't any position, prior to all these threads, on the desirability of > an unmoderated talk.religion.bahai. But I'd have to say, when it comes > to posting private email, I'm biased as well. And see no reason to be > ashamed of that bias. Particularly when an apparently reasonable private > email with a politely made, explicit request not to post it is > deliberately posted accompanied by an odd screed about fascism. May I suggested you go back and read the "apparently reasonable" email. There's more involved in it than the request not to post. WHY would there be a request not to post? Ask yourself that question as you reread it. WHY would Mr. Reini want to hide, conceal, keep in the dark, out of public view, the suggestion that I'm attacking the Bahai institutions? How would that play to, apparently, his advantage in opposing talk.religion.bahai? You need to understand and know something about some people in the Bahai Faith in order to fully perceive what Mr. Reini is doing in that message. Face value, a polite request not to post, won't work.... I'd have to compare it to Hitler terrorizing the Jews by sending them private notes that intimate they're against the Aryan race to convey the real nature of Mr. Reini's "reasonable" little email.... The Jews understood what Hitler was doing.... And the possibility of egregious deeds to come.... He and others are annoyed because I refuse to go to the gas ovens in silence.... > > Lynn Gazis-Sax Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:27:55 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 03:34:37 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA01366; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:33:08 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:33:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199703051133.FAA01366@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5098 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:311f40d4cd9544110875df9fbfe680318c18e07d6463 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Betrayal of trust, was Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857561576.1357@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <33182ABD.3580@wwnet.com> <857393489.1747@dejanews.com> <5ff95m$ng_002@news.zippo.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 11:32:56 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , gazissax@netcom.com (Lynn Diana Gazis) wrote: > > John Lowther (jlowther@acusd.edu) wrote: > > : Perhaps Bruce should hold up a sign -- "Hi. I'm biased." > > I hadn't any position, prior to all these threads, on the desirability of > an unmoderated talk.religion.bahai. But I'd have to say, when it comes > to posting private email, I'm biased as well. And see no reason to be > ashamed of that bias. Particularly when an apparently reasonable private > email with a politely made, explicit request not to post it is > deliberately posted accompanied by an odd screed about fascism. May I suggested you go back and read the "apparently reasonable" email. There's more involved in it than the request not to post. WHY would there be a request not to post? Ask yourself that question as you reread it. WHY would Mr. Reini want to hide, conceal, keep in the dark, out of public view, the suggestion that I'm attacking the Bahai institutions? How would that play to, apparently, his advantage in opposing talk.religion.bahai? You need to understand and know something about some people in the Bahai Faith in order to fully perceive what Mr. Reini is doing in that message. Face value, a polite request not to post, won't work.... I'd have to compare it to Hitler terrorizing the Jews by sending them private notes that intimate they're against the Aryan race to convey the real nature of Mr. Reini's "reasonable" little email.... The Jews understood what Hitler was doing.... And the possibility of egregious deeds to come.... He and others are annoyed because I refuse to go to the gas ovens in silence.... > > Lynn Gazis-Sax Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:28 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 03:58:23 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA01825; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:57:08 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:57:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199703051157.FAA01825@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5461 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:e10f70d40dd5f42158e986db7e126ed0a100badccdf6 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857562725.1709@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <857394294.2022@dejanews.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 11:52:06 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , Graham Sorenson wrote: > > In article <857429398.25661@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher > writes > >> IMHO, the posts were rejected not so much on their content as on how > >> that content was expressed. The discussions on s.r.b are of high caliber > >> and can become vigorous. They are also free of personal attacks, > >> name-calling, etc. -- a refreshing island of calm in the storm-tossed > >> sea which is Usenet. IMHO, the rejected posts did not meet the standards > >> of the newsgroup because of their tone, not their content. > > > >False. The "moderators" suppressed content on the excuse of "tone." > >There over 20 censored messages posted to news.groups....not only > >several.... I would characterize soc.religion.bahai as an oppressive > >concentration camp of smug, self-righteous Jesuits or ayatollahs.... > > See! Exactly! Why Your posts were sent back to you on SRB You resort to > name calling. Accurate, in this regard. > > It is not False that your messages to srb were returned to you on srb > as being censored.. If they were to be censored then they would not have > been sent back with a request to change some of the inflamatory name > calling or other aspects of the "tone" of your messages... As the poet Yeats put it, "Who can tell the dancer from the dance?" The medium is the message, in a sense. To change the language changes the content, and that was and is my objection, at times.... We're going around in circles, though. We've been over this it seems countless times.... Anybody else notice that? Anybody else notice it's basically the same few individuals involved? Mr. Reini is entitled to sending clandestine messages attempting to terrorize me into remaining or retreating back into a ghetto of silence.... It's okay. We'll all ignore that reality, and harp on my lack of etiquette? The crude Jews didn't even know the customs of the Aryans.... They got what they deserved.... > > -- > Graham Sorenson > https://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:32 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 14:00:12 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id PAA26094; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 15:57:58 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 15:57:58 -0600 Message-Id: <199703052157.PAA26094@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5539 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:715f20d47d9574c1c1a1087381f6e268c3714d5ab74a ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857599064.26063@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <857394294.2022@dejanews.com> <331AF9CF.22BE@wwnet.com> <857429398.25661@dejanews.com> <5fi3rf$gh1@news.hartwick.edu> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 21:57:45 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.20 (ts_rh.metronet.lib.mi.us) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5fi3rf$gh1@news.hartwick.edu>, wisanr@hartwick.edu (Dick Wisan) wrote: > > In article <857429398.25661@dejanews.com>, FG@hotmail.com says... > > > >In article <331AF9CF.22BE@wwnet.com>, > > Roger Reini wrote: > [snip] > >> IMHO, the posts were rejected not so much on their content as on how > >> that content was expressed. The discussions on s.r.b are of high caliber > >> and can become vigorous. They are also free of personal attacks, > >> name-calling, etc. -- a refreshing island of calm in the storm-tossed > >> sea which is Usenet. IMHO, the rejected posts did not meet the standards > >> of the newsgroup because of their tone, not their content. > > > >False. The "moderators" suppressed content on the excuse of "tone." > >There over 20 censored messages posted to news.groups....not only > >several.... I would characterize soc.religion.bahai as an oppressive > >concentration camp of smug, self-righteous Jesuits or ayatollahs.... > > > >>Suitably rephrased, I would imagine that they would be allowed. > > > >To suite the taste of hitlerites, nannies, old biddies, and > >pollyannas.... > > Well, there it is. I know nothing of the previous postings in this > thread, but that certainly looks like you've proved his point. The issue of whether talk.religion.bahai should or should not exist is not over tone, though many have tried to make that the issue. It's over whether an moderated, censored newsgroup should have the alternative of an unmoderated, unmanipulated one.... It's not whether you like my "tone" or not, it's whether 100 people have enough interest in the valid issues that have been raised these past weeks and vote yes. Those who vote yes are not necessarily voting for ME.... I surely don't conceive of it that way, and many surely won't either.... This is all old ground. The CFV (Call For Votes) should be posted any day now. > > -- > R. N. (Dick) Wisan - Email: wisanr@norwich.net > - Snail: 37 Clinton Street, Oneonta NY 13820, U.S.A. > - Just your opinion, please, ma'am: No fax. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:36 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 5 14:13:07 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id QAA26798; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 16:11:41 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 16:11:41 -0600 Message-Id: <199703052211.QAA26798@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5294 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:01cfb0c43d9504213a712feb8f489bb59296e2fb823b ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: Response to a Fanatic Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857599881.26751@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <857214887.14063@dejanews.com> <857394294.2022@dejanews.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 05 22:11:21 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.20 (ts_rh.metronet.lib.mi.us) X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , Graham Sorenson wrote: > > In article <857429398.25661@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher > writes > >> IMHO, the posts were rejected not so much on their content as on how > >> that content was expressed. The discussions on s.r.b are of high caliber > >> and can become vigorous. They are also free of personal attacks, > >> name-calling, etc. -- a refreshing island of calm in the storm-tossed > >> sea which is Usenet. IMHO, the rejected posts did not meet the standards > >> of the newsgroup because of their tone, not their content. > > > >False. The "moderators" suppressed content on the excuse of "tone." > >There over 20 censored messages posted to news.groups....not only > >several.... I would characterize soc.religion.bahai as an oppressive > >concentration camp of smug, self-righteous Jesuits or ayatollahs.... > > See! Exactly! Why Your posts were sent back to you on SRB You resort to > name calling. > Sorenson writes: > It is not False that your messages to srb were returned to you on srb > as being censored.. If they were to be censored then they would not have > been sent back with a request to change some of the inflamatory name > calling or other aspects of the "tone" of your messages... Let's ignore Mr. Reini's coercive, threatening, clandestine email to me? He clearly puts himself on the saintly side.... His intimating I work for Satan is okay, standard Bahai practice....is it? If so, then I rest my case again for the need for an undistorted medium of communication to protect us all from the Mr. Reinis in the Bahai Faith and elsewhere.... > > -- > Graham Sorenson > https://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk The CFV (Call For Votes) should be out any time now. Remember, it's what Christopher Stone, the group-mentor, called on soc.religion.bahai an "interest poll," not an election.... Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:47 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 8 05:23:26 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id HAA09106; Sat, 8 Mar 1997 07:21:34 -0600 Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 07:21:34 -0600 Message-Id: <199703081321.HAA09106@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 7921 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f12f00d4cd3554117442bddc6f70d4e83908f176082b ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: CFV talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857826958.8775@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca,eugene@marsweb.com References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> <857733440.30016@dejanews.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 08 13:15:59 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.127 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <857733440.30016@dejanews.com>, eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > In article <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com>, > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers and > > sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. The only > > newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. This fact has > > been an impediment in my attempts to post to the newsgroup and only one > > post on "The finality of prophethood" that I sent to the newsgroup was > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another opportunity to > > reply with their outarageous interpretations of the Quran without me being > > able to continue the discussion. With the creation of talk.religion.bahai > > people and other brothers and sisters who are more knowledgable can post > > on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who have been misled on this > > very crucial issue.Thank you. I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. bahai, soc.culture.iranian, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com > > I have done some research on messages posted to srb and I have seen just > what you refer to being done to others. It looks like it will be an open > discussion but it isn't, it is used instead to get in the 'last word' so > to say. In most cases the origional poster is not allowed to reply after > they have their chance to. Not much of a discussion. Even one case is to > much. Thus censorship is taking place on srb. Thanks for having the courage to say so.... > > Thats enough to cause me to vote yes on trb. > > I will never support censorship. We here in America still do not fully > realize the full import of free speech and the right to pratice your > religion. You as a Muslum, evedently living in Canada enjoy the > opportunity to avail yourself to these rights. If I were a Baha'i in Iran > would I have the same opportunity? How many thousands of Bahai's have > been murdered in Iran? Yes, murdered. > > And by the same fact, how many Mulsims have been murdered by Christians > now? > > Murder of others because of diffrences in religious beliefs is evil. > > Free speech is the first thing all oppressors of other men seek to stop, > especialy where religions and governments are concerned. When censorship > does not work, murder is the next step. > > If members of srb want to disagree with the claims of censorship on srb > then I will post a few examples of the same that other posters to srb > have experienced to back your claim up even further. As I said before, > even one time is one time to much. I would greatly appreciate your posting examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai that you or anyone else has experienced too. The moderators clear tactic in dealing with my examples of censorship that I post on news.groups was to characterize them as rude, offensive, etc.... while ignoring the real content issues that were being suppressed by them. Others might find it helpful too now that the CFV has gone out to see something else censored. > > The claims of the Baha'i Faith will have to stand on its own out in the > open under a FULL and OPEN discussion, which in reallity do not take > placed on srb. Exactly what I've been trying to get people to realize all along! > > Now that I have the followers of Jesus, Muhammad, and Baha'u'llah all mad > at me(Which is what, about half of the planet or better now?), we might > as well have trb so they can 'discuss' the issue with me. > > I'm looking forward to participating on trb. So am I. We have to get 100 YES votes first! It's hard to call at the moment, given the techniques used by the "moderators" of character assassination and accussations of my being a covenant breaker.... (anyone who is not a mindless pawn is a covenant breaker apparently in their definition). I urge you to post some examples to help those who perhaps have not yet made up their minds.... Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:28:19 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 8 05:23:26 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id HAA09106; Sat, 8 Mar 1997 07:21:34 -0600 Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 07:21:34 -0600 Message-Id: <199703081321.HAA09106@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 7921 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f12f00d4cd3554117442bddc6f70d4e83908f176082b ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: CFV talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <857826958.8775@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca,eugene@marsweb.com References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> <857733440.30016@dejanews.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 08 13:15:59 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.127 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <857733440.30016@dejanews.com>, eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > In article <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com>, > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers and > > sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. The only > > newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. This fact has > > been an impediment in my attempts to post to the newsgroup and only one > > post on "The finality of prophethood" that I sent to the newsgroup was > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another opportunity to > > reply with their outarageous interpretations of the Quran without me being > > able to continue the discussion. With the creation of talk.religion.bahai > > people and other brothers and sisters who are more knowledgable can post > > on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who have been misled on this > > very crucial issue.Thank you. I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. bahai, soc.culture.iranian, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com > > I have done some research on messages posted to srb and I have seen just > what you refer to being done to others. It looks like it will be an open > discussion but it isn't, it is used instead to get in the 'last word' so > to say. In most cases the origional poster is not allowed to reply after > they have their chance to. Not much of a discussion. Even one case is to > much. Thus censorship is taking place on srb. Thanks for having the courage to say so.... > > Thats enough to cause me to vote yes on trb. > > I will never support censorship. We here in America still do not fully > realize the full import of free speech and the right to pratice your > religion. You as a Muslum, evedently living in Canada enjoy the > opportunity to avail yourself to these rights. If I were a Baha'i in Iran > would I have the same opportunity? How many thousands of Bahai's have > been murdered in Iran? Yes, murdered. > > And by the same fact, how many Mulsims have been murdered by Christians > now? > > Murder of others because of diffrences in religious beliefs is evil. > > Free speech is the first thing all oppressors of other men seek to stop, > especialy where religions and governments are concerned. When censorship > does not work, murder is the next step. > > If members of srb want to disagree with the claims of censorship on srb > then I will post a few examples of the same that other posters to srb > have experienced to back your claim up even further. As I said before, > even one time is one time to much. I would greatly appreciate your posting examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai that you or anyone else has experienced too. The moderators clear tactic in dealing with my examples of censorship that I post on news.groups was to characterize them as rude, offensive, etc.... while ignoring the real content issues that were being suppressed by them. Others might find it helpful too now that the CFV has gone out to see something else censored. > > The claims of the Baha'i Faith will have to stand on its own out in the > open under a FULL and OPEN discussion, which in reallity do not take > placed on srb. Exactly what I've been trying to get people to realize all along! > > Now that I have the followers of Jesus, Muhammad, and Baha'u'llah all mad > at me(Which is what, about half of the planet or better now?), we might > as well have trb so they can 'discuss' the issue with me. > > I'm looking forward to participating on trb. So am I. We have to get 100 YES votes first! It's hard to call at the moment, given the techniques used by the "moderators" of character assassination and accussations of my being a covenant breaker.... (anyone who is not a mindless pawn is a covenant breaker apparently in their definition). I urge you to post some examples to help those who perhaps have not yet made up their minds.... Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:53 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sun Mar 9 02:41:42 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA12055; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 04:40:31 -0600 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 04:40:31 -0600 Message-Id: <199703091040.EAA12055@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4664 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:31df70e46d9574d11edc6319358e8cdd55bcc884feec ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Bahai newsgroup vote YES Newsgroups: alt.religion.islam Message-Id: <857904019.12048@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Mar 09 10:40:19 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers and > > sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. The only > > newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. This fact has > > been an impediment in my attempts to post to the newsgroup and only one > > post on "The finality of prophethood" that I sent to the newsgroup was > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another opportunity to > > reply with their outarageous interpretations of the Quran without me being > > able to continue the discussion. With the creation of talk.religion.bahai > > people and other brothers and sisters who are more knowledgable can post > > on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who have been misled on this > > very crucial issue.Thank you. I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. bahai, soc.culture.iranian, soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com Frederick Glaysher -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:28:25 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sun Mar 9 02:41:42 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA12055; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 04:40:31 -0600 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 04:40:31 -0600 Message-Id: <199703091040.EAA12055@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4664 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:31df70e46d9574d11edc6319358e8cdd55bcc884feec ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Bahai newsgroup vote YES Newsgroups: alt.religion.islam Message-Id: <857904019.12048@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Mar 09 10:40:19 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers and > > sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. The only > > newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. This fact has > > been an impediment in my attempts to post to the newsgroup and only one > > post on "The finality of prophethood" that I sent to the newsgroup was > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another opportunity to > > reply with their outarageous interpretations of the Quran without me being > > able to continue the discussion. With the creation of talk.religion.bahai > > people and other brothers and sisters who are more knowledgable can post > > on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who have been misled on this > > very crucial issue.Thank you. I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. bahai, soc.culture.iranian, soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com Frederick Glaysher -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:28:29 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sun Mar 9 02:43:57 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA12091; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 04:43:00 -0600 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 04:43:00 -0600 Message-Id: <199703091043.EAA12091@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 7736 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:511f20040db504215ad9b2fd91ca5321e8cddbfeb71e ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Voting on talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: alt.religion.islam Message-Id: <857904166.12077@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Mar 09 10:42:48 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers and > > sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. The only > > newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. This fact has > > been an impediment in my attempts to post to the newsgroup and only one > > post on "The finality of prophethood" that I sent to the newsgroup was > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another opportunity to > > reply with their outarageous interpretations of the Quran without me being > > able to continue the discussion. With the creation of talk.religion.bahai > > people and other brothers and sisters who are more knowledgable can post > > on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who have been misled on this > > very crucial issue.Thank you. I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. bahai, soc.culture.iranian, soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com > > I have done some research on messages posted to srb and I have seen just > what you refer to being done to others. It looks like it will be an open > discussion but it isn't, it is used instead to get in the 'last word' so > to say. In most cases the origional poster is not allowed to reply after > they have their chance to. Not much of a discussion. Even one case is to > much. Thus censorship is taking place on srb. Thanks for having the courage to say so.... > > Thats enough to cause me to vote yes on trb. > > I will never support censorship. We here in America still do not fully > realize the full import of free speech and the right to pratice your > religion. You as a Muslum, evedently living in Canada enjoy the > opportunity to avail yourself to these rights. If I were a Baha'i in Iran > would I have the same opportunity? How many thousands of Bahai's have > been murdered in Iran? Yes, murdered. > > And by the same fact, how many Mulsims have been murdered by Christians > now? > > Murder of others because of diffrences in religious beliefs is evil. > > Free speech is the first thing all oppressors of other men seek to stop, > especialy where religions and governments are concerned. When censorship > does not work, murder is the next step. > > If members of srb want to disagree with the claims of censorship on srb > then I will post a few examples of the same that other posters to srb > have experienced to back your claim up even further. As I said before, > even one time is one time to much. I would greatly appreciate your posting examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai that you or anyone else has experienced too. The moderators clear tactic in dealing with my examples of censorship that I post on news.groups was to characterize them as rude, offensive, etc.... while ignoring the real content issues that were being suppressed by them. Others might find it helpful too now that the CFV has gone out to see something else censored. > > The claims of the Baha'i Faith will have to stand on its own out in the > open under a FULL and OPEN discussion, which in reallity do not take > placed on srb. Exactly what I've been trying to get people to realize all along! > > Now that I have the followers of Jesus, Muhammad, and Baha'u'llah all mad > at me(Which is what, about half of the planet or better now?), we might > as well have trb so they can 'discuss' the issue with me. > > I'm looking forward to participating on trb. So am I. We have to get 100 YES votes first! It's hard to call at the moment, given the techniques used by the "moderators" of character assassination and accussations of my being a covenant breaker.... (anyone who is not a mindless pawn is a covenant breaker apparently in their definition). I urge you to post some examples to help those who perhaps have not yet made up their minds.... Frederick Glaysher -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:57 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sun Mar 9 02:43:57 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA12091; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 04:43:00 -0600 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 04:43:00 -0600 Message-Id: <199703091043.EAA12091@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 7736 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:511f20040db504215ad9b2fd91ca5321e8cddbfeb71e ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Voting on talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: alt.religion.islam Message-Id: <857904166.12077@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Mar 09 10:42:48 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers and > > sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. The only > > newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. This fact has > > been an impediment in my attempts to post to the newsgroup and only one > > post on "The finality of prophethood" that I sent to the newsgroup was > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another opportunity to > > reply with their outarageous interpretations of the Quran without me being > > able to continue the discussion. With the creation of talk.religion.bahai > > people and other brothers and sisters who are more knowledgable can post > > on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who have been misled on this > > very crucial issue.Thank you. I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. bahai, soc.culture.iranian, soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com > > I have done some research on messages posted to srb and I have seen just > what you refer to being done to others. It looks like it will be an open > discussion but it isn't, it is used instead to get in the 'last word' so > to say. In most cases the origional poster is not allowed to reply after > they have their chance to. Not much of a discussion. Even one case is to > much. Thus censorship is taking place on srb. Thanks for having the courage to say so.... > > Thats enough to cause me to vote yes on trb. > > I will never support censorship. We here in America still do not fully > realize the full import of free speech and the right to pratice your > religion. You as a Muslum, evedently living in Canada enjoy the > opportunity to avail yourself to these rights. If I were a Baha'i in Iran > would I have the same opportunity? How many thousands of Bahai's have > been murdered in Iran? Yes, murdered. > > And by the same fact, how many Mulsims have been murdered by Christians > now? > > Murder of others because of diffrences in religious beliefs is evil. > > Free speech is the first thing all oppressors of other men seek to stop, > especialy where religions and governments are concerned. When censorship > does not work, murder is the next step. > > If members of srb want to disagree with the claims of censorship on srb > then I will post a few examples of the same that other posters to srb > have experienced to back your claim up even further. As I said before, > even one time is one time to much. I would greatly appreciate your posting examples of censorship on soc.religion.bahai that you or anyone else has experienced too. The moderators clear tactic in dealing with my examples of censorship that I post on news.groups was to characterize them as rude, offensive, etc.... while ignoring the real content issues that were being suppressed by them. Others might find it helpful too now that the CFV has gone out to see something else censored. > > The claims of the Baha'i Faith will have to stand on its own out in the > open under a FULL and OPEN discussion, which in reallity do not take > placed on srb. Exactly what I've been trying to get people to realize all along! > > Now that I have the followers of Jesus, Muhammad, and Baha'u'llah all mad > at me(Which is what, about half of the planet or better now?), we might > as well have trb so they can 'discuss' the issue with me. > > I'm looking forward to participating on trb. So am I. We have to get 100 YES votes first! It's hard to call at the moment, given the techniques used by the "moderators" of character assassination and accussations of my being a covenant breaker.... (anyone who is not a mindless pawn is a covenant breaker apparently in their definition). I urge you to post some examples to help those who perhaps have not yet made up their minds.... Frederick Glaysher -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:28:35 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sun Mar 9 03:07:21 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA12381; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:06:52 -0600 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:06:52 -0600 Message-Id: <199703091106.FAA12381@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 5713 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:517f60943de5645110d38690b155a5ea7b706a893fd8 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Bahai newsgroup Newsgroups: alt.religion.islam.shia Message-Id: <857905597.12373@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News USENET Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Mar 09 11:06:37 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers and > > sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. The only > > newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. This fact has > > been an impediment in my attempts to post to the newsgroup and only one > > post on "The finality of prophethood" that I sent to the newsgroup was > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another opportunity to > > reply with their outarageous interpretations of the Quran without me being > > able to continue the discussion. With the creation of talk.religion.bahai > > people and other brothers and sisters who are more knowledgable can post > > on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who have been misled on this > > very crucial issue.Thank you. I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. bahai, soc.culture.iranian, soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com > > I have done some research on messages posted to srb and I have seen just > what you refer to being done to others. It looks like it will be an open > discussion but it isn't, it is used instead to get in the 'last word' so > to say. In most cases the origional poster is not allowed to reply after > they have their chance to. Not much of a discussion. Even one case is to > much. Thus censorship is taking place on srb. Thanks for having the courage to say so.... > > Thats enough to cause me to vote yes on trb. > clip,clip > > I'm looking forward to participating on trb. So am I. We have to get 100 YES votes first! It's hard to call at the moment, given the techniques used by the "moderators" of character assassination and accussations of my being a covenant breaker.... (anyone who is not a mindless pawn is a covenant breaker apparently in their definition). I urge you to post some examples to help those who perhaps have not yet made up their minds.... Frederick Glaysher -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:20:03 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sun Mar 9 03:07:21 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA12381; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:06:52 -0600 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:06:52 -0600 Message-Id: <199703091106.FAA12381@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5713 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:517f60943de5645110d38690b155a5ea7b706a893fd8 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Bahai newsgroup Newsgroups: alt.religion.islam.shia Message-Id: <857905597.12373@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News USENET Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Mar 09 11:06:37 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers and > > sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. The only > > newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. This fact has > > been an impediment in my attempts to post to the newsgroup and only one > > post on "The finality of prophethood" that I sent to the newsgroup was > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another opportunity to > > reply with their outarageous interpretations of the Quran without me being > > able to continue the discussion. With the creation of talk.religion.bahai > > people and other brothers and sisters who are more knowledgable can post > > on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who have been misled on this > > very crucial issue.Thank you. I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. bahai, soc.culture.iranian, soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com > > I have done some research on messages posted to srb and I have seen just > what you refer to being done to others. It looks like it will be an open > discussion but it isn't, it is used instead to get in the 'last word' so > to say. In most cases the origional poster is not allowed to reply after > they have their chance to. Not much of a discussion. Even one case is to > much. Thus censorship is taking place on srb. Thanks for having the courage to say so.... > > Thats enough to cause me to vote yes on trb. > clip,clip > > I'm looking forward to participating on trb. So am I. We have to get 100 YES votes first! It's hard to call at the moment, given the techniques used by the "moderators" of character assassination and accussations of my being a covenant breaker.... (anyone who is not a mindless pawn is a covenant breaker apparently in their definition). I urge you to post some examples to help those who perhaps have not yet made up their minds.... Frederick Glaysher -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:20:07 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sun Mar 9 03:14:48 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA12476; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:14:17 -0600 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:14:17 -0600 Message-Id: <199703091114.FAA12476@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5228 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:313f40141df53471ca725bba9e44306d99bce3a0b401 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: new Bahai newsgroup Newsgroups: alt.islam.sufism Message-Id: <857906040.12460@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News USENET Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Mar 09 11:14:01 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers > > and sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. The only > > newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. This fact has > > been an impediment in my attempts to post to the newsgroup and only > > one post on "The finality of prophethood" that I sent to the newsgroup was > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another > > opportunity to reply with their outarageous interpretations of the Quran > > > > without me being able to continue the discussion. With the creation of > > talk.religion.bahai people and other brothers and sisters who are more > > > > > knowledgable can post on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who have > > > been misled on this very crucial issue.Thank you. I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. bahai, soc.culture.iranian, soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com > > I have done some research on messages posted to srb and I have seen just > what you refer to being done to others. It looks like it will be an open > discussion but it isn't, it is used instead to get in the 'last word' so > to say. In most cases the origional poster is not allowed to reply after > they have their chance to. Not much of a discussion. Even one case is to > much. Thus censorship is taking place on srb. Thanks for having the courage to say so.... > > Thats enough to cause me to vote yes on trb. > [clip,clip] Frederick Glaysher -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:28:39 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sun Mar 9 03:14:48 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA12476; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:14:17 -0600 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:14:17 -0600 Message-Id: <199703091114.FAA12476@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5228 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:313f40141df53471ca725bba9e44306d99bce3a0b401 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: new Bahai newsgroup Newsgroups: alt.islam.sufism Message-Id: <857906040.12460@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News USENET Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Mar 09 11:14:01 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers > > and sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. The only > > newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. This fact has > > been an impediment in my attempts to post to the newsgroup and only > > one post on "The finality of prophethood" that I sent to the newsgroup was > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another > > opportunity to reply with their outarageous interpretations of the Quran > > > > without me being able to continue the discussion. With the creation of > > talk.religion.bahai people and other brothers and sisters who are more > > > > > knowledgable can post on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who have > > > been misled on this very crucial issue.Thank you. I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. bahai, soc.culture.iranian, soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com > > I have done some research on messages posted to srb and I have seen just > what you refer to being done to others. It looks like it will be an open > discussion but it isn't, it is used instead to get in the 'last word' so > to say. In most cases the origional poster is not allowed to reply after > they have their chance to. Not much of a discussion. Even one case is to > much. Thus censorship is taking place on srb. Thanks for having the courage to say so.... > > Thats enough to cause me to vote yes on trb. > [clip,clip] Frederick Glaysher -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:20:11 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sun Mar 9 03:30:49 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA12601; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:29:16 -0600 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:29:16 -0600 Message-Id: <199703091129.FAA12601@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5336 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:51cf4014cdd51431ae0f1dd7ca738d33380730013881 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: YES on CFV: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: uk.religion.islam Message-Id: <857906945.12583@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News USENET Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Mar 09 11:29:05 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers > > and sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. > > The only newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. > > This fact has been an impediment in my attempts to post to the > > newsgroup and only one post on "The finality of prophethood" that I > > sent to the newsgroup was > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another > > opportunity to reply with their outarageous interpretations of the > > Quran without me being able to continue the discussion. With the > > creation of talk.religion.bahai people and other brothers and > > sisters who are more > > knowledgable can post on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who > > have been misled on this very crucial issue.Thank you. I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. bahai, soc.culture.iranian, soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com > > I have done some research on messages posted to srb and I have seen just > what you refer to being done to others. It looks like it will be an open > discussion but it isn't, it is used instead to get in the 'last word' so > to say. In most cases the origional poster is not allowed to reply after > they have their chance to. Not much of a discussion. Even one case is to > much. Thus censorship is taking place on srb. Thanks for having the courage to say so.... > > Thats enough to cause me to vote yes on trb. > [clip,clip] Frederick Glaysher -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:28:43 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sun Mar 9 03:30:49 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA12601; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:29:16 -0600 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:29:16 -0600 Message-Id: <199703091129.FAA12601@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5336 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:51cf4014cdd51431ae0f1dd7ca738d33380730013881 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: YES on CFV: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: uk.religion.islam Message-Id: <857906945.12583@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News USENET Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Mar 09 11:29:05 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) eugene@marsweb.com wrote: > > afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers > > and sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. > > The only newsgroup today on the bahais is a moderated newsgroup. > > This fact has been an impediment in my attempts to post to the > > newsgroup and only one post on "The finality of prophethood" that I > > sent to the newsgroup was > > posted. That was only because the moderators wanted another > > opportunity to reply with their outarageous interpretations of the > > Quran without me being able to continue the discussion. With the > > creation of talk.religion.bahai people and other brothers and > > sisters who are more > > knowledgable can post on the bahai faith to enlighten the bahais who > > have been misled on this very crucial issue.Thank you. I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so rightly point out. Please post this reply and urge others to vote before March 26th when the voting period ends. The Call For Votes and instructions on how to vote are posted on news.groups, soc.religion. bahai, soc.culture.iranian, soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc, and elsewhere, or can be obtained by emailing the impartial vote taker: jjd@primenet.com > > I have done some research on messages posted to srb and I have seen just > what you refer to being done to others. It looks like it will be an open > discussion but it isn't, it is used instead to get in the 'last word' so > to say. In most cases the origional poster is not allowed to reply after > they have their chance to. Not much of a discussion. Even one case is to > much. Thus censorship is taking place on srb. Thanks for having the courage to say so.... > > Thats enough to cause me to vote yes on trb. > [clip,clip] Frederick Glaysher -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:28:47 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sun Mar 9 03:54:32 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA12754; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:53:48 -0600 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:53:48 -0600 Message-Id: <199703091153.FAA12754@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5366 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f13fa0c47dc53471212e36070e8bbbb6372e4fa7baae ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Why CFV talk.religion.bahai was not posted to Islamic newsgroups Newsgroups: alt.religion.islam Message-Id: <857908398.12738@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Mar 09 11:53:18 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com>, afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers and > sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. [clip] > To vote "Yes", send an email message to jjd@primenet.com and say ONLY > the following in the message " I vote YES on talk.religion.bahai ". It > is very important to follow the instructions carefully since it is an > automated process. If you do not get a confirmation in three days then > read the CFV at news.announce.newsgroups. I find it very interesting that > they chose to distribute the CFV to many religious newsgroups except the > ones having anything to do with Islam...what are they afraid of? If you > know of any other newsgroups on Islam please spread the word..also any > mailing lists. I tried to post the RFD (Request For Discussion) to soc.religion.islam in late January but the moderators there would not allow me to do so. Sorry. I didn't know of the existence of alt.religion.islam and the other Islamic newsgroups until just today. Thanks for helping to make me aware of them. I'd appreciate your reposting this message or whatever about talk.religion.bahai for others to read and consider voting on. There has been extensive discussion about talk.religion. bahai on news.groups and soc.religion.bahai (the latter until recently when the "moderators" there banned all further discussion about it). I'm truly sorry Muslims got left out of the discussion period. I did try to include all of you but apparently took NO for an answer too easily. At least there's time to join in the vote (and perhaps save it since many totalitarian Bahais are against it). Catch up on the discussion if you'd like under news.groups Also, the Call For Votes is available under news.announce.newgroups and news.groups USEnet guidelines frown on it being redistributed, especially with any changes so that people can get the full picture. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:20:15 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sun Mar 9 03:54:32 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA12754; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:53:48 -0600 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 05:53:48 -0600 Message-Id: <199703091153.FAA12754@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5366 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f13fa0c47dc53471212e36070e8bbbb6372e4fa7baae ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Why CFV talk.religion.bahai was not posted to Islamic newsgroups Newsgroups: alt.religion.islam Message-Id: <857908398.12738@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Mar 09 11:53:18 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com>, afshin.afrashteh@utoronto.ca wrote: > > Salaam alaikum brothers and sisters, > > I have posted this CFV because I am appealing to my muslim brothers and > sisters to vote "YES" to the creation of talk.religion.bahai. [clip] > To vote "Yes", send an email message to jjd@primenet.com and say ONLY > the following in the message " I vote YES on talk.religion.bahai ". It > is very important to follow the instructions carefully since it is an > automated process. If you do not get a confirmation in three days then > read the CFV at news.announce.newsgroups. I find it very interesting that > they chose to distribute the CFV to many religious newsgroups except the > ones having anything to do with Islam...what are they afraid of? If you > know of any other newsgroups on Islam please spread the word..also any > mailing lists. I tried to post the RFD (Request For Discussion) to soc.religion.islam in late January but the moderators there would not allow me to do so. Sorry. I didn't know of the existence of alt.religion.islam and the other Islamic newsgroups until just today. Thanks for helping to make me aware of them. I'd appreciate your reposting this message or whatever about talk.religion.bahai for others to read and consider voting on. There has been extensive discussion about talk.religion. bahai on news.groups and soc.religion.bahai (the latter until recently when the "moderators" there banned all further discussion about it). I'm truly sorry Muslims got left out of the discussion period. I did try to include all of you but apparently took NO for an answer too easily. At least there's time to join in the vote (and perhaps save it since many totalitarian Bahais are against it). Catch up on the discussion if you'd like under news.groups Also, the Call For Votes is available under news.announce.newgroups and news.groups USEnet guidelines frown on it being redistributed, especially with any changes so that people can get the full picture. Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Tue Apr 08 07:20:36 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 12 04:49:50 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA17395; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 06:49:30 -0600 Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 06:49:30 -0600 Message-Id: <199703121249.GAA17395@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 8687 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:317fb0e47d9544217ed6a22db2a1dca17b557faf09c7 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: CFV talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <858170943.17383@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> <857733440.30016@dejanews.com> <857826958.8775@dejanews.com> <5g4fo6$gj9$1@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 12 12:49:05 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.122 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5g4fo6$gj9$1@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz>, math5ijf@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Isaac Freeman) wrote: > > In article <857826958.8775@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher writes: > > I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can > > take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference > > of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so > > rightly point out. > > Even if everything you say about the moderators were accurate, they would hardly > be "fanatics". Claims like that make sensible discussion very difficult. Would > you be able to react calmly and reasonably if someone called you a fanatic? There are obviously fanatics in the Bahai Faith, as in all religions. As a Bahai for twenty years, I challenge anyone in the Bahai Faith to honestly claim otherwise.... > > > > If members of srb want to disagree with the claims of censorship on srb > > > then I will post a few examples of the same that other posters to srb > > > have experienced to back your claim up even further. As I said before, > > > even one time is one time to much. > > > > I would greatly appreciate your posting examples of censorship on > > soc.religion.bahai that you or anyone else has experienced too. > > I would also like to see any examples that can be provided, as thus far Mr > Glaysher's examples have not convinced me. I am trying to keep an open mind, > and would be prepared to change my vote to a yes (before anyone draws any > implications from that, I have registered an abstention) if I see anything > that looks like censorship to me. > > > So am I. We have to get 100 YES votes first! It's hard to call > > at the moment, given the techniques used by the "moderators" of > > character assassination and accusations of my being a covenant > > breaker.... > > I beg your pardon? I've yet to see any sign of interference in discussions > by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai. They've actually gone out of their > way to publicise the vote, and given advice on how to vote that seemed > rigorously impartial. > I've also seen no sign of anybody being called a covenant breaker. Such a > claim would be laughable, in any case. Go back to the message I reposted by Dr. Steve Burgess in South Africa on news.groups.... He clearly intimates there that I'm a covenant breaker. The "moderators" permitted his posting.... Also, see my response to the even clearer, actually, outright accusation by Mr. Reini on news.groups too. Who appointed them to make such judgments? > > > (anyone who is not a mindless pawn is a covenant breaker > > apparently in their definition). > > The term "covenant breaker" has a clear and accepted definition: it is someone > who repeatedly and deliberately claims that the line of Guardianship (a position > of spiritual leadership, which is to be chosen by appointment of the previous > Guardian) is different from that which is stated in the Guardian's writings. > In the present day there is no Guardian, as Shoghi Effendi left no known > instructions as to who his successor should be. Under these circumstances, a > covenant breaker would be a person who claimed that Shoghi Effendi did appoint a > successor, without any documentary evidence. > That's what the term means. Nothing I've seen that Mr Glaysher has written gives > the slightest evidence that he might be a covenant breaker. To the best of my > knowledge he has never disputed the successorship of Shoghi Effendi. > That's why I say that such a claim would be laughable - Mr Glaysher has never > given anyone the slightest cause to believe such a thing. > > To reiterate the point, the only involvement I've seen by the moderators in > this discussion has been to correct factual errors and to provide information > on how to go about voting. I've seen no character assassination by the > moderators, and no claims of covenant breaking by anyone at all. It is, of > course, conceivable that I missed those particular posts, or that they haven't > reached my site yet. See the back files on news.groups.... Search under Burgess and Reini. > > I have criticised some of Mr Glaysher's claims, and asked a few questions to > help myself and others determine which way to vote. I give you my word of > honour that I've had no secret contact with the moderators, and that I know of > no campaign to discredit Mr Glaysher, or encourage people to vote no. The evidence of a NO! vote campaign has just been posted to news.groups and elsewhere, including soc.religion.bahai, though they'll surely suppress it, using their monopoly to their advantage yet again.... Mark Towfiq posted a message to the woman's discussion listserv instructing people on how to vote NO! If you're sincere, sir, you should follow through and read it.... His fanaticism there is quite clear, I think.... > > > I urge you to post some examples > > to help those who perhaps have not yet made up their minds.... > > Also to help those who have made up their minds. The rules given in the CFV > allow for people to change their minds. > > Isaac Freeman Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:29:09 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Wed Mar 12 04:49:50 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id GAA17395; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 06:49:30 -0600 Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 06:49:30 -0600 Message-Id: <199703121249.GAA17395@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 8687 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:317fb0e47d9544217ed6a22db2a1dca17b557faf09c7 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: CFV talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <858170943.17383@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <5fnmfr$3lq@shell3.ba.best.com> <857733440.30016@dejanews.com> <857826958.8775@dejanews.com> <5g4fo6$gj9$1@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz> X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 12 12:49:05 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.122 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5g4fo6$gj9$1@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz>, math5ijf@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Isaac Freeman) wrote: > > In article <857826958.8775@dejanews.com>, Frederick Glaysher writes: > > I'd welcome your YES votes so that true interreligious discussion can > > take place between Muslims and Bahais and others without the interference > > of fanatics in the Bahai Faith manipulating the discussion as you so > > rightly point out. > > Even if everything you say about the moderators were accurate, they would hardly > be "fanatics". Claims like that make sensible discussion very difficult. Would > you be able to react calmly and reasonably if someone called you a fanatic? There are obviously fanatics in the Bahai Faith, as in all religions. As a Bahai for twenty years, I challenge anyone in the Bahai Faith to honestly claim otherwise.... > > > > If members of srb want to disagree with the claims of censorship on srb > > > then I will post a few examples of the same that other posters to srb > > > have experienced to back your claim up even further. As I said before, > > > even one time is one time to much. > > > > I would greatly appreciate your posting examples of censorship on > > soc.religion.bahai that you or anyone else has experienced too. > > I would also like to see any examples that can be provided, as thus far Mr > Glaysher's examples have not convinced me. I am trying to keep an open mind, > and would be prepared to change my vote to a yes (before anyone draws any > implications from that, I have registered an abstention) if I see anything > that looks like censorship to me. > > > So am I. We have to get 100 YES votes first! It's hard to call > > at the moment, given the techniques used by the "moderators" of > > character assassination and accusations of my being a covenant > > breaker.... > > I beg your pardon? I've yet to see any sign of interference in discussions > by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai. They've actually gone out of their > way to publicise the vote, and given advice on how to vote that seemed > rigorously impartial. > I've also seen no sign of anybody being called a covenant breaker. Such a > claim would be laughable, in any case. Go back to the message I reposted by Dr. Steve Burgess in South Africa on news.groups.... He clearly intimates there that I'm a covenant breaker. The "moderators" permitted his posting.... Also, see my response to the even clearer, actually, outright accusation by Mr. Reini on news.groups too. Who appointed them to make such judgments? > > > (anyone who is not a mindless pawn is a covenant breaker > > apparently in their definition). > > The term "covenant breaker" has a clear and accepted definition: it is someone > who repeatedly and deliberately claims that the line of Guardianship (a position > of spiritual leadership, which is to be chosen by appointment of the previous > Guardian) is different from that which is stated in the Guardian's writings. > In the present day there is no Guardian, as Shoghi Effendi left no known > instructions as to who his successor should be. Under these circumstances, a > covenant breaker would be a person who claimed that Shoghi Effendi did appoint a > successor, without any documentary evidence. > That's what the term means. Nothing I've seen that Mr Glaysher has written gives > the slightest evidence that he might be a covenant breaker. To the best of my > knowledge he has never disputed the successorship of Shoghi Effendi. > That's why I say that such a claim would be laughable - Mr Glaysher has never > given anyone the slightest cause to believe such a thing. > > To reiterate the point, the only involvement I've seen by the moderators in > this discussion has been to correct factual errors and to provide information > on how to go about voting. I've seen no character assassination by the > moderators, and no claims of covenant breaking by anyone at all. It is, of > course, conceivable that I missed those particular posts, or that they haven't > reached my site yet. See the back files on news.groups.... Search under Burgess and Reini. > > I have criticised some of Mr Glaysher's claims, and asked a few questions to > help myself and others determine which way to vote. I give you my word of > honour that I've had no secret contact with the moderators, and that I know of > no campaign to discredit Mr Glaysher, or encourage people to vote no. The evidence of a NO! vote campaign has just been posted to news.groups and elsewhere, including soc.religion.bahai, though they'll surely suppress it, using their monopoly to their advantage yet again.... Mark Towfiq posted a message to the woman's discussion listserv instructing people on how to vote NO! If you're sincere, sir, you should follow through and read it.... His fanaticism there is quite clear, I think.... > > > I urge you to post some examples > > to help those who perhaps have not yet made up their minds.... > > Also to help those who have made up their minds. The rules given in the CFV > allow for people to change their minds. > > Isaac Freeman Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Wed Apr 09 08:20:15 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Tue Mar 18 03:58:12 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA32209; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 05:58:00 -0600 Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 05:58:00 -0600 Message-Id: <199703181158.FAA32209@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6687 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:210f40a40dc56451abc8848f20d57b1f1f19188084b9 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: No Comment: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage Message-Id: <858686266.32195@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News USENET Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Mar 18 11:57:47 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) I LEAVE IT TO YOU TO DECIDE THE MOVTIVES OF MR. REINI. PLEASE SEE RESPONSE TO A FANATIC ON NEWS.GROUPS FOR BACKGROUND. POSTED UPON APPARENT REQUEST: Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 14:24:29 -0500 From: Roger Reini To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Respect for the Institutions Once again, I'm replying privately because I think it's most appropriate. I would prefer that you not post this on Usenet, though I have a feeling you will. If you do repost it, you do so without my permission. It's not that I would be embarrassed by it; it's that I think what I have to say is best said privately. In regards to article <5gj9vj%249b3%241@bilbo.reference.com> which you also cc'd Joseph Emmanuel, you made this statement in response to Emmanuel's comments: >Many people have now stated this openly, while others have >emailed me in fear, apparently, of some sort of retaliation, >real or imagined, on the part of the moderators of >soc.religion.bahai, or perhaps someone in the Bahai >administration.... IMHO, I believe that this statement is disrespectful to the Institutions and the Administrative Order. To speculate about a serious matter like this (questioning the motives of the Institutions or of the individuals serving on them) without strong proof is counterproductive and tends to promote disunity and strife. When we became Baha'is, we promised that we would obey the laws that Baha'u'llah set forth. That includes accepting and obeying the Institutions which He established. We believers are counseled by Baha'u'llah, 'Abdu'l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice to love our Institutions and to obey them, for they are assured of divine guidance. If we distrust our Institutions, if we regard them with suspicion, or if we continually look for ulterior motives behind their actions, we make it harder to spread the word about Baha'u'llah. We undermine the effectiveness of the Institutions. We disrupt the unity of the Cause. We delay the Most Great Peace. We prove ourselves as unworthy of being followers of Baha'u'llah. The Cause of God will triumph regardless of our behavior. If we act in concord with His teachings, it will triumph much sooner than if we don't. If you sincerely believe that your statement is not disrepectful to the Institutions, I would like to know why. Perhaps I am reading more into it than I should. If I am, I'm sure you will put my mind at ease. Now, more than ever, we need to demonstrate steadfastness in His path, to remain firm in the Covenant. As you surely know, it is only by our remaining firm in the Covenant that the Cause can spread. Did you by any chance see the postings in soc.religion.bahai of the message from the Universal House of Justice on Individual Rights and Freedoms? If not, I urge you to read them. They are very relevant to the discussions taking place on s.r.b and other newsgroups, including news.groups. Please don't take these comments personally. I don't hold a grudge against you; I bear you no ill will. I am not accusing you of anything. And I am certainly NOT accusing you of being a Covenant breaker. I didn't before, and I'm not doing it now. My only concern is the Cause of God. I have already cast my vote in the t.r.b matter (FYI, I voted ABSTAIN). By the way, happy Naw-Ruz! FREDERICK GLAYSHER ROCHESTER HILLS, MICHIGAN USA Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Thu Apr 10 08:14:59 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Tue Mar 18 03:58:12 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA32209; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 05:58:00 -0600 Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 05:58:00 -0600 Message-Id: <199703181158.FAA32209@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6687 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:210f40a40dc56451abc8848f20d57b1f1f19188084b9 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: No Comment: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage Message-Id: <858686266.32195@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News USENET Posting Service X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Mar 18 11:57:47 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.117 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) I LEAVE IT TO YOU TO DECIDE THE MOVTIVES OF MR. REINI. PLEASE SEE RESPONSE TO A FANATIC ON NEWS.GROUPS FOR BACKGROUND. POSTED UPON APPARENT REQUEST: Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 14:24:29 -0500 From: Roger Reini To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Respect for the Institutions Once again, I'm replying privately because I think it's most appropriate. I would prefer that you not post this on Usenet, though I have a feeling you will. If you do repost it, you do so without my permission. It's not that I would be embarrassed by it; it's that I think what I have to say is best said privately. In regards to article <5gj9vj%249b3%241@bilbo.reference.com> which you also cc'd Joseph Emmanuel, you made this statement in response to Emmanuel's comments: >Many people have now stated this openly, while others have >emailed me in fear, apparently, of some sort of retaliation, >real or imagined, on the part of the moderators of >soc.religion.bahai, or perhaps someone in the Bahai >administration.... IMHO, I believe that this statement is disrespectful to the Institutions and the Administrative Order. To speculate about a serious matter like this (questioning the motives of the Institutions or of the individuals serving on them) without strong proof is counterproductive and tends to promote disunity and strife. When we became Baha'is, we promised that we would obey the laws that Baha'u'llah set forth. That includes accepting and obeying the Institutions which He established. We believers are counseled by Baha'u'llah, 'Abdu'l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice to love our Institutions and to obey them, for they are assured of divine guidance. If we distrust our Institutions, if we regard them with suspicion, or if we continually look for ulterior motives behind their actions, we make it harder to spread the word about Baha'u'llah. We undermine the effectiveness of the Institutions. We disrupt the unity of the Cause. We delay the Most Great Peace. We prove ourselves as unworthy of being followers of Baha'u'llah. The Cause of God will triumph regardless of our behavior. If we act in concord with His teachings, it will triumph much sooner than if we don't. If you sincerely believe that your statement is not disrepectful to the Institutions, I would like to know why. Perhaps I am reading more into it than I should. If I am, I'm sure you will put my mind at ease. Now, more than ever, we need to demonstrate steadfastness in His path, to remain firm in the Covenant. As you surely know, it is only by our remaining firm in the Covenant that the Cause can spread. Did you by any chance see the postings in soc.religion.bahai of the message from the Universal House of Justice on Individual Rights and Freedoms? If not, I urge you to read them. They are very relevant to the discussions taking place on s.r.b and other newsgroups, including news.groups. Please don't take these comments personally. I don't hold a grudge against you; I bear you no ill will. I am not accusing you of anything. And I am certainly NOT accusing you of being a Covenant breaker. I didn't before, and I'm not doing it now. My only concern is the Cause of God. I have already cast my vote in the t.r.b matter (FYI, I voted ABSTAIN). By the way, happy Naw-Ruz! FREDERICK GLAYSHER ROCHESTER HILLS, MICHIGAN USA Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Thu Apr 10 08:18:08 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 22 05:10:31 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id HAA01700; Sat, 22 Mar 1997 07:07:57 -0600 Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 07:07:57 -0600 Message-Id: <199703221307.HAA01700@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4620 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:414f00d4dd251461143322850d3844f8ab21c1afe193 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: NO! vote campaign: talk.religion.bahai continues? Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.religion.quaker Message-Id: <859036035.1683@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: guymacon@deltanet.com References: <5gcovi$5bv$1@bilbo.reference.com> <19970318024700.VAA23860@ladder01.news.aol.com> <5glv9s$191$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5gnl92$lko$2@news06.deltanet.com> <5gtslj$hki$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5gvig1$9k0$2@news05.deltanet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 22 13:07:20 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.122 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5gvig1$9k0$2@news05.deltanet.com>, guymacon@deltanet.com (Guy Macon) wrote: > > It *isn't* fair. Why should your side be allowed to gather > support all over the net while the other side plays by the rules > and tries to get votes in news.groups and the bahai newsgroups? > Do you consider that to be just? Actually, the other side has not played by the rules either. Mr. Towfiq's NO vote campaign (see numerous postings on news.groups) took place on at least three lists. Again, though, I felt there are people from other religions, including the Quakers, who have become Bahais, left the Bahai Faith, for whatever reasons, and so on, who would understand the importance of an unmoderated, uncensored and unmanipulated newsgroup: talk.religion.bahai That's all. I'm truly sorry it offends you so, and I apologize for the disruption of the peace of your cyberspace. I shan't post to the Quakers' newsgroup again, after this apology.... > > Or are you really *against* talk.religion.bahai, and are breaking > the rules to get the vote to be "no"? As the proponent, I'm definitely not against talk.religion.bahai Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Wed Apr 09 08:20:39 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Sat Mar 22 05:10:31 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id HAA01700; Sat, 22 Mar 1997 07:07:57 -0600 Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 07:07:57 -0600 Message-Id: <199703221307.HAA01700@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4620 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:414f00d4dd251461143322850d3844f8ab21c1afe193 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: NO! vote campaign: talk.religion.bahai continues? Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.religion.quaker Message-Id: <859036035.1683@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: guymacon@deltanet.com References: <5gcovi$5bv$1@bilbo.reference.com> <19970318024700.VAA23860@ladder01.news.aol.com> <5glv9s$191$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5gnl92$lko$2@news06.deltanet.com> <5gtslj$hki$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5gvig1$9k0$2@news05.deltanet.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Mar 22 13:07:20 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.122 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5gvig1$9k0$2@news05.deltanet.com>, guymacon@deltanet.com (Guy Macon) wrote: > > It *isn't* fair. Why should your side be allowed to gather > support all over the net while the other side plays by the rules > and tries to get votes in news.groups and the bahai newsgroups? > Do you consider that to be just? Actually, the other side has not played by the rules either. Mr. Towfiq's NO vote campaign (see numerous postings on news.groups) took place on at least three lists. Again, though, I felt there are people from other religions, including the Quakers, who have become Bahais, left the Bahai Faith, for whatever reasons, and so on, who would understand the importance of an unmoderated, uncensored and unmanipulated newsgroup: talk.religion.bahai That's all. I'm truly sorry it offends you so, and I apologize for the disruption of the peace of your cyberspace. I shan't post to the Quakers' newsgroup again, after this apology.... > > Or are you really *against* talk.religion.bahai, and are breaking > the rules to get the vote to be "no"? As the proponent, I'm definitely not against talk.religion.bahai Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Thu Apr 10 08:21:28 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Thu Mar 27 13:13:15 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id PAA12145; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 15:09:22 -0600 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 15:09:22 -0600 Message-Id: <199703272109.PAA12145@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5099 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:410f60844db544114c394643bd6c1268facac713570d ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: RESULT: talk.religion.bahai fails 157:691 Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <859496936.12114@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <859422879.4199@isc.org> X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Mar 27 21:09:08 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.127 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article , emma@Kanpai.Stanford.EDU (Emma Pease) wrote: > > In <859422879.4199@isc.org> jjd@primenet.com (Jim Davis) writes: > > > RESULT > > unmoderated group talk.religion.bahai fails 157:691 > > >There were 157 YES votes and 691 NO votes, for a total of 848 valid votes. > >There were 19 abstains and 2 invalid ballots. > > >Proponent: Frederick Glaysher > >Mentor: Christopher Stone > >Votetaker: Jim Davis > > Hmm, I didn't expect this much negative voting and I don't think Mr. > Glaysher managed to anger so many people that nearly 700 voted no to > spite him. Most of these 'no' votes were cast for political reasons. Emma, I tried to warn you, but you wouldn't listen.... Please consider emailing Tale at, I think, group-advice@uunet.uu.net and requesting that the fraudulent NO votes be cast out and talk.religion.bahai formed. All of you other technically expert people out there saavy about USEnet way beyond me, please consider doing likewise. That I and 156 other people should have to wait 6 months is blatant injustice and what I and others have tried to tell you all along: censorship on soc.religion.bahai, and on the part of religious fanatics (Incidentally, I'm a Bahai) who support the moderators there and who are already justfiying this outrageous abuse of free speech and religious freedom. > > I also note that some 157 people did vote 'yes'. Though some might be > cast by people who have no intention of using the group I suspect that > a core of 100+ do. [clip] > Emma > -- > \---- > |\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster > |_\/ emma@csli.stanford.edu Die Luft der Freiheit weht Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Thu Apr 10 08:21:32 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Thu Mar 27 13:22:36 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id PAA12561; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 15:18:43 -0600 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 15:18:43 -0600 Message-Id: <199703272118.PAA12561@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5695 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:116f20041de524119a33a43bb457e2592baad697d8ae ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: RESULT: talk.religion.bahai fails 157:691 Newsgroups: news.groups Message-Id: <859497501.12525@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service References: <859422879.4199@isc.org> <5hcv5c$m5r@marvin.deepthot.cary.nc.us> X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Mar 27 21:18:21 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.127 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) In article <5hcv5c$m5r@marvin.deepthot.cary.nc.us>, denebeim@deepthot.cary.nc.us (Jay Denebeim) wrote: > > In article , > Emma Pease wrote: > > >Hmm, I didn't expect this much negative voting and I don't think Mr. > >Glaysher managed to anger so many people that nearly 700 voted no to > >spite him. Most of these 'no' votes were cast for political reasons. > > I agree. > > >I also promised Mr. Glaysher that if the vote did manage to garner > >150+ 'yes' votes and still failed that I would reconsider my 'abstain' > >the next time the vote comes around (in 6 months if Mr. Glaysher > >resubmits it). My initial reaction is to vote 'yes' next time solely > >because of the massive 'no' vote. > > So is mine. In fact, I'm getting pretty damned sick of the same group > of people vetoing newsgroups. I didn't follow this particular RFD at > all, but I think I'm going to start voting for any group that pisses > off Indians. What is that, four newsgroups in the last six months? "Next time" is too late. There is no reasonable, logical reason why 157 people should have to wait 6 months under these conditions and when the voting was obviously corrupted. I've reposted Mr. Towfiq's NO vote instructions on news.groups. Please take a look at it. I ask you to consider emailing Tale, USEnet moderator, at group-advice@uunet.uu.net and request he disregard the obviously political, religious bias that is blatant in the RESULT. This has been done many time for others groups up against tyrants and oppressors of one type or another. There is no reason why it should be denied the 157 people who honestly and in good conscience voted for talk.religion.bahai I ask all of you who are appalled by the injustice of this infringement of free speech and decency to email Tale as well. Try Admin@uvv.org too. My group advisors have been Bill Aten at bill@netagw.com and Christopher Stone at cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu Let them know your opinion too. > > Jay > -- > * Jay Denebeim, Moderator, rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated * > * newsgroup submission address: b5mod@deepthot.cary.nc.us * > * moderator contact address: b5mod-request@deepthot.cary.nc.us * > * personal contact address: denebeim@deepthot.cary.nc.us * Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Thu Apr 10 08:21:39 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Thu Mar 27 14:00:38 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id PAA14256; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 15:59:51 -0600 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 15:59:51 -0600 Message-Id: <199703272159.PAA14256@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 3812 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:713fb0f43de524519e50141bc63b67d068dde8fce121 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: How to Overturn the NO vote Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc Message-Id: <859499951.14232@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: talisman@umich.edu,bahai-faith@bcca.org X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Mar 27 21:59:12 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.126 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) If you are less than pleased with the unethical NO vote campaign against talk.religion.bahai please make your feelings known to David "Tale" Lawrence, who coordinates the creation of newsgroups. He has the authority to overturn voting abuse. It has been done in the past, and it can be done in this outrageous case. I urge you not to accept the fraudulent RESULT. There is no justifiable reason 157 people who want an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith should have to wait 6 months because of a clearly orchestrated NO vote campaign. David "Tale" Lawrence at group-advice@uunet.uu.net Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Thu Apr 10 08:21:43 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Thu Mar 27 16:04:39 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id SAA20007; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 18:01:21 -0600 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 18:01:21 -0600 Message-Id: <199703280001.SAA20007@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 3842 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:211f10c40d9504d155dd62d43587ba2a7046d2e68cb1 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Overturn NO vote campaign: talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.religion.islam,alt.religion.islam.shia Message-Id: <859507259.19970@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News USENET Posting Service To: talisman@umich.edu X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Mar 28 00:01:00 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.125 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) If you are less than pleased with the unethical NO vote campaign against talk.religion.bahai please make your feelings known to David "Tale" Lawrence, who coordinates the creation of newsgroups. He has the authority to overturn voting abuse. It has been done in the past, and it can be done in this outrageous case. I urge you not to accept the fraudulent RESULT. There is no justifiable reason 157 people, Bahais and non-Bahais, who want an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith should have to wait 6 months because of a clearly orchestrated NO vote campaign. David "Tale" Lawrence at group-advice@uunet.uu.net Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:54:02 1997 >From www@grunt.dejanews.com Fri Apr 4 04:14:50 1997 Received: (from www@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA03018; Fri, 4 Apr 1997 04:58:16 -0600 Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 04:58:16 -0600 Message-Id: <199704041058.EAA03018@grunt.dejanews.com> To: FG@hotmail.com From: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Subject: Deja News Posting Confirmation Reply-To: dopost@grunt.dejanews.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 14109 [A reply is required to post your article. (If you did not request this, please do not reply to this email, instead read the instructions at the bottom of this note, and send any questions to postnews@dejanews.com).] You have requested that the following article be posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News. Your article is currently sitting in our spool waiting for you to authorize it by following the following instructions: TO POST YOUR ARTICLE PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS: --------------------------------------------------------------- - You must reply to this email, including the ENTIRE text of this email in the reply. (It's okay if your email program inserts characters in the left hand column, e.g. '>', or whatever). The reply MUST be sent to: dopost@postnews.dejanews.com - You must change the Subject: header of your reply to contain the words: "PLEASE POST" (capitalization doesn't matter). (Note: this is the Subject header of the message you send to us, not the subject header of the article you wish to have posted). [The following string must not be changed/modified/wrapped/truncated.] TRANSID:f15f60a41dd52441c8d96c7f6d6df8c9ffae0035f381 ===================================================================== ====== From: FG Subject: Re: SRB Censored: 3-31-97 Open Letter to UHJ talk.religion.bahai Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian,news.groups,alt.religion.bahai Message-Id: <860151456.2991@dejanews.com> Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: HALLAJ@ONLINE.COM References: <33451e13.28773281@news.online.no> X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Apr 04 10:57:43 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) Subject: Re: SRB Censored: 3-31-97 Open Letter to UHJ talk.religion.bahai From: hallaj@online.com (Hallaj) Date: 1997/04/03 Message-Id: <33451e13.28773281@news.online.no> Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian,alt.religion.islam [More Headers] On 2 Apr 1997 13:35:11 GMT, FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > >From: "Rick Boatright" > >To: FG@hotmail.com > >Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 11:43:54 -0600 > >Subject: Re: Open Letter: UHJ (Universal House of Justice): talk.religion > >CC: srb-mods@bcca.org > Dear sir, I see you have posted this note to soc.culture.iranian and alt.religion.islam. Do you think the moderators of SRB would refuse to publish this post there? THEY HAVE REFUSED TO POST THIS MESSAGE ON SOC.RELIGION.BAHAI IN DEFIANCE OF THEIR CENSORSHIP, I HAVE THEREFORE POSTED THIS MESSAGE ON NEWS.GROUPS AND A FEW OTHER PLACES. Anyway, I am sorry that one cannot discuss freely there. Once they censored my post too ! THANK YOU FOR SAYING SO, HALLAJ.... YOU ARE NOW AT LEAST ABOUT THE FIFTEENTH TO TWENTIETH PERSON WHO HAS STATED THEY HAVE BEEN CENSORED BY SOC.RELIGION.BAHAI IN THE PAST, SO THE "MODERATORS" CONTINUE TO DENY IT.... Regards Hallaj > > >Dear Frederick, > > > >I have forwarded your letter to the secretariat at the world center, > >and to Dr. Hoda Mahmoud since your note replies in part to his email. > > > >I explicitly deny that the moderators of soc.religion.bahai have > >participated in any program to block the formation of > >talk.religion.bahai. While we have never acted as advocates of the > >proposal, the moderators have publicly expressed their dismay at the > >number of votes from individuals who clearly are not usenet users. I > >will also point out that the moderators where the first to point out > >the irregularities of Mark Towfiq's note, and other posts about TRB. > > > >At no time have the moderators participated in "back channel > >communications" to block the formation of TRB. > > > >As I said, I have forwarded your note to the House, and I an > >returning it to you unposted on SRB. The moderators are of the > >opinion that the proper forum for the discussion of moderation > >practices in a usenet newsgroup is in news.groups. The moderators > >participate there, and will continue the discussion as long as you > >need. > > > >As an individual, I am brought to ask you another question. How is > >the request for a meeting and discussion from Dr Mahmoudi > >"threatening and coercive"? It looked a LOT like a request for a > >discssion to me. Further, I am forced to ask how your publishing his > >private emails to you without his permission is an appropriate > >action? > > > >Rick Boatright > >co-moderator > >soc.religion.bahai > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> March 31, 1997 > >> > >> The Universal House of Justice of the Bahais of the World > >> Haifa, Israel > >> > >> Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: > >> > >> After careful reflection and prayer for the past few days, I've > >> decided that open public discussion and knowledge are more > >> important than my own status as a Bahai. > >> > >> I have been a Bahai for more than twenty years, since 1976. I > >> became a Bahai by reading almost every single Bahai book > >> published at the time. Given my background as a Catholic and > >> poet, I was deeply moved by the beauty and profundity of the > >> Bahai Writings. As a young person, I spent two months travel > >> teaching throughout Michigan with several other youthful, > >> innocent Bahais. Like many, I have sacrificed financially to > >> contribute to the Bahai Faith. I pioneered for a year and a > >> half in Japan, for two years on an American Indian reservation, > >> and have travel taught in China. The spiritual profundity of > >> the Bahai vision, as reflected in the work of the > >> African-American poet Robert Hayden, inspired me to study at > >> the University of Michigan under him and to spend considerable > >> time and labor editing his collected poems and prose for > >> Liveright and the University of Michigan Press. I have > >> published two essays in the Bahai magazine World Order and > >> spent more time than I can remember at Bahai summer camps, > >> workshops, and deepenings. Throughout all my varied Bahai > >> experience, I have loved the Figures and Teachings of the Faith > >> even as the conviction has grown that all information and > >> discussion in the Bahai Faith is subtly manipulated, controlled, > >> and distorted for the "good of the Faith." There seems to be a > >> pervasive, rigid control of all thought, ideas, and information > >> that calls into question the motives of the individuals in > >> power in the Bahai Administration. > >> > >> As a published writer and former college and university > >> instructor of rhetoric and literature for over ten years, I > >> believe the whole process of "review" has become a complete > >> farce and disgrace to the Bahai Faith and is suggestive of the > >> worst censorship under the most repressive regimes, religious > >> or secular, of historical experience. If one truly wishes to > >> understand why many Bahais, both highly educated and others, > >> leave the Bahai Faith or become "inactive" and withdraw into > >> silence and uninvolvement with the religion, one need only to > >> look objectively at what seems to be the oppressive and > >> coercive methods of people in the Bahai Administration itself > >> to find the answer. > >> > >> My experiencing of these same methods of censorship and > >> distortion on soc.religion.bahai proved to be the last > >> intolerable straw. My attempt to form an unmoderated newsgroup > >> on the Internet that no one could manipulate and censor has a > >> long experience of Bahai tyranny in the background. The > >> resorting to deceit and back-channel communication by the > >> moderators of soc.religion.bahai and others naively believing > >> they're working for the benefit of the Bahai Faith by > >> campaigning for 691 unethical NO votes on talk.religion.bahai > >> further proves the pervasive acceptance of disreputable tactics > >> by Bahais in their attempt to maintain a stranglehold over all > >> thought and discussion. > >> > >> Recently, more than ever, I've often recalled the words to me > >> in private several times of Robert Hayden, the only Bahai to > >> be appointed Consultant in Poetry to the Library of Congress: > >> "Why I continue to have anything to do with the Bahai Faith, I > >> do not know, I do not know." I myself no longer know. > >> > >> I suppose I hope that the oppressive, coercive methods that > >> have come to be accepted and justified in the Bahai > >> Administration, demonstrated for instance in the crushing of > >> the magazine Dialogue, the incidents surrounding the Bahai > >> Encyclopedia, the listserv Talisman I, and the continuingly > >> crude, unreadable propoganda vehicle of the American Bahai, > >> might yet be put aside in favor of the beautiful vision of > >> Baha'u'llah and Abdul-Baha for freedom of religious conscience > >> and belief and a humane, tolerant universalism. I fear that all > >> too often the religious totalitarianism of Baha'u'llah's > >> fanatical homeland has seeped into every nook and cranny of > >> His religion, smothering out the free light of the human soul > >> and hamstringing His Administration. > >> > >> It was with the bitterest of feelings that I observed some > >> time ago the Bahai exhibition, a deceitful propaganda event > >> really, on freedom of religious conscience and belief sponsored > >> by the National Spiritual Assembly in the rotunda of the > >> Capitol in Washington, D.C., so far in reality from the truth > >> was it, so misled, trusting, and uninformed were the > >> Congressmen of my country.... > >> > >> If censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith, I would like to > >> know what passages of the Bahai Writings support it and what > >> are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship. It seems to > >> me that censorship pervades the Bahai Faith so thoroughly that > >> some Bahais regularly use it as a method of intimidation and > >> silencing of anyone with an unconventional opinion by accusing > >> the individual of being a covenant breaker. This tactic was > >> used against me by at least three Bahais during the discussion > >> period for talk.religion.bahai and tacitly condoned by the > >> moderators and others. > >> > >> I include, at the end, a threatening, coercive email message I > >> received on March 27, 1997, from Mr. Hoda Mahmoudi, > >> Auxiliary Board Member for Michigan, at a crucial juncture of > >> the discussion and voting for talk.religion.bahai and would like > >> an explanation of his motives. > >> > >> I, and perhaps the rest of the world, would greatly appreciate > >> evidence that there are not now nine ayatollahs residing in > >> Israel on Mt Carmel. > >> > >> Respectfully, > >> > >> Frederick Glaysher > >> Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > >> > >> -------- > >> >Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 15:45:46 -0500 > >> >To: FG@hotmail.com > >> >From: Hoda Mahmoudi > >> > >> >Dear Mr. Glaysher: > >> > > >> >I have been reading your e-mail postings recently. I would like to speak > >> >with you by phone about some of your throughts and opinions regarding > >> >matters relevant to the Baha'i Faith. As an Auxiliary Board members for > >> >Michigan, I am always interested in issues which relate to individual > >> >spiritual responsibility and the Baha'i Faith's principle of unity. My > >> >phone number is 616/789-0590. > >> > > >> >Hope to hear from you soon. > >> > > >> >Hoda > >> > > >> > > FREDERICK GLAYSHER ROCHESTER HILLS, MICHIGAN USA -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ===================================================================== ====== WHAT TO DO IF YOU DID NOT REQUEST THIS POSTING: ---------------------------------------------- [This article has NOT yet been posted to Usenet. The reason we send this email is to authenticate the author of articles we post.] If you did not request this article be posted to Usenet via the Deja News service, that could mean someone using our service forged your address and attempted to make this article appear as if you had posted it. The person who did this used the IP address we log in the X-Originating-IP-Addr: header field of the posting. This person may be able to be traced if you contact the system administrator at their site. If you would like us to try to find out if someone forged your address, please write to postnews@dejanews.com, include a statement like "I didn't write this, please find out who did", and include this entire message. We will try to help you as much as we can, but we are not a legal body and other system administrators are not always cooperative, so we cannot promise any results. We are sorry for any inconvenience. From - Mon Apr 07 07:54:00 1997 >From phekda@juno.com Thu Apr 3 16:02:33 1997 Received: (from phekda@juno.com) by x1.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id S`I28445; Thu, 03 Apr 1997 18:59:45 EST To: FG@hotmail.com, talisman@umich.edu Subject: Destructive attitudes Message-ID: <19970403.155844.9374.1.Phekda@juno.com> References: <5humv8$4ut@murrow.corp.sgi.com> <199704031251.EAA22002@shadowfax.reference.com> X-Mailer: Juno 1.14 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,6,12-16 From: phekda@juno.com (William H Reed) Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 18:59:45 EST X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 839 Dear Frederick: It may surprise you to know that some of the very issues that YOU SAY you want to address are the same ones that most concern me. My original offer to assist you was genuine. However your manner of conflict and anger are obstacles to finding solutions. You seem to be much more interested in your own indignation than in solving these problems. It has become progressively more obvious that I will not be able to assist you, or you I. Hence forth all messages received by me from you will be deleted unread, with the one exception that if you sincerely wish to adopt a more constructive methodology you may send me a personal message RE "UNITY" I will read this if it comes. If you burn this option you will have no further opportunity to communicate with me. My Prayers are with you: William H. Reed From - Mon Apr 07 07:53:53 1997 >From arash@post1.com Thu Apr 3 08:11:18 1997 Received: from bcarsde5.ott.bnr.ca (actually 47.80.6.26) by bcarsde4.localhost; Thu, 3 Apr 1997 11:06:45 -0500 Received: from bmerh71b (actually bmerh71b.ott.bnr.ca) by bcarsde5.ott.bnr.ca; Thu, 3 Apr 1997 11:06:11 -0500 Received: from localhost by bmerh71b with SMTP (1.37.109.16/16.2 BNR V4.2 P1) id AA068293568; Thu, 3 Apr 1997 11:06:08 -0500 Sender: sabeti@post1.com Message-Id: <3343D557.F4C@post1.com> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 11:05:43 -0500 From: Arash Organization: Supersonics X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (X11; I; HP-UX A.09.03 9000/712) Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian,news.groups,talk.religion.misc Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: SRB Censored: 3-31-97 Open Letter to UHJ References: <5humv8$4ut@murrow.corp.sgi.com> <5i093o$hvo$1@bilbo.reference.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2191 FG@hotmail.com wrote: snip... , we don't want to hear it.... Again, > predictable. > > > > > - Behnam > > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA Mr Glaysher, You have still failed to explain to us why Hoda's email to you was threatening. And here is a quot from your original posting (letter to UHJ) > > I, and perhaps the rest of the world, would greatly appreciate > evidence that there are not now nine ayatollahs residing in > Israel on Mt Carmel. If you show this to even a 6 year old Bahai, he(she) would tell you the author of such letter never understood the station of UHJ and its nine members. The qustion can't get more rediculous than asking UHJ for evidence to prove to the world that they are not nine Ayatollahs...what a distorted state of mind!! This kind of comment does not and can not come from a person who understands Bahai Faith. The other problem with your letter is that you start with bragging about what services you have done for the Bahai Faith. These kinds of remarks and your intentions of putting them there at the beginnig of your letter is totally in contrast to what a Bahai life is all about. You never understood and still don't understand why Bahais sacrifice their times and lives for Bahau'llah. Your failure to discuss your issues face to face with other Bahais is a very suspicious behaviour from a member of the Bahai faith. Hiding behind your computer and using hotmail services and writing such letters are pretty much waste of time and will never solve any problems that you may have. Your problems are very fundamental and of important nature to you, and if YOU don't come forward and talk about it, they will never be solved for you. However, you may have other intentions by keeping your distance and typing up more letters from behind your terminal. Bahais believe in Bahau'llah and trust the Universal House of Justice. They obey the local and national spiritual assemblies. Write a letter to your National Spiritual Assembly and also wait for the reply of the UHJ to your letter. You can share the replies with us as you did with your letter. Arash From - Mon Apr 07 07:53:56 1997 >From osborndo@pilot.msu.edu Thu Apr 3 09:00:03 1997 Received: from new586.casid.msu.edu (du1330.casid.msu.edu [35.8.70.3]) by pilot18.cl.msu.edu (8.7.5/MSU-2.10) id LAA84343; Thu, 3 Apr 1997 11:58:34 -0500 Message-ID: <3343E21E.5E1B@pilot.msu.edu> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 12:00:14 -0500 From: Donald Zhang Osborn Reply-To: 306@pilot.msu.edu, Berkey@pilot.msu.edu, Hall@pilot.msu.edu, E.@pilot.msu.edu, Lansing@pilot.msu.edu, MI@pilot.msu.edu, 48824-1111@pilot.msu.edu Organization: Ctr for Adv Study of Internatl Dev. - MSU X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian,news.groups,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion.bahai To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: SRB Censored: 3-31-97 Open Letter to UHJ References: <5humv8$4ut@murrow.corp.sgi.com> <5i093o$hvo$1@bilbo.reference.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3251 FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > fg> I include, at the end, a threatening, coercive email message I [snip] > > fg> evidence that there are not now nine ayatollahs residing in [snip] > To be a Bahai, then, is to be a ZOMBIE for Baha'u'llah? I respect [snip] > Again, predictable "witch hunt" thinking, typical of many in > the Bahai Faith.... [snip] > Too many accusations to deal with. I do believe it was coercive > and attempting to silence me at a crucial juncture of the voting > process, at the exact moment when I had requested that the NO > votes be disqualified since they were clearly orchestrated by > probably soc.religion.bahai and several of their "attack dogs." [snip] > You confirm, actually, my worst expectations of Bahais and > their pre-reformation thinking.... [snip] > this tactic can be used to silence any voice in the Bahai Faith > that is not one of conventional uniformity, regurgitating > received opinion and used to crush religious freedom and > conscience.... [snip] {& an earlier reference to "fascist Baha'is"} The above characterization of the Baha'i community is unnrecognizeable to this believer. Aside from some very questionable assumptions (e.g., re: orchestration of opinions about t.r.b. and the nature & intent of the letter you received) the use of such terminology at best devalues whatever you are trying to say. Attached are two quotes, which you are certainly familiar with, for the information of other readers concerning Baha'i teachings about choice of words in human communication. DZO "Every word is endowed with a spirit, therefore the speaker or expounder should carefully deliver his words at the appropriate time and place, for the impression which each word maketh is clearly evident and perceptible. The Great Being saith: One word may be likened unto fire, another unto light, and the influence which both exert is manifest in the world. Therefore an enlightened man of wisdom should primarily speak with words as mild as milk, that the children of men may be nurtured and edified thereby and may attain the ultimate goal of human existence which is the station of true understanding and nobility. And likewise He saith: One word is like unto springtime causing the tender saplings of the rose-garden of knowledge to become verdant and flourishing, while another word is even as a deadly poison. It behoveth a prudent man of wisdom to speak with utmost leniency and forbearance so that the sweetness of his words may induce everyone to attain that which befitteth man's station." Baha'u'llah, Lawh-i-Maqsud, Tablets of Baha'u'llah, p. 173 (#31) https://SunSITE.UNC.Edu/Bahai/Texts/English/TB/TB-10.html#Page 173 "For the tongue is a smoldering fire, and excess of speech a deadly poison. Material fire consumeth the body, whereas the fire of the tongue devoureth both heart and soul. The force of the former lasteth but for a time, whilst the effects of the latter endureth a century." Baha'u'llah, Kitab-i-Iqan, p. 193 (#214) & Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 265 (#2). https://SunSITE.UNC.Edu/Bahai/Texts/English/IQA/IQA-2.html#Page 193 https://SunSITE.UNC.Edu/Bahai/Texts/English/GWB/GWB-125.html#Page 265 From - Thu Apr 10 08:34:46 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Apr 10 05:31:51 1997 Received: (from root@localhost) by f43.hotmail.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id FAA13125; Thu, 10 Apr 1997 05:28:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199704101228.FAA13125@f43.hotmail.com> Received: from 199.179.42.123 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Thu, 10 Apr 1997 05:28:09 PDT X-Originating-IP: [199.179.42.123] From: "Frederick Glaysher" To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Email address change Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 05:28:09 PDT X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 613 to: cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu cc:bill@netagw.com,contact@uvv.org Since no one can fix the ISP problem I've been experiencing, I'm changing my email back to FG@hotmail.com and am working on getting a new ISP. Please send all email to me here at the original address, FG@hotmail.com, including the CFV or whatever for talk.religion.bahai. Thanks. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sat Apr 12 07:19:51 1997 >From thodges@freenet.calgary.ab.ca Fri Apr 11 07:58:39 1997 Received: from srv1.freenet.calgary.ab.ca(198.161.243.11) by srv1.freenet.calgary.ab.ca via smap (V1.3) id ZZ53554; Fri Apr 11 08:52:13 1997 Date: Fri, 11 Apr 1997 08:52:11 -0600 (MDT) From: T Hodges To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: email echo alt.religion.bahai In-Reply-To: <199704111229.FAA05940@f17.hotmail.com> Message-Id: Organization: Calgary Free-Net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1782 Dear Frederick, I am pretty buried at the present so I wouldn't be able to offer any help. Good luck, Tom Tom Hodges thodges@freenet.calgary.ab.ca Professional Agronomist, member Baha'i Faith, Go player On Fri, 11 Apr 1997, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > Thanks for your suggestion. I've just received two long documents > from Jonathan Grobe, who set up alt.religion.bahai, on how to > put together an email echo.... They rather on the technical side. > Have you ever done this before? Would you be willing to help any > way? > > -- > > Subject: Re: alt.religion.bahai > From: thodges@freenet.calgary.ab.ca (T Hodges) > Date: 1997/04/04 > Message-Id: <5i38kr$vqq@ds2.acs.ucalgary.ca> > Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.rights.human,alt.religion.bahai > [More Headers] > > To increase access, create an email echo of the newsgroup and send it > out to everyone who wants to subscribe. Also forward any email responses > to the newsgroup. > > In article <5i2ph1$i5d$1@bilbo.reference.com>, wrote: > >Now that the stop-gap measure of alt.religion.bahai has been > >created, I would like advice on how to maximize access to it. > -- > Tom Hodges thodges@freenet.calgary.ab.ca > Professional Agronomist, member Baha'i Faith, Go player > > > > > > Home Power Search Post to Usenet Ask DN Wizard Help > Why use DN? | Advertising Info | Press Releases | Jobs | > Policy Stuff > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com > --------------------------------------------------------- > From - Sun Apr 13 08:01:47 1997 >From osborndo@pilot.msu.edu Sat Apr 12 07:12:04 1997 Received: from algeria (meke.isp.msu.edu [35.8.242.49]) by pilot11.cl.msu.edu (8.7.5/MSU-2.10) id KAA160086; Sat, 12 Apr 1997 10:12:34 -0400 Message-Id: <199704121412.KAA160086@pilot11.cl.msu.edu> Date: Sat, 12 Apr 97 10:17:04 -0700 From: Donald Zhang Osborn Organization: ---- X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,bit.admin,alt.config To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: email echo/listserv: alt.religion.bahai References: <5int1b$jpm$1@bilbo.reference.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 2339 Somebody please consider helping Frederick with this. Note the caveats below. TIA! FG@hotmail.com wrote: >To Whom It May Concern: > >157 people recently voted YES for the creation of >talk.religion.bahai, which was defeated by 691 NO votes for >ideological, religious reasons, not valid ones, technically. Frederick, Once again, it is neither accurate nor helpful to sweepingly dismiss everyone who voted one way and validate those who voted another way. It perpetuates a false division and actually weakens your appeal. >I and probably most of the 156 people who voted YES would >like to create a email echo/listserv to help ourselves and How accurate is it to make such an assertion? There may be a significant number of people who would be interested in such an e-mail list, but I don't think one could measure it by a vote taken to create a newsgroup. Anyway, as the days go by, the significance of such a vote continues to decline (people change their minds one way or another, others may not have cared that much to begin with [whtever their vote], others forget about the whole thing, still others become interested, etc.). >others gain access to alt.religion.bahai, which Jonathan >Grobe at UVV set up for us a few weeks ago. Many people who Presumably by "us" you mean the widest possible community of actual & potential Usenet readers who would be interested in the Baha'i Faith. Mr. Grobe obviously looked at the t.r.b. vote in assessing what he thought would be sufficient interest for a.r.b., but I'm sure he didn't think that all who voted yes were actually interested, or that no one beyond that number had an interest. >voted YES apparently only have email capabilities and cannot >directly read alt.religion.bahai. This appeal would be more accurate and stronger if you noted that there may be people who did not vote yes who would be interested in e-mail access to the group. More to the point, you could simply say that you think there would be interest in an E-mail echo/list for a.r.b. based on x number of requests you've received. As has been suggested in several previous messages, it's past time to stop referring to the t.r.b. vote totals as if they meant anything more than diverse opinions on the t.r.b. proposal. DZO From - Mon Apr 14 07:58:10 1997 >From ncwright@earthlink.net Sun Apr 13 12:27:36 1997 Received: from LOCALNAME (ip91.philadelphia7.pa.pub-ip.psi.net [38.26.63.91]) by norway.it.earthlink.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA21444; Sun, 13 Apr 1997 12:25:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <335150E2.5AF1@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 13 Apr 1997 14:32:18 -0700 From: "Nona C. Wright" Reply-To: ncwright@earthlink.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: email echo/listserv: alt.religion.bahai References: <5int1b$jpm$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5iqh6b$414$1@bilbo.reference.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 2586 Frederick, What makes you think all those no votes were Baha'is? I personally did not vote because I read and understood the rules. Several of my friends did the same. I read the list of who voted no and didn't recognise many names. Didn't see any of the regulars from srb. Saw lots of Persian and Arabic names. trb was discussed in many news groups including sci and Muslim and Christian groups. Some of these folks might not want to see another Baha'i presence on the internet. We cannot assume ALL the people who voted no were Baha'is. Any way you got your open forum, so go for it. Nona FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > > > On Sat, 12 Apr 1997 18:44:11 +0100, Chris wrote: > > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, FG@hotmail.com > > > wrote > > > >691 NO votes for > > > >ideological, religious reasons, not valid ones, technically. > > > > > > Fred, while I am sure you are right about some of these votes, please > > > stop implying that every single person who voted against t.r.b did so > > > for the reasons you quote. If you persist, your credibility will be > > > undermined even further and you will find itr even more difficult to get > > > t.r.b off the ground next time round. > > More like right about MOST of the 691 votes.... As many Usenet > > tech people observed after the vote, 691 NO votes could not > > exist for technical reasons.... Why do you keep defending such > > deceit and dishonesty on the part of 691 Bahais? What about > > their so-called credibility? They have none as far as I'm > > concerned. > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > > > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 > > > Verily, Jesus said: "Come ye after Me, and I will make you to become > > > fishers of men." In this day, however, We say: "Come ye after Me, that > > > We may make you to become quickeners of mankind." [Baha'u'llah] > > > For more info goto: https://www.miracles.win-uk.net/Bahai > > > https://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk/bahai.html > > > or my embryonic web site at > > > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -- > > Posted using Reference.COM https://www.reference.com > Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. > > InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting. From - Wed Apr 16 07:29:54 1997 >From jim@american.edu Tue Apr 15 09:26:28 1997 Received: (from jim@localhost) by dresden.american.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA23138 for FG@hotmail.com; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 12:26:21 -0400 From: Jim McIntosh Message-Id: <199704151626.MAA23138@dresden.american.edu> Subject: Re: email echo/listserv: alt.religion.bahai In-Reply-To: <861106662.13415@dejanews.com> from Frederick Glaysher at "Apr 15, 97 07:51:29 am" To: FG@hotmail.com Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 12:26:21 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 897 > Okay, sorry again. I assume I get a list from bit.admin? And then > you connect it? I've read the instructions, but I fear I'm what > is known as low tech.... You need to find a list somewhere. There doesn't seem to be a group of people who regularly read bit.admin, so I wouldn't hold out thinking that someone reading your post in bit.admin will be able to give you a list. Check with those that were in favor of the newsgroup to see if any of them are at a university or company which allows people to request mailing lists. You can also check out L-Soft's very reasonable commercial listserv service at https://www.lsoft.com Jim McIntosh Personal Mail: Jim@McIntosh.org American University AU Mail: jim@american.edu Washington, DC USA 20016-8019 The path of service leads from charity to justice. From - Thu Apr 17 09:06:24 1997 BCC: FG@hotmail.com Message-ID: <3356204F.1DC4@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:06:23 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jrcole@umich.edu Subject: email echo/listserv: alt.religion.bahai References: <199704151626.MAA23138@dresden.american.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 457 Juan, I'm having trouble finding an institution or ISP that will support a LISTSERV for alt.religion.bahai Any chance you or U of M would? Once a LISTSERV is set up somewhere it can have a GATEWAY connected to it for alt.religion.bahai, which then would provide access for anyone with email service--much wider access. Perhaps you already understand how this would work from Talisman. Or can you suggest anyone else who might help? Fred From - Thu Apr 17 09:15:13 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Apr 17 06:05:49 1997 Received: (qmail 6237 invoked from network); 17 Apr 1997 13:03:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO default) (199.179.42.121) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 17 Apr 1997 13:03:19 -0000 Message-ID: <3356204F.1DC4@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:06:23 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jrcole@umich.edu Subject: email echo/listserv: alt.religion.bahai References: <199704151626.MAA23138@dresden.american.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 455 Juan, I'm having trouble finding an institution or ISP that will support a LISTSERV for alt.religion.bahai Any chance you or U of M would? Once a LISTSERV is set up somewhere it can have a GATEWAY connected to it for alt.religion.bahai, which then would provide access for anyone with email service--much wider access. Perhaps you already understand how this would work from Talisman. Or can you suggest anyone else who might help? Fred From - Fri Apr 18 07:27:14 1997 >From jrcole@umich.edu Thu Apr 17 08:50:21 1997 Received: from pm113-23.dialip.mich.net by gimantis.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.8.5/2.2) id LAA07749; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 11:48:43 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199704171548.LAA07749@gimantis.rs.itd.umich.edu> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 11:48:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender: jrcole@j.imap.itd.umich.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: FG@hotmail.com From: jrcole@umich.edu (Juan R. I. Cole) Subject: Re: email echo/listserv: alt.religion.bahai X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1261 Dear Frederick: Unfortunately the University of Michigan does not have listserv capabilities. That is why I ran talisman 2 and irfan off little x500 programs of the sort we set up for our classes. It would not work as a gateway. John and Linda Walbridge have listserv capabilities at Indiana, but I do not know if they are willing to lend their auspices to this. All you could do is ask. I don't think the reflector is absolutely necessary--I read alt.relgion.bahai on the usenet server and that works perfectly well. Do you have a Web page with logs? That is very important, especially if the messages are to get into the search engines. cheers Juan (I'm going out of town for a bit, so may not be able to reply to further messages quickly.) >Juan, > >I'm having trouble finding an institution or ISP that will support a >LISTSERV for alt.religion.bahai Any chance you or U of M would? > >Once a LISTSERV is set up somewhere it can have a GATEWAY connected >to it for alt.religion.bahai, which then would provide access for anyone >with email service--much wider access. Perhaps you already understand >how this would work from Talisman. > >Or can you suggest anyone else who might help? > >Fred > > From - Fri Apr 18 07:28:20 1997 >From jrcole@umich.edu Thu Apr 17 15:56:53 1997 Received: from pm115-20.dialip.mich.net by gimantis.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.8.5/2.2) id SAA26141; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 18:54:27 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199704172254.SAA26141@gimantis.rs.itd.umich.edu> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 18:54:27 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender: jrcole@j.imap.itd.umich.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: FG@hotmail.com From: jrcole@umich.edu (Juan R. I. Cole) Subject: Re: email echo/listserv: alt.religion.bahai X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1697 A usenet official replied to my protest against the talk.religion.bahai vote. I thought the advise might be useful. cheers Juan ---------------- It sounds to me like what you really need is a private listserv run by someone who is not a Baha'i. I, for example, could care less whether some dictatorial religious organization cares to try to shun me or not. I'm not Baha'i, nor are any of my friends, and I have very little respect for religious organizations in the first place. What it sounds like you need is to find someone like me to run the list. I personally am not volunteering (too many projects already), but there are many people in news.groups who run hundreds of mailing lists, and for whom it would be a very minor task to add another. Many of those are also staunch libertarians who wouldn't take at all well to such tactics, and would undoubtably make fools out of the Baha'i religious authorities if they cared to attempt such stunts. It sounds to me like you should post this information to news.groups and ask for a listserv location which is not vulnerable to that sort of religious censorship. I'd be surprised if you didn't get several offers of help. >Juan, > >I'm having trouble finding an institution or ISP that will support a >LISTSERV for alt.religion.bahai Any chance you or U of M would? > >Once a LISTSERV is set up somewhere it can have a GATEWAY connected >to it for alt.religion.bahai, which then would provide access for anyone >with email service--much wider access. Perhaps you already understand >how this would work from Talisman. > >Or can you suggest anyone else who might help? > >Fred > > From - Mon Apr 07 07:52:43 1997 >From rdetweil@usr04.primenet.com Sun Mar 30 18:01:48 1997 Received: (from rdetweil@localhost) by usr04.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA08525 for FG@hotmail.com; Sun, 30 Mar 1997 19:00:33 -0700 (MST) From: "Richard C. Detweiler" Message-Id: <199703310200.TAA08525@usr04.primenet.com> Subject: Re: email for UHJ To: FG@hotmail.com (Frederick Glaysher) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 19:00:31 -0700 (MST) In-Reply-To: <199703310154.RAA11357@f26.hotmail.com> from "Frederick Glaysher" at Mar 30, 97 05:54:54 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 316 Hello Fred, The House can be reached at secretariat@bwc.org. Dick D. > If anyone there has the email address for the Universal > House of Justice, I'd appreciate your forwarding it to > me as soon as possible. > > I appreciate your help. > > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Thu Apr 10 08:21:10 1997 >From jwinters@chass.utoronto.ca Thu Mar 27 12:02:57 1997 Received: from localhost by chass.utoronto.ca via SMTP (951211.SGI.8.6.12.PATCH1042/940406.SGI) id PAA17797; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 15:00:38 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 15:00:38 -0500 (EST) From: Jonah Winters Reply-To: Jonah Winters To: FG@hotmail.com cc: talisman@umich.edu Subject: Failed TRB In-Reply-To: <199703271401.GAA00259@shadowfax.reference.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1011 Dear Mr. Glaysher, First, you have permission to quote or use my brief comments as you wish. I was one of at least a few, probably many, who neglected to vote because he didn't really care much either way about the newsgroup. However, had the ballot read "this group is presumed defeated unless and only unless a sufficient number of yes votes are received," then I most certainly would have voted. It simply never occured to me that, without my vote, the group would have failed. Now that I realize the strength of the "no" campaign, should you resubmit this proposal for consideration again, I will certainly give you my "yes" vote. I don't usually like what you say and the way that you say it, but, unless we support the right of speech of those we disagree with, then supporting the right of speech of those we agree with hardly accounts for much. -Jonah =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Jonah and Kari Winters 33 Endean Avenue / Toronto, Ontario / M4M-1W5 / (416) 461-3527 From - Fri Feb 28 06:45:16 1997 Received: from e2.empirenet.com (205.164.88.2) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Thu, 27 Feb 1997 12:22:04 -0500 Received: from user69.empirenet.com (user69.empirenet.com [205.164.88.169]) by e2.empirenet.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA19852 for <@moa.net>; Thu, 27 Feb 1997 09:27:34 -0800 Message-ID: <3315CE16.74C2@empirenet.com> Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 10:10:30 -0800 From: Yvonne Best X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: @moa.net Subject: Faith on the net X-URL: https://altavista.digital.com/cgi-bin/query?pg=q&what=news&stq=30&q=bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 3468 I see no reason why it is inapropriate to exclude pronography, or other areas of discussion which may be not in accordance with the life of a Baha'i, or the Teachings of the Faith. Therefore moderation of the news group may be needed. As to the discussion of "issues in the Faith" shouldn't those have been worked our prior to becomming a Baha'i. There just aren't any women on the UHJ. Where do I get of questioning the wisdom of that. It is clearly written, and if I am one who desires to reject that particular teaching, then I am not following the teaching, and guidance of Baha'u'llah. I know that for some it is a cop out to say, so it is written so shall it be. But, either you believe or you don't, there realy isn't anything productive in creating strife between people about acceptance and non acceptance. SEX is simple: None except between a husband (man) and wife (woman). This does not deny that some people are homosexual, or even perminately single heterosexual. It just limits the activity of sex to the institution of marriage between one man and one wife. I can be as homosexual as I may be created, however, being such does not give a licence to have sexual relations. There is no need to elaborate with detail or further debate. The stop sign is clear, stop at it or chose not to. But, don't expect it to be removed because it inconviences you. That same inconvience restraigns others so that we may live in an ever advancing civilization, and that we may avoid crashing into one another, spiritualy, and physicaly. The Baha'i Faith is not a Democracy. The laws are set forth, the instatutions are designed to perfection. The only failures come from individuals trying to use the Baha'i Faith as their tool for personal grandstanding, or gain. The Baha'i Faith is not the most comfortable place to be. Baha'u'llah even advised a merchant that was a groupie thinking that there would be a monetary reward in association with the Baha'is to dissassociate him self for his own benefit, as to be a Baha'i was not a position of comfort, or material gain. However, I believe it is for me the only place. Absolute adhearment to the laws and the teachings of the Faith, have been my solice, protection, and security, as well as my challange, and reward. I would die before recanting my faith, and I will never be an appologist for the teachings of Baha'u'llah, the decisions of the UHJ. I do belive in occational lively consultation with National Spritual Assemblies, and Local Spritual Assemblies, and ABM/Councelors, as these institutions have yet come to maturity, and at times benefits from a thorn prick now and then. I do not believe in the public showing of dirty laundry, or derideing an instatution, individual in any forum. I believe in consultation, not backbittine, not bickkering, and not gossip. I have been in varrious countries for the past ten years. I lived the Faith outside of the US culture. First of all, yes there are as many declarations as claimed. If anything there are more, not less Baha'is. I also know that for every 10,000 declarations, there are only perhaps 100 who will make the personal sacrafice to serve the cause in a demonstrative mannor. This is true of nearly all religions, as we have yet to assimulate ourselfs truly into a Baha'i Life, collectively. I wish you well. yvonne From - Fri Feb 28 07:59:25 1997 Received: from default (199.179.42.20) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 07:10:39 -0500 Message-ID: <3316CD03.4256@moa.net> Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 07:18:11 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yvonne Best Subject: Re: Faith on the net References: <3315CE16.74C2@empirenet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 4470 Yvonne Best wrote: > > I see no reason why it is inapropriate to exclude pronography, or other > areas of discussion which may be not in accordance with the life of a > Baha'i, or the Teachings of the Faith. Therefore moderation of the news > group may be needed. In whose opinion? That's crucial question your reasoning ignores. > > As to the discussion of "issues in the Faith" shouldn't those have been > worked our prior to becomming a Baha'i. There just aren't any women on > the UHJ. Where do I get of questioning the wisdom of that. It is > clearly written, and if I am one who desires to reject that particular > teaching, then I am not following the teaching, and guidance of > Baha'u'llah. > I've never even commented on that "issue" as far as I can recall.... > I know that for some it is a cop out to say, so it is written so shall it > be. But, either you believe or you don't, there realy isn't anything > productive in creating strife between people about acceptance and non > acceptance. > Your method of reasoning strikes me as simplistic. > SEX is simple: None except between a husband (man) and wife (woman). > This does not deny that some people are homosexual, or even perminately > single heterosexual. It just limits the activity of sex to the > institution of marriage between one man and one wife. I can be as > homosexual as I may be created, however, being such does not give a > licence to have sexual relations. There is no need to elaborate with > detail or further debate. The stop sign is clear, stop at it or chose > not to. But, don't expect it to be removed because it inconviences you. Another topic unremarked upon by me.... > That same inconvience restraigns others so that we may live in an ever > advancing civilization, and that we may avoid crashing into one another, > spiritualy, and physicaly. > > The Baha'i Faith is not a Democracy. The laws are set forth, the > instatutions are designed to perfection. Unlike your spelling.... The only failures come from > individuals trying to use the Baha'i Faith as their tool for personal > grandstanding, or gain. > Your assumptions, compounded with your simplistic reasoning, ignore the entire context of discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai > The Baha'i Faith is not the most comfortable place to be. Baha'u'llah > even advised a merchant that was a groupie thinking that there would be a > monetary reward in association with the Baha'is to dissassociate him self > for his own benefit, as to be a Baha'i was not a position of comfort, or > material gain. However, I believe it is for me the only place. Absolute > adhearment to the laws and the teachings of the Faith, have been my > solice, protection, and security, as well as my challange, and reward. It's always easier for human beings to turn off what little brain they might have and become a zombie for some cause.... I don't believe that's what the Writings call us to.... Quite the reverse. I > would die before recanting my faith, and I will never be an appologist > for the teachings of Baha'u'llah, the decisions of the UHJ. Look the word up and learns what it means.... I do belive > in occational lively consultation with National Spritual Assemblies, and > Local Spritual Assemblies, and ABM/Councelors, as these institutions have > yet come to maturity, and at times benefits from a thorn prick now and > then. I do not believe in the public showing of dirty laundry, or > derideing an instatution, individual in any forum. I believe in > consultation, not backbittine, not bickkering, and not gossip. > > I have been in varrious countries for the past ten years. I lived the > Faith outside of the US culture. First of all, yes there are as many > declarations as claimed. If anything there are more, not less Baha'is. > I also know that for every 10,000 declarations, there are only perhaps > 100 who will make the personal sacrafice to serve the cause in a > demonstrative mannor. This is true of nearly all religions, as we have > yet to assimulate ourselfs truly into a Baha'i Life, collectively. > > I wish you well. > > yvonne I wish you well too. I'm sure you mean well, or think you do.... Please crosspost any response to news.groups where all discussion is also supposed to appear. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 28 07:18:11 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <3316CD03.4256@moa.net> Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 07:18:11 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yvonne Best Subject: Re: Faith on the net References: <3315CE16.74C2@empirenet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 4472 Yvonne Best wrote: > > I see no reason why it is inapropriate to exclude pronography, or other > areas of discussion which may be not in accordance with the life of a > Baha'i, or the Teachings of the Faith. Therefore moderation of the news > group may be needed. In whose opinion? That's crucial question your reasoning ignores. > > As to the discussion of "issues in the Faith" shouldn't those have been > worked our prior to becomming a Baha'i. There just aren't any women on > the UHJ. Where do I get of questioning the wisdom of that. It is > clearly written, and if I am one who desires to reject that particular > teaching, then I am not following the teaching, and guidance of > Baha'u'llah. > I've never even commented on that "issue" as far as I can recall.... > I know that for some it is a cop out to say, so it is written so shall it > be. But, either you believe or you don't, there realy isn't anything > productive in creating strife between people about acceptance and non > acceptance. > Your method of reasoning strikes me as simplistic. > SEX is simple: None except between a husband (man) and wife (woman). > This does not deny that some people are homosexual, or even perminately > single heterosexual. It just limits the activity of sex to the > institution of marriage between one man and one wife. I can be as > homosexual as I may be created, however, being such does not give a > licence to have sexual relations. There is no need to elaborate with > detail or further debate. The stop sign is clear, stop at it or chose > not to. But, don't expect it to be removed because it inconviences you. Another topic unremarked upon by me.... > That same inconvience restraigns others so that we may live in an ever > advancing civilization, and that we may avoid crashing into one another, > spiritualy, and physicaly. > > The Baha'i Faith is not a Democracy. The laws are set forth, the > instatutions are designed to perfection. Unlike your spelling.... The only failures come from > individuals trying to use the Baha'i Faith as their tool for personal > grandstanding, or gain. > Your assumptions, compounded with your simplistic reasoning, ignore the entire context of discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai > The Baha'i Faith is not the most comfortable place to be. Baha'u'llah > even advised a merchant that was a groupie thinking that there would be a > monetary reward in association with the Baha'is to dissassociate him self > for his own benefit, as to be a Baha'i was not a position of comfort, or > material gain. However, I believe it is for me the only place. Absolute > adhearment to the laws and the teachings of the Faith, have been my > solice, protection, and security, as well as my challange, and reward. It's always easier for human beings to turn off what little brain they might have and become a zombie for some cause.... I don't believe that's what the Writings call us to.... Quite the reverse. I > would die before recanting my faith, and I will never be an appologist > for the teachings of Baha'u'llah, the decisions of the UHJ. Look the word up and learns what it means.... I do belive > in occational lively consultation with National Spritual Assemblies, and > Local Spritual Assemblies, and ABM/Councelors, as these institutions have > yet come to maturity, and at times benefits from a thorn prick now and > then. I do not believe in the public showing of dirty laundry, or > derideing an instatution, individual in any forum. I believe in > consultation, not backbittine, not bickkering, and not gossip. > > I have been in varrious countries for the past ten years. I lived the > Faith outside of the US culture. First of all, yes there are as many > declarations as claimed. If anything there are more, not less Baha'is. > I also know that for every 10,000 declarations, there are only perhaps > 100 who will make the personal sacrafice to serve the cause in a > demonstrative mannor. This is true of nearly all religions, as we have > yet to assimulate ourselfs truly into a Baha'i Life, collectively. > > I wish you well. > > yvonne I wish you well too. I'm sure you mean well, or think you do.... Please crosspost any response to news.groups where all discussion is also supposed to appear. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sun Mar 02 19:01:42 1997 Received: from e2.empirenet.com (205.164.88.2) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 02 Mar 1997 04:15:33 -0500 Received: from user49.empirenet.com (user49.empirenet.com [205.164.88.149]) by e2.empirenet.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id BAA23598 for <@moa.net>; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 01:21:06 -0800 Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 01:21:06 -0800 Message-Id: <199703020921.BAA23598@e2.empirenet.com> X-Sender: yvonne@e2.empirenet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: @moa.net From: yvonne@empirenet.com (Yvonne Best) Subject: Re: Faith on the net X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 8235 Thanks for taking your valuable time in reading my email. My purpose in writing to you directly was to share with you my personal opinion that moderation in all things is needed. >Yvonne Best wrote: >> >> I see no reason why it is inapropriate to exclude pronography, or other >> areas of discussion which may be not in accordance with the life of a >> Baha'i, or the Teachings of the Faith. Therefore moderation of the news >> group may be needed. > >In whose opinion? That's crucial question your reasoning ignores. The personal standard I use, When the writings don't spell it out for a simpleton like myself, is: Would I want my child, daughter or son, sister or brother, mother and father, and husband, or wife, be in this situation, read this (writing) or what ever is being evaluated. The same standard applies to them, as would be would I share this _____ with Baha'u'llah or the Master. If the answer is no for any of the above than in MY opinion it should be excluded from the news group. It is not what the topic is..... sometimes it is simply how it is being presented and again the above standard is one I would use. > >> >> As to the discussion of "issues in the Faith" shouldn't those have been >> worked our prior to becomming a Baha'i. There just aren't any women on >> the UHJ. Where do I get of questioning the wisdom of that. It is >> clearly written, and if I am one who desires to reject that particular >> teaching, then I am not following the teaching, and guidance of >> Baha'u'llah. >> > >I've never even commented on that "issue" as far as I can recall.... The topics I brought up in my email were those in the string, some included as examples in your posting or reposting of other's email to you. I do believe, that any topic can be discussed and if the writings are used as a reference point to the discussion the discussion can and would be quite productive. > >> I know that for some it is a cop out to say, so it is written so shall it >> be. But, either you believe or you don't, there realy isn't anything >> productive in creating strife between people about acceptance and non >> acceptance. >> > >Your method of reasoning strikes me as simplistic. Simplistic, perhaps, is there need complex reasoning when topics or issues are detailed so clearly in the Most Holy Book, and the other writings?? There are yes-no answers, there is a host of clear directions for living. There is a right and wrong. I find it has made my life quite content to RUSH to the side that is indicated as being the desired behavior, rather than linger in a gray area, or tread on those few limitations or "wrong" areas. Yes, I stop at all stop signs. > >> SEX is simple: None except between a husband (man) and wife (woman). >> This does not deny that some people are homosexual, or even perminately >> single heterosexual. It just limits the activity of sex to the >> institution of marriage between one man and one wife. I can be as >> homosexual as I may be created, however, being such does not give a >> licence to have sexual relations. There is no need to elaborate with >> detail or further debate. The stop sign is clear, stop at it or chose >> not to. But, don't expect it to be removed because it inconviences you. > >Another topic unremarked upon by me.... > >> That same inconvience restraigns others so that we may live in an ever >> advancing civilization, and that we may avoid crashing into one another, >> spiritualy, and physicaly. >> >> The Baha'i Faith is not a Democracy. The laws are set forth, the >> instatutions are designed to perfection. > >Unlike your spelling.... Pardon my spelling/typing errors, if they offended your eyes and cause you a problem in ascertaining the meaning of my adamantine prattle. I do not run all my email through a spell check. > >The only failures come from >> individuals trying to use the Baha'i Faith as their tool for personal >> grandstanding, or gain. >> > >Your assumptions, compounded with your simplistic reasoning, ignore the >entire context of discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai. I understand from reading the posts that there are those amongst the posters of talk.religion.bahai, that feel that the there should be no censure of what is said, or how it is said. I am do not hold such an opinion. Do continue the discussion regarding the setting of a social standard, censor or what ever you want to call it. I do believe there is a place for a censor in a news group identified as Baha'i. That is my opinion. > >> The Baha'i Faith is not the most comfortable place to be. Baha'u'llah >> even advised a merchant that was a groupie thinking that there would be a >> monetary reward in association with the Baha'is to dissassociate him self >> for his own benefit, as to be a Baha'i was not a position of comfort, or >> material gain. However, I believe it is for me the only place. Absolute >> adhearment to the laws and the teachings of the Faith, have been my >> solice, protection, and security, as well as my challange, and reward. > >It's always easier for human beings to turn off what little brain they >might have and become a zombie for some cause.... I don't believe >that's >what the Writings call us to.... Quite the reverse. I censor what I think all the time... I look forward to the day, that my thoughts are such that no censor is needed. This does not mean in any way that I am a brain dead, airhead. Neigh, I am a content individual, who spends her time in creative ventures, in areas of social and economic development, space travel and payload delivery systems, education, and geriatric care. I also do not waste my time in endless debate, and questioning. If the answer is NO I can handle that and go on. I do not have a need to try to debase the NO, by trying to find a logical... argument for a YES. > > I >> would die before recanting my faith, and I will never be an appologist >> for the teachings of Baha'u'llah, the decisions of the UHJ. > >Look the word up and learns what it means.... Apologist: a person who apologizes. I will not apologize for the Writings and Teachings of Baha'u'llah, in order to make someone more comfortable in being or becoming a Baha'i. I will apologize for not checking my spelling... Or did you mean recanting? Recanting Ones Faith: To take back, to undo, to un-declare, to rescind ones statement of faith, or association. I recall reading that to behave as though you were not a Baha'i after having declared belief in the faith, for your protection from religious persecution, is equal to recanting ones faith. The writings are quite interesting on the topic. I would rather die than to recant my faith. > > I do belive >> in occational lively consultation with National Spritual Assemblies, and >> Local Spritual Assemblies, and ABM/Councelors, as these institutions have >> yet come to maturity, and at times benefits from a thorn prick now and >> then. I do not believe in the public showing of dirty laundry, or >> derideing an instatution, individual in any forum. I believe in >> consultation, not backbittine, not bickkering, and not gossip. >> >> I have been in varrious countries for the past ten years. I lived the >> Faith outside of the US culture. First of all, yes there are as many >> declarations as claimed. If anything there are more, not less Baha'is. >> I also know that for every 10,000 declarations, there are only perhaps >> 100 who will make the personal sacrafice to serve the cause in a >> demonstrative mannor. This is true of nearly all religions, as we have >> yet to assimulate ourselfs truly into a Baha'i Life, collectively. >> >> I wish you well. >> >> yvonne > >I wish you well too. I'm sure you mean well, or think you do.... You said: I'm sure you mean well, or think you do.... Interesting remark... I do, do well thank you. I also mean well. Some would also call me mean as "absolute" as I am. I have no complaints, stress, or lack of contentment. sincerly, Yvonne From - Fri Feb 07 08:26:38 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.55) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:24:57 -0500 Message-ID: <32FB12CB.57AE@moa.net> Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:32:27 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: boatright@cjnetworks.com Subject: forming talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 2923 [Please post or reject this message.] Subject: Re: Forward to soc.religion.bahai Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:41:38 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> To: Samantha BCC: @MOA.net References: 1 Samantha wrote: > > [Please forward this post to soc.religion.bahai after you've read it > yourself.] Forward and post your own messages. This one, with my response. > > Frederick, > > You probably should form your own newsgroup. The mis-directed anger that > you display in soc.religion.bahai is embarrassing to witness. > Now what about my FEELINGS? It's okay for YOU to make blanket statements unsupported by particular references.... > Your claim that the moderators of this newsgroup are too controlling is > unfounded and inaccurate. I believe it's true. Read the censored messages at news.groups There's a newly censored one I'll be posting there this morning.... If you consider the variety of topics > discussed in the space of one week, you'll see that quite a wide > spectrum is covered. And how many censored messages never get through? We wouldn't know that, would we? Like all newsgroups, this one has a few (very few) > parameters that are enforced, simply for the sake of maintaining some > type of order. Not in my experience. They are constantly interfering in communication for all kinds of trivial reasons.... The request that posts relate directly to the Baha'i > Faith is fair, and quite broad, in my opinion. > I've never said otherwise. > There must be some reason that you're attacking the moderators of > soc.relion.bahai, and the Baha'i Faith itself, with such vehemence. First of all, I'm not attacking them. I'm defending my own religious conscience and free speech. Why is it you don't care or have the slightest respect, apparently, for the integrity of my own mind? I'm not attacking the Bahai Faith; they are, in a sense, in my opinion. (I don't want to overemphasize that last statement. I'm not demonizing them. I'm sure they're sincere too in their own beliefs, and I respect that.) The Bahai Writings uphold the individual's expression of conscience. > However, I'd venture to guess that it's nothing Baha'i-related, but > something that you're suffering internally. This newsgroup just happens > to provide a convenient, emotionally-safe venue for you to express your > anger. > Now let me guess. You're a pyschology student? First year? > I hope you find the answers you're looking for. You sound like someone > who's in a lot of pain. > > Samantha I'm sure you mean well or think you do? May God bless you, and help you to mature.... -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 07 06:32:27 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32FB12CB.57AE@moa.net> Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:32:27 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: boatright@cjnetworks.com Subject: forming talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 2923 [Please post or reject this message.] Subject: Re: Forward to soc.religion.bahai Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:41:38 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> To: Samantha BCC: @MOA.net References: 1 Samantha wrote: > > [Please forward this post to soc.religion.bahai after you've read it > yourself.] Forward and post your own messages. This one, with my response. > > Frederick, > > You probably should form your own newsgroup. The mis-directed anger that > you display in soc.religion.bahai is embarrassing to witness. > Now what about my FEELINGS? It's okay for YOU to make blanket statements unsupported by particular references.... > Your claim that the moderators of this newsgroup are too controlling is > unfounded and inaccurate. I believe it's true. Read the censored messages at news.groups There's a newly censored one I'll be posting there this morning.... If you consider the variety of topics > discussed in the space of one week, you'll see that quite a wide > spectrum is covered. And how many censored messages never get through? We wouldn't know that, would we? Like all newsgroups, this one has a few (very few) > parameters that are enforced, simply for the sake of maintaining some > type of order. Not in my experience. They are constantly interfering in communication for all kinds of trivial reasons.... The request that posts relate directly to the Baha'i > Faith is fair, and quite broad, in my opinion. > I've never said otherwise. > There must be some reason that you're attacking the moderators of > soc.relion.bahai, and the Baha'i Faith itself, with such vehemence. First of all, I'm not attacking them. I'm defending my own religious conscience and free speech. Why is it you don't care or have the slightest respect, apparently, for the integrity of my own mind? I'm not attacking the Bahai Faith; they are, in a sense, in my opinion. (I don't want to overemphasize that last statement. I'm not demonizing them. I'm sure they're sincere too in their own beliefs, and I respect that.) The Bahai Writings uphold the individual's expression of conscience. > However, I'd venture to guess that it's nothing Baha'i-related, but > something that you're suffering internally. This newsgroup just happens > to provide a convenient, emotionally-safe venue for you to express your > anger. > Now let me guess. You're a pyschology student? First year? > I hope you find the answers you're looking for. You sound like someone > who's in a lot of pain. > > Samantha I'm sure you mean well or think you do? May God bless you, and help you to mature.... -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 07 08:26:41 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.55) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:27:24 -0500 Message-ID: <32FB135C.182@moa.net> Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:34:52 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: forming talk.religion.bahai References: <"eP0Gb.A.kfB.7QW-y"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 2984 [Please post or reject this messages.] Subject: Re: Forward to soc.religion.bahai Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:41:38 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> To: Samantha BCC: @MOA.net References: 1 Samantha wrote: > > [Please forward this post to soc.religion.bahai after you've read it > yourself.] Forward and post your own messages. This one, with my response. > > Frederick, > > You probably should form your own newsgroup. The mis-directed anger that > you display in soc.religion.bahai is embarrassing to witness. > Now what about my FEELINGS? It's okay for YOU to make blanket statements unsupported by particular references.... > Your claim that the moderators of this newsgroup are too controlling is > unfounded and inaccurate. I believe it's true. Read the censored messages at news.groups There's a newly censored one I'll be posting there this morning.... If you consider the variety of topics > discussed in the space of one week, you'll see that quite a wide > spectrum is covered. And how many censored messages never get through? We wouldn't know that, would we? Like all newsgroups, this one has a few (very few) > parameters that are enforced, simply for the sake of maintaining some > type of order. Not in my experience. They are constantly interfering in communication for all kinds of trivial reasons.... The request that posts relate directly to the Baha'i > Faith is fair, and quite broad, in my opinion. > I've never said otherwise. > There must be some reason that you're attacking the moderators of > soc.relion.bahai, and the Baha'i Faith itself, with such vehemence. First of all, I'm not attacking them. I'm defending my own religious conscience and free speech. Why is it you don't care or have the slightest respect, apparently, for the integrity of my own mind? I'm not attacking the Bahai Faith; they are, in a sense, in my opinion. (I don't want to overemphasize that last statement. I'm not demonizing them. I'm sure they're sincere too in their own beliefs, and I respect that.) The Bahai Writings uphold the individual's expression of conscience. > However, I'd venture to guess that it's nothing Baha'i-related, but > something that you're suffering internally. This newsgroup just happens > to provide a convenient, emotionally-safe venue for you to express your > anger. > Now let me guess. You're a pyschology student? First year? > I hope you find the answers you're looking for. You sound like someone > who's in a lot of pain. > > Samantha I'm sure you mean well or think you do? May God bless you, and help you to mature.... -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 07 16:22:14 1997 Received: from topeka.cjnetworks.com (206.52.158.250) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 11:49:56 -0500 Received: from rick.cjnetworks.com (Port37.cjnetworks.com [206.52.158.47]) by topeka.cjnetworks.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id KAA06818; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:55:11 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199702071655.KAA06818@topeka.cjnetworks.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Rick Boatright" Organization: Topeka Business Computers To: Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:56:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: forming talk.religion.bahai Reply-to: boatright@cjnetworks.com CC: srb-mods@bcca.org, smsmith@mail.cybertrails.com Priority: normal In-reply-to: <32FB12CB.57AE@moa.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.50) X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 3619 Dear Frederick, Again, I have seen a note that Michele felt that the "psychology student, first year" comment was a direct attack and asking you to please either forward this via direct email or edit that line. The post as a whole is of course, entirely within charter and we _very much_ want to post your stuff, but please reffer to Michele's direct comments to you rather than trusting my poor memory. Are you having email trouble? I _know_ I saw this one go out. Rick Boatright > [Please post or reject this message.] > > > Subject: > Re: Forward to soc.religion.bahai > Date: > Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:41:38 -0500 > From: > Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> > To: > Samantha > BCC: > @MOA.net > References: > 1 > > > Samantha wrote: > > > > [Please forward this post to soc.religion.bahai after you've read it > > yourself.] > > Forward and post your own messages. This one, with my response. > > > > > Frederick, > > > > You probably should form your own newsgroup. The mis-directed anger that > > you display in soc.religion.bahai is embarrassing to witness. > > > > Now what about my FEELINGS? It's okay for YOU to make blanket > statements > unsupported by particular references.... > > > Your claim that the moderators of this newsgroup are too controlling is > > unfounded and inaccurate. > > I believe it's true. Read the censored messages at news.groups > There's a newly censored one I'll be posting there this morning.... > > If you consider the variety of topics > > discussed in the space of one week, you'll see that quite a wide > > spectrum is covered. > > And how many censored messages never get through? We wouldn't know > that, would we? > > Like all newsgroups, this one has a few (very few) > > parameters that are enforced, simply for the sake of maintaining some > > type of order. > > Not in my experience. They are constantly interfering in communication > for all kinds of trivial reasons.... > > The request that posts relate directly to the Baha'i > > Faith is fair, and quite broad, in my opinion. > > > > I've never said otherwise. > > > There must be some reason that you're attacking the moderators of > > soc.relion.bahai, and the Baha'i Faith itself, with such vehemence. > > First of all, I'm not attacking them. I'm defending my own religious > conscience and free speech. Why is it you don't care or have the > slightest respect, apparently, for the integrity of my own mind? > I'm not attacking the Bahai Faith; they are, in a sense, in my > opinion. (I don't want to overemphasize that last statement. I'm > not demonizing them. I'm sure they're sincere too in their own > beliefs, and I respect that.) The Bahai Writings uphold the > individual's expression of conscience. > > > However, I'd venture to guess that it's nothing Baha'i-related, but > > something that you're suffering internally. This newsgroup just happens > > to provide a convenient, emotionally-safe venue for you to express your > > anger. > > > > Now let me guess. You're a pyschology student? First year? > > > I hope you find the answers you're looking for. You sound like someone > > who's in a lot of pain. > > > > Samantha > > I'm sure you mean well or think you do? May God bless you, and help > you to mature.... > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > From - Sat Feb 08 16:25:16 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.54) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 08 Feb 1997 07:25:59 -0500 Message-ID: <32FC7299.4F46@moa.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 07:33:29 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: boatright@cjnetworks.com Subject: Re: forming talk.religion.bahai References: <199702071655.KAA06818@topeka.cjnetworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 4203 Samantha, Michele, or someone has asked for my retractions.... I've posted the message to news.groups since it's another censored one.... As I mentioned to her, she, they, decided to post the other person's original nasty message that hurts my little feelings.... but that's okay.... no censorship or unfairness involved.... -- Rick Boatright wrote: > > Dear Frederick, > > Again, I have seen a note that Michele felt that the "psychology > student, first year" comment was a direct attack and asking you to > please either forward this via direct email or edit that line. The > post as a whole is of course, entirely within charter and we _very > much_ want to post your stuff, but please reffer to Michele's direct > comments to you rather than trusting my poor memory. > > Are you having email trouble? I _know_ I saw this one go out. > > Rick Boatright > > > [Please post or reject this message.] > > > > > > Subject: > > Re: Forward to soc.religion.bahai > > Date: > > Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:41:38 -0500 > > From: > > Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> > > To: > > Samantha > > BCC: > > @MOA.net > > References: > > 1 > > > > > > Samantha wrote: > > > > > > [Please forward this post to soc.religion.bahai after you've read it > > > yourself.] > > > > Forward and post your own messages. This one, with my response. > > > > > > > > Frederick, > > > > > > You probably should form your own newsgroup. The mis-directed anger that > > > you display in soc.religion.bahai is embarrassing to witness. > > > > > > > Now what about my FEELINGS? It's okay for YOU to make blanket > > statements > > unsupported by particular references.... > > > > > Your claim that the moderators of this newsgroup are too controlling is > > > unfounded and inaccurate. > > > > I believe it's true. Read the censored messages at news.groups > > There's a newly censored one I'll be posting there this morning.... > > > > If you consider the variety of topics > > > discussed in the space of one week, you'll see that quite a wide > > > spectrum is covered. > > > > And how many censored messages never get through? We wouldn't know > > that, would we? > > > > Like all newsgroups, this one has a few (very few) > > > parameters that are enforced, simply for the sake of maintaining some > > > type of order. > > > > Not in my experience. They are constantly interfering in communication > > for all kinds of trivial reasons.... > > > > The request that posts relate directly to the Baha'i > > > Faith is fair, and quite broad, in my opinion. > > > > > > > I've never said otherwise. > > > > > There must be some reason that you're attacking the moderators of > > > soc.relion.bahai, and the Baha'i Faith itself, with such vehemence. > > > > First of all, I'm not attacking them. I'm defending my own religious > > conscience and free speech. Why is it you don't care or have the > > slightest respect, apparently, for the integrity of my own mind? > > I'm not attacking the Bahai Faith; they are, in a sense, in my > > opinion. (I don't want to overemphasize that last statement. I'm > > not demonizing them. I'm sure they're sincere too in their own > > beliefs, and I respect that.) The Bahai Writings uphold the > > individual's expression of conscience. > > > > > However, I'd venture to guess that it's nothing Baha'i-related, but > > > something that you're suffering internally. This newsgroup just happens > > > to provide a convenient, emotionally-safe venue for you to express your > > > anger. > > > > > > > Now let me guess. You're a pyschology student? First year? > > > > > I hope you find the answers you're looking for. You sound like someone > > > who's in a lot of pain. > > > > > > Samantha > > > > I'm sure you mean well or think you do? May God bless you, and help > > you to mature.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sat Feb 08 07:33:29 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32FC7299.4F46@moa.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 07:33:29 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: boatright@cjnetworks.com Subject: Re: forming talk.religion.bahai References: <199702071655.KAA06818@topeka.cjnetworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 4205 Samantha, Michele, or someone has asked for my retractions.... I've posted the message to news.groups since it's another censored one.... As I mentioned to her, she, they, decided to post the other person's original nasty message that hurts my little feelings.... but that's okay.... no censorship or unfairness involved.... -- Rick Boatright wrote: > > Dear Frederick, > > Again, I have seen a note that Michele felt that the "psychology > student, first year" comment was a direct attack and asking you to > please either forward this via direct email or edit that line. The > post as a whole is of course, entirely within charter and we _very > much_ want to post your stuff, but please reffer to Michele's direct > comments to you rather than trusting my poor memory. > > Are you having email trouble? I _know_ I saw this one go out. > > Rick Boatright > > > [Please post or reject this message.] > > > > > > Subject: > > Re: Forward to soc.religion.bahai > > Date: > > Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:41:38 -0500 > > From: > > Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> > > To: > > Samantha > > BCC: > > @MOA.net > > References: > > 1 > > > > > > Samantha wrote: > > > > > > [Please forward this post to soc.religion.bahai after you've read it > > > yourself.] > > > > Forward and post your own messages. This one, with my response. > > > > > > > > Frederick, > > > > > > You probably should form your own newsgroup. The mis-directed anger that > > > you display in soc.religion.bahai is embarrassing to witness. > > > > > > > Now what about my FEELINGS? It's okay for YOU to make blanket > > statements > > unsupported by particular references.... > > > > > Your claim that the moderators of this newsgroup are too controlling is > > > unfounded and inaccurate. > > > > I believe it's true. Read the censored messages at news.groups > > There's a newly censored one I'll be posting there this morning.... > > > > If you consider the variety of topics > > > discussed in the space of one week, you'll see that quite a wide > > > spectrum is covered. > > > > And how many censored messages never get through? We wouldn't know > > that, would we? > > > > Like all newsgroups, this one has a few (very few) > > > parameters that are enforced, simply for the sake of maintaining some > > > type of order. > > > > Not in my experience. They are constantly interfering in communication > > for all kinds of trivial reasons.... > > > > The request that posts relate directly to the Baha'i > > > Faith is fair, and quite broad, in my opinion. > > > > > > > I've never said otherwise. > > > > > There must be some reason that you're attacking the moderators of > > > soc.relion.bahai, and the Baha'i Faith itself, with such vehemence. > > > > First of all, I'm not attacking them. I'm defending my own religious > > conscience and free speech. Why is it you don't care or have the > > slightest respect, apparently, for the integrity of my own mind? > > I'm not attacking the Bahai Faith; they are, in a sense, in my > > opinion. (I don't want to overemphasize that last statement. I'm > > not demonizing them. I'm sure they're sincere too in their own > > beliefs, and I respect that.) The Bahai Writings uphold the > > individual's expression of conscience. > > > > > However, I'd venture to guess that it's nothing Baha'i-related, but > > > something that you're suffering internally. This newsgroup just happens > > > to provide a convenient, emotionally-safe venue for you to express your > > > anger. > > > > > > > Now let me guess. You're a pyschology student? First year? > > > > > I hope you find the answers you're looking for. You sound like someone > > > who's in a lot of pain. > > > > > > Samantha > > > > I'm sure you mean well or think you do? May God bless you, and help > > you to mature.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 07 08:26:37 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.55) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:20:46 -0500 Message-ID: <32FB11CF.5A3D@moa.net> Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:28:15 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: news.groups To: decar@earthlink.net Subject: Re: Rationale: talk.religion.bahai References: <"eP0Gb.A.kfB.7QW-y"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 872 Dr. Hops wrote: > > In Response To: Baha'is do not have ultimate control over the destiny > of the Faith................. [clip] ...I listen and watch the media and to me, it's amazing that we > still are not considered a main stream religion. It doesn't surprise me at all. Indeed, if the Bahai Faith were considered a "main stream religion"--that would surprise me.... We are looked at in so > many ways other than what and who we are. I believe we should consider much more how we look as a religion to other people and face the fact that it's often not an attractive sight...in ways we don't commonly consider. As a religion, it's possible many people see us much more clearly than we see ourselves....or want to see ourselves.... [clip] > Debra/Los Angeles > -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sat Feb 08 07:18:13 1997 Received: from cliff.cybertrails.com (205.180.32.134) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 08 Feb 1997 00:10:32 -0500 Message-ID: Received: from smsmith ([205.180.50.86]) by cliff.cybertrails.com (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with SMTP id AAA160; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 22:16:19 -0700 Comments: Authenticated sender is From: smsmith@mail.cybertrails.com To: @moa.net Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 22:20:56 +0000 Subject: Re: forming talk.religion.bahai (Frederick Glaysher) CC: srb-mods@bcca.org Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42) X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 4865 Mr. Glaysher, Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. It is being returned with the request that you tone down the level of sarcasm. Specifically, the comments: "They are constantly interfering in communication for all kinds of trivial reasons..." and "Why it is that you don't care or have the lightest respect, apparently, for..." and "Now let me guess. You're a psychology student? First year?" and last, "May God bless you and help you to mature." In regards to your first comment, the moderators of soc.religion.bahai follow the Charter of srb without trivializations. Rejections or requests for changes are made only when a submission violates this Charter. It is not the place of the moderators to do anything more or less than to uphold Charter, out of considration for all members of this newsgroup. Each submission is reviewed on individual merit without regard to the sender. Regarding your second comment, this takes on the tone of personal attack against the person you are responding to. Perhaps simply rephrasing to say "I feel as if you do not respect the integrity of my mind..." would remove the presumtive nature of this statement. The third and the last comments referred to come across as pure sarcasm. Is this what you intended? Sincerely, S. Michele Smith co-moderator, soc.religion.bahai [respond to: srb-mods@bcca.org] > To: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net > From: FG <@moa.net> > Subject: Re: forming talk.religion.bahai (Frederick Glaysher) > Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 08:03:17 -0500 > Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. > Reply-to: @moa.net > Cc: SAMANTHA@MS.PALS.MSUS.EDU > subject: > Re: Forward to soc.religion.bahai > Date: > Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:41:38 -0500 > From: > Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> > To: > Samantha > BCC: > @MOA.net > References: > 1 > > > Samantha wrote: > > > > [Please forward this post to soc.religion.bahai after you've read it > > yourself.] > > Forward and post your own messages. This one, with my response. > > > > > Frederick, > > > > You probably should form your own newsgroup. The mis-directed anger that > > you display in soc.religion.bahai is embarrassing to witness. > > > > Now what about my FEELINGS? It's okay for YOU to make blanket > statements > unsupported by particular references.... > > > Your claim that the moderators of this newsgroup are too controlling is > > unfounded and inaccurate. > > I believe it's true. Read the censored messages at news.groups > There's a newly censored one I'll be posting there this morning.... > > If you consider the variety of topics > > discussed in the space of one week, you'll see that quite a wide > > spectrum is covered. > > And how many censored messages never get through? We wouldn't know > that, would we? > > Like all newsgroups, this one has a few (very few) > > parameters that are enforced, simply for the sake of maintaining some > > type of order. > > Not in my experience. They are constantly interfering in communication > for all kinds of trivial reasons.... > > The request that posts relate directly to the Baha'i > > Faith is fair, and quite broad, in my opinion. > > > > I've never said otherwise. > > > There must be some reason that you're attacking the moderators of > > soc.relion.bahai, and the Baha'i Faith itself, with such vehemence. > > First of all, I'm not attacking them. I'm defending my own religious > conscience and free speech. Why is it you don't care or have the > slightest respect, apparently, for the integrity of my own mind? > I'm not attacking the Bahai Faith; they are, in a sense, in my > opinion. (I don't want to overemphasize that last statement. I'm > not demonizing them. I'm sure they're sincere too in their own > beliefs, and I respect that.) The Bahai Writings uphold the > individual's expression of conscience. > > > However, I'd venture to guess that it's nothing Baha'i-related, but > > something that you're suffering internally. This newsgroup just happens > > to provide a convenient, emotionally-safe venue for you to express your > > anger. > > > > Now let me guess. You're a pyschology student? First year? > > > I hope you find the answers you're looking for. You sound like someone > > who's in a lot of pain. > > > > Samantha > > I'm sure you mean well or think you do? May God bless you, and help > you to mature.... > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > From - Sat Feb 08 07:23:13 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.54) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 08 Feb 1997 07:15:32 -0500 Message-ID: <32FC7026.4BAC@moa.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 07:23:02 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: smsmith@mail.cybertrails.com Subject: Re: forming talk.religion.bahai (Frederick Glaysher) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 5399 I'm not censoring anything here for you people. You posted her nasty little message without worrying about my feelings.... THAT'S okay, is it? Oh, and you don't CENSOR or manipulate discussion on srb! What a farce. ------- smsmith@mail.cybertrails.com wrote: > > Mr. Glaysher, > > Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. > > It is being returned with the request that you tone down the level of > sarcasm. Specifically, the comments: "They are constantly interfering > in communication for all kinds of trivial reasons..." and "Why it is > that you don't care or have the lightest respect, apparently, for..." > and "Now let me guess. You're a psychology student? First year?" and > last, "May God bless you and help you to mature." > > In regards to your first comment, the moderators of > soc.religion.bahai follow the Charter of srb without trivializations. > Rejections or requests for changes are made only when a submission > violates this Charter. It is not the place of the moderators to do > anything more or less than to uphold Charter, out of considration for > all members of this newsgroup. Each submission is reviewed on > individual merit without regard to the sender. > > Regarding your second comment, this takes on the tone of personal > attack against the person you are responding to. Perhaps simply > rephrasing to say "I feel as if you do not respect the integrity of > my mind..." would remove the presumtive nature of this statement. > > The third and the last comments referred to come across as pure > sarcasm. Is this what you intended? > > Sincerely, > S. Michele Smith > co-moderator, soc.religion.bahai > [respond to: srb-mods@bcca.org] > > > To: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net > > From: FG <@moa.net> > > Subject: Re: forming talk.religion.bahai (Frederick Glaysher) > > Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 08:03:17 -0500 > > Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. > > Reply-to: @moa.net > > Cc: SAMANTHA@MS.PALS.MSUS.EDU > > > subject: > > Re: Forward to soc.religion.bahai > > Date: > > Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:41:38 -0500 > > From: > > Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> > > To: > > Samantha > > BCC: > > @MOA.net > > References: > > 1 > > > > > > Samantha wrote: > > > > > > [Please forward this post to soc.religion.bahai after you've read it > > > yourself.] > > > > Forward and post your own messages. This one, with my response. > > > > > > > > Frederick, > > > > > > You probably should form your own newsgroup. The mis-directed anger that > > > you display in soc.religion.bahai is embarrassing to witness. > > > > > > > Now what about my FEELINGS? It's okay for YOU to make blanket > > statements > > unsupported by particular references.... > > > > > Your claim that the moderators of this newsgroup are too controlling is > > > unfounded and inaccurate. > > > > I believe it's true. Read the censored messages at news.groups > > There's a newly censored one I'll be posting there this morning.... > > > > If you consider the variety of topics > > > discussed in the space of one week, you'll see that quite a wide > > > spectrum is covered. > > > > And how many censored messages never get through? We wouldn't know > > that, would we? > > > > Like all newsgroups, this one has a few (very few) > > > parameters that are enforced, simply for the sake of maintaining some > > > type of order. > > > > Not in my experience. They are constantly interfering in communication > > for all kinds of trivial reasons.... > > > > The request that posts relate directly to the Baha'i > > > Faith is fair, and quite broad, in my opinion. > > > > > > > I've never said otherwise. > > > > > There must be some reason that you're attacking the moderators of > > > soc.relion.bahai, and the Baha'i Faith itself, with such vehemence. > > > > First of all, I'm not attacking them. I'm defending my own religious > > conscience and free speech. Why is it you don't care or have the > > slightest respect, apparently, for the integrity of my own mind? > > I'm not attacking the Bahai Faith; they are, in a sense, in my > > opinion. (I don't want to overemphasize that last statement. I'm > > not demonizing them. I'm sure they're sincere too in their own > > beliefs, and I respect that.) The Bahai Writings uphold the > > individual's expression of conscience. > > > > > However, I'd venture to guess that it's nothing Baha'i-related, but > > > something that you're suffering internally. This newsgroup just happens > > > to provide a convenient, emotionally-safe venue for you to express your > > > anger. > > > > > > > Now let me guess. You're a pyschology student? First year? > > > > > I hope you find the answers you're looking for. You sound like someone > > > who's in a lot of pain. > > > > > > Samantha > > > > I'm sure you mean well or think you do? May God bless you, and help > > you to mature.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sat Feb 08 07:23:02 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32FC7026.4BAC@moa.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 07:23:02 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: smsmith@mail.cybertrails.com Subject: Re: forming talk.religion.bahai (Frederick Glaysher) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 5401 I'm not censoring anything here for you people. You posted her nasty little message without worrying about my feelings.... THAT'S okay, is it? Oh, and you don't CENSOR or manipulate discussion on srb! What a farce. ------- smsmith@mail.cybertrails.com wrote: > > Mr. Glaysher, > > Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. > > It is being returned with the request that you tone down the level of > sarcasm. Specifically, the comments: "They are constantly interfering > in communication for all kinds of trivial reasons..." and "Why it is > that you don't care or have the lightest respect, apparently, for..." > and "Now let me guess. You're a psychology student? First year?" and > last, "May God bless you and help you to mature." > > In regards to your first comment, the moderators of > soc.religion.bahai follow the Charter of srb without trivializations. > Rejections or requests for changes are made only when a submission > violates this Charter. It is not the place of the moderators to do > anything more or less than to uphold Charter, out of considration for > all members of this newsgroup. Each submission is reviewed on > individual merit without regard to the sender. > > Regarding your second comment, this takes on the tone of personal > attack against the person you are responding to. Perhaps simply > rephrasing to say "I feel as if you do not respect the integrity of > my mind..." would remove the presumtive nature of this statement. > > The third and the last comments referred to come across as pure > sarcasm. Is this what you intended? > > Sincerely, > S. Michele Smith > co-moderator, soc.religion.bahai > [respond to: srb-mods@bcca.org] > > > To: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net > > From: FG <@moa.net> > > Subject: Re: forming talk.religion.bahai (Frederick Glaysher) > > Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 08:03:17 -0500 > > Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. > > Reply-to: @moa.net > > Cc: SAMANTHA@MS.PALS.MSUS.EDU > > > subject: > > Re: Forward to soc.religion.bahai > > Date: > > Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:41:38 -0500 > > From: > > Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> > > To: > > Samantha > > BCC: > > @MOA.net > > References: > > 1 > > > > > > Samantha wrote: > > > > > > [Please forward this post to soc.religion.bahai after you've read it > > > yourself.] > > > > Forward and post your own messages. This one, with my response. > > > > > > > > Frederick, > > > > > > You probably should form your own newsgroup. The mis-directed anger that > > > you display in soc.religion.bahai is embarrassing to witness. > > > > > > > Now what about my FEELINGS? It's okay for YOU to make blanket > > statements > > unsupported by particular references.... > > > > > Your claim that the moderators of this newsgroup are too controlling is > > > unfounded and inaccurate. > > > > I believe it's true. Read the censored messages at news.groups > > There's a newly censored one I'll be posting there this morning.... > > > > If you consider the variety of topics > > > discussed in the space of one week, you'll see that quite a wide > > > spectrum is covered. > > > > And how many censored messages never get through? We wouldn't know > > that, would we? > > > > Like all newsgroups, this one has a few (very few) > > > parameters that are enforced, simply for the sake of maintaining some > > > type of order. > > > > Not in my experience. They are constantly interfering in communication > > for all kinds of trivial reasons.... > > > > The request that posts relate directly to the Baha'i > > > Faith is fair, and quite broad, in my opinion. > > > > > > > I've never said otherwise. > > > > > There must be some reason that you're attacking the moderators of > > > soc.relion.bahai, and the Baha'i Faith itself, with such vehemence. > > > > First of all, I'm not attacking them. I'm defending my own religious > > conscience and free speech. Why is it you don't care or have the > > slightest respect, apparently, for the integrity of my own mind? > > I'm not attacking the Bahai Faith; they are, in a sense, in my > > opinion. (I don't want to overemphasize that last statement. I'm > > not demonizing them. I'm sure they're sincere too in their own > > beliefs, and I respect that.) The Bahai Writings uphold the > > individual's expression of conscience. > > > > > However, I'd venture to guess that it's nothing Baha'i-related, but > > > something that you're suffering internally. This newsgroup just happens > > > to provide a convenient, emotionally-safe venue for you to express your > > > anger. > > > > > > > Now let me guess. You're a pyschology student? First year? > > > > > I hope you find the answers you're looking for. You sound like someone > > > who's in a lot of pain. > > > > > > Samantha > > > > I'm sure you mean well or think you do? May God bless you, and help > > you to mature.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Wed Feb 05 07:05:24 1997 Received: from mail.mankato.msus.edu (134.29.1.12) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 04 Feb 1997 17:14:17 -0500 Received: from pals.mankato.msus.edu by mail.mankato.msus.edu with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #5) id m0vrt9j-000L81C; Tue, 4 Feb 97 16:15 CST Message-ID: <32F7D214.319D@ms.pals.msus.edu> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 16:19:32 -0800 From: Samantha X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: @MOA.net CC: samantha@ms.pals.msus Subject: Forward to soc.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1176 [Please forward this post to soc.religion.bahai after you've read it yourself.] Frederick, You probably should form your own newsgroup. The mis-directed anger that you display in soc.religion.bahai is embarrassing to witness. Your claim that the moderators of this newsgroup are too controlling is unfounded and inaccurate. If you consider the variety of topics discussed in the space of one week, you'll see that quite a wide spectrum is covered. Like all newsgroups, this one has a few (very few) parameters that are enforced, simply for the sake of maintaining some type of order. The request that posts relate directly to the Baha'i Faith is fair, and quite broad, in my opinion. There must be some reason that you're attacking the moderators of soc.relion.bahai, and the Baha'i Faith itself, with such vehemence. However, I'd venture to guess that it's nothing Baha'i-related, but something that you're suffering internally. This newsgroup just happens to provide a convenient, emotionally-safe venue for you to express your anger. I hope you find the answers you're looking for. You sound like someone who's in a lot of pain. Samantha From - Wed Feb 05 18:01:58 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.56) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:34:09 -0500 Message-ID: <32F88002.2942@moa.net> Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:41:38 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Samantha Subject: Re: Forward to soc.religion.bahai References: <32F7D214.319D@ms.pals.msus.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 2550 Samantha wrote: > > [Please forward this post to soc.religion.bahai after you've read it > yourself.] Forward and post your own messages. This one, with my response. > > Frederick, > > You probably should form your own newsgroup. The mis-directed anger that > you display in soc.religion.bahai is embarrassing to witness. > Now what about my FEELINGS? It's okay for YOU to make blanket statements unsupported by particular references.... > Your claim that the moderators of this newsgroup are too controlling is > unfounded and inaccurate. I believe it's true. Read the censored messages at news.groups There's a newly censored one I'll be posting there this morning.... If you consider the variety of topics > discussed in the space of one week, you'll see that quite a wide > spectrum is covered. And how many censored messages never get through? We wouldn't know that, would we? Like all newsgroups, this one has a few (very few) > parameters that are enforced, simply for the sake of maintaining some > type of order. Not in my experience. They are constantly interfering in communication for all kinds of trivial reasons.... The request that posts relate directly to the Baha'i > Faith is fair, and quite broad, in my opinion. > I've never said otherwise. > There must be some reason that you're attacking the moderators of > soc.relion.bahai, and the Baha'i Faith itself, with such vehemence. First of all, I'm not attacking them. I'm defending my own religious conscience and free speech. Why is it you don't care or have the slightest respect, apparently, for the integrity of my own mind? I'm not attacking the Bahai Faith; they are, in a sense, in my opinion. (I don't want to overemphasize that last statement. I'm not demonizing them. I'm sure they're sincere too in their own beliefs, and I respect that.) The Bahai Writings uphold the individual's expression of conscience. > However, I'd venture to guess that it's nothing Baha'i-related, but > something that you're suffering internally. This newsgroup just happens > to provide a convenient, emotionally-safe venue for you to express your > anger. > Now let me guess. You're a pyschology student? First year? > I hope you find the answers you're looking for. You sound like someone > who's in a lot of pain. > > Samantha I'm sure you mean well or think you do? May God bless you, and help you to mature.... -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Wed Feb 05 07:41:38 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32F88002.2942@moa.net> Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:41:38 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Samantha Subject: Re: Forward to soc.religion.bahai References: <32F7D214.319D@ms.pals.msus.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 2552 Samantha wrote: > > [Please forward this post to soc.religion.bahai after you've read it > yourself.] Forward and post your own messages. This one, with my response. > > Frederick, > > You probably should form your own newsgroup. The mis-directed anger that > you display in soc.religion.bahai is embarrassing to witness. > Now what about my FEELINGS? It's okay for YOU to make blanket statements unsupported by particular references.... > Your claim that the moderators of this newsgroup are too controlling is > unfounded and inaccurate. I believe it's true. Read the censored messages at news.groups There's a newly censored one I'll be posting there this morning.... If you consider the variety of topics > discussed in the space of one week, you'll see that quite a wide > spectrum is covered. And how many censored messages never get through? We wouldn't know that, would we? Like all newsgroups, this one has a few (very few) > parameters that are enforced, simply for the sake of maintaining some > type of order. Not in my experience. They are constantly interfering in communication for all kinds of trivial reasons.... The request that posts relate directly to the Baha'i > Faith is fair, and quite broad, in my opinion. > I've never said otherwise. > There must be some reason that you're attacking the moderators of > soc.relion.bahai, and the Baha'i Faith itself, with such vehemence. First of all, I'm not attacking them. I'm defending my own religious conscience and free speech. Why is it you don't care or have the slightest respect, apparently, for the integrity of my own mind? I'm not attacking the Bahai Faith; they are, in a sense, in my opinion. (I don't want to overemphasize that last statement. I'm not demonizing them. I'm sure they're sincere too in their own beliefs, and I respect that.) The Bahai Writings uphold the individual's expression of conscience. > However, I'd venture to guess that it's nothing Baha'i-related, but > something that you're suffering internally. This newsgroup just happens > to provide a convenient, emotionally-safe venue for you to express your > anger. > Now let me guess. You're a pyschology student? First year? > I hope you find the answers you're looking for. You sound like someone > who's in a lot of pain. > > Samantha I'm sure you mean well or think you do? May God bless you, and help you to mature.... -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Thu Apr 10 08:18:32 1997 >From mbkafes@bestweb.net Thu Mar 27 07:04:19 1997 Received: from jmkafes (dialin-26.croton.bestweb.net [208.197.0.127]) by okeefe.bestweb.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA09693 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 10:04:18 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199703271504.KAA09693@okeefe.bestweb.net> From: "Milissa Boyer Kafes" To: "Fred Glaysher" Subject: Fw: Talk.religion.bahai Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 10:05:15 -0500 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1637 Hi Fred-- I've read with horror and disgust the results of the no vote campaign. I just wanted to forward to you the complaint I sent to the moderators of the voting. I'll be praying that things work out, as I would really like to have an independent forum for Baha'is Thanks for hanging in there. Baha'i love Milissa Boyer Kafes mbkafes@bestweb.net ---------- > From: Milissa Boyer Kafes > To: bill@netagw.com; cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu; jjd@primenet.com > Subject: Talk.religion.bahai > Date: Thursday, March 27, 1997 9:56 AM > > Dear Sirs--- > > I would like to lodge a formal complaint about the voting for the newsgroup > talk.religion.bahai. > There was a large scale, successful campaign on several Bahai lists for > people to vote no. Many Baha'is wanted people to vote no, even though they > had no intention of ever using the newsgroup, simply for ideological > reasons. > > Given that well over the required 100 people did vote yes and will use the > newsgroup if created, please reconsider allowing this newsgroup to be > created. Please give Baha'is who want true freedom of speech a public > forum. > > Baha'u'llah, the Prophet-Founder of our religion, stated that independent > investigation of truth is a God-given right. Only a true, open forum will > give us this right and make it truly meaningful. I do not, for the life of > me, understand the actions of some of my fellow-believers in this no > campaign, and I sincerely believe that Baha'u'llah would not approve. > > Sincerely, > Milissa Boyer Kafes > mbkafes@bestweb.net From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:32 1997 Received: from f16.hotmail.com (207.82.250.27) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:15:21 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f16.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA17722; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:20:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:20:59 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231320.FAA17722@f16.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:20:59 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: [auto-reply] Re: Posting error: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 3175 >Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 18:00:46 -0500 (EST) >From: newgroups-request@ten.uu.net (David C Lawrence) >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: [auto-reply] Re: Posting error: talk.religion.bahai >This is an automatically generated reply to a message from you which >landed in my mailbox. Auto-replies for moderators-request or >group-advice mail will be sent for every message. Others will only be >sent once per week to any given address. > >SPECIAL NOTE: as announced in news.announce.newgroups, the Big 8 group >creation process is on winter holiday. No proposals are being >accepted from 21 December until 6 January 1997; your message is being >returned in full below. If this was a formal proposal, please >resubmit it at that time. If it was not, perhaps the rest of the >usual form letter here will help you with whatever you were trying to >accomplish. (I am aware that it is now after 6 January; submissions >should be accepted soon.) > >Your message appears to relate to news.announce.newgroups, either as a >submission for publication or as a question. Please note, messages >which are not formal proposals (as defined in How to Format and Submit >a New Group Proposal, posted regularly in news.announce.newgroups) >will likely get no further reply than this message. > >If it is a formal group proposal, be assured that it should get out >the next time the queue is able to be run. If you see a flurry there >of RFD and/or CFV postings (2nd CFVs and RESULTs are handled >separately) and your article does not come through in that batch, wait >at least a few hours for it then mail me asking what happened. It is >possible that your proposal might be held a little longer to discuss >it before it appears in news.announce.newgroups, in which case someone >will be contacting you about the pertinent issues. > >Questions about group creation will likely be redirected to >group-mentors@acpub.duke.edu, a group of volunteers who help people >with the group creation process. If your message is about newsgroups >in hierarchies other than comp, humanities, misc, news, rec, sci, soc >or talk, then news.announce.newgroups is not involved in handling it. >Local hierarchy issues are best dealt with by way of your local news >administrators. alt groups are a bit disorganised, but their creation >is discussed in alt.config, where a periodic posting describing how to >do it is also posted. Questions about alt can be directed to Ellen >Keyne Seebacher if you really want or >need to do it via mail. > >Disclaimer: While I am grateful to the support of UUNET Technologies >for operating news.announce.newgroups, it is not part of my job >description with them and hence not what I am paid to do. Your >patience and understanding for the occasional long delay in handling >your message is greatly appreciated. > >David Lawrence, moderator, news.announce.newgroups > >---#@!~:207.82.250.115:d0: --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:36 1997 Received: from f12.hotmail.com (207.82.250.23) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:17:16 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f12.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA11146; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:22:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:22:54 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231322.FAA11146@f12.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:22:53 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: CFV Rough Draft Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4647 >Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 17:54:01 -0500 >From: FG <@moa.net> >To: @moa.net >CC: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: CFV Rough Draft >RFD: talk.religion.bahai > >I have participated in the required RFD discussion. No changes have >been made in the text of the RFD. Response to the RFD usually fell >into two categories, for and against. One person hadn't made up his >mind. > >Several respondents were against the creation of an unmoderated >newsgroup simply because it was either about a religion, and people >always disagree about religion, or because it was unmoderated and >would lead to flame wars. I responded that because people do >disagree, from time to time, that alone is no valid reason for >opposing the creation of an unmoderated forum. I emphasized that >people must be responsible for the expression of their own ideas >in a respectful fashion. I pointed out that I believe >Soc.religion.bahai is heavily censored. My motive for proposing >this group is to prevent others from squelching the expression of >free religious conscience and belief. I don't advocate flame wars, >nor do I advocate censorship. While there may be times in which >individuals will go too far, they will at least have the opportunity >to express their opinions. Others will have the opportunity to hear >them, learn from them, disagree, tell them why, and so. To me, it >seems the essence of human communication. > >Much discussion revolved around the issue >to Bahais of covenant breakers, i.e., people who have been declared >so by the Bahai administration. Soc.religion.bahai is moderated and >apparently bans these people from posting to it. The concern was >that without a moderator, who would ban them? > >To me this issue is not a valid one for preventing the creation of >an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith. I suggested repeatedly >that someone can speak up and tell them they're wrong or someone in >the Bahai administration appointed to that role can. That seems >reasonable to me. Insisting that only moderated or censored newsgroups >are appropriate to the Bahai Faith seems to miss the freedom of the >human conscience most religions respect. > >Others felt there are too many newsgroups now or Bahais should use >soc.religion.misc for unmoderated discussion. Neither holds water in >my opinion because talk.religion.bahai would serve a real need for >the internet community, Bahai or not, and soc.religion.misc is just >too miscellaneous and not focused on the Bahai Faith, which is what >I'm suggesting. > >No one suggested changes in the RFD. Discussion has all been around >the above issues. Several people supported it as much needed and >offering Bahais some place else to post to than the moderated newgroup >soc.religion.bahai. Others seemed to agree that censorship exists on >soc.religion.bahai. > >talk.religion.bahaiunmoderated > >Proponent: Frederick Glaysher @MOA.net > OR FG@hotmail.com > >Mentor: Christopher Stonecbstone@phoenix.Princeton.EDU > >CFV DISTRIBUTION: > >Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,soc.religion.bahai, >soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human, >talk.religion.misc > >I believe they are all moderated except the last one. > >Pointers will appear in the following newsgroups: >soc.religion.unitarian-univ,soc.religion.eastern,soc.religion.gnosis, >soc.religion.hindu,soc.religion.paganism,soc.religion.quaker, >soc.religion.sikhism,soc.religion.vaishnava,soc.atheism, >talk.religion.buddhism,talk.religion.newage > >and the following mailing lists: > >Talisman@umich.edu >Subscribe via: jsgreen@umich.edu >List honors Reply-To: headers yes >List allows non-members to post messages yes > >Irfan@umich.edu >Subscribe via" jrcole@umich.edu >List honors Reply-To: headers yes >List allows non-members to post messages yes > >CHARTER & RATIONALE: Talk.Religion.Bahai > >All newsgroups given to the discussion of the Bahai Faith are >moderated. >A need for an unmoderated forum exists. This proposed newsgroup would >meet that need. All topics or ideas relevant to the Bahai Faith, its >history, teachings, theology, and so on would be appropriate areas for >discussion. > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >Rochester Hills, Michigan USA >FG@hotmail.com >@MOA.net --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:34 1997 Received: from f27.hotmail.com (207.82.250.38) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:16:31 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f27.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA12281; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:22:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:22:09 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231322.FAA12281@f27.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:22:09 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: did it Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 337 >Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:53:57 -0500 (EST) >From: Harris632@aol.com >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: did it >did this group get established? --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:18 1997 Received: from f9.hotmail.com (207.82.250.20) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:08:21 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f9.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA05875; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:13:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:13:57 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231313.FAA05875@f9.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:13:57 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: my earlier email being copied to you Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 3707 >Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 23:11:42 -0500 (EST) >From: EdP94@aol.com >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: my earlier email being copied to you >Fred, >What follows is the text of the earlier email I promised to you. I provide >it to you as a courtesy, since you appear not to have seen it when it >appeared in Baha'i-Discuss. I hope it provides you the information you >wanted. >Regards, >Ed Price >edp94@aol.com >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >------------------ >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >------------------ >Concerning the proposed unmoderated newsgroup, I wrote this previously: > > > I am in favor of this group, however, only on the condition that > > covenant-breakers and their material would be excluded from the forum. > The > > Faith is clear as can be that we are to separate ourselves from these >people. > > They on the other hand, do not respect our laws or our wishes. Since the > > issue has come up in the past on other Baha'i forums and the answer has >been > > that they cannot be excluded because our charter doesn't let us, since >this > > group is forming its charter now, this seems the best time to implement >all > > necessary precautions. > >I have read the remarks of others, who are largely in opposition to this >proposal. Each one makes a number of persuasive points, and I find myself >being influenced by these more experienced voices. > >Here is one of these voices. Referring to my commnets above... ><< Someone here obviously missed the fact that said group would be >unmoderated. This means that not only can covenant-breaker material be >posted -- and probably will be :-( - but that there won't be anyone to >prevent it. >> > >I guess I am unclear what unmoderated really means. It never crossed my mind >that there is such a thing as being absolutely unmoderated. I assumed that >even an umoderated list would have someone in control. Otherwise, what would >prevent an unmoderated forum from becoming a vehicle for excessive profanity, >pornography, or criminal activity. Also, who would hold legal responsibility >for the forum? Why would anyone agree to host such a forum on their >computer, when faced with such potentially huge liabilities? Thus I assumed, >someone would be at the helm, in some fashion. If this view is in error, >then absolutely I would be opposed to such a forum. For me, no further >discussion would be needed. Can someone clarify please? > >As others have stated, I agree that the proponents of the RFD should put >forth a cogent and coherent explanation of the "need" which they say exists. > In the absense of such an explanation the proposal should be looked at with >caution (to say the least!). > >I have no desire to grant opponents of the faith, whether internal or >external, a ready made forum with which to trash the Faith. On the other >hand, I do not fear opposition in and of itself. The issue I raised above >about excluding Covenant breakers and their unwanted contact continues to be >my bottom line. > >Let the proponants of this group come forward with a clear and convincing >rationale for this unmoderated forum. Let them also state their attitude and >agenda towards the administration and the Covenant. And let us all listen >with care. If they make a good enough case the proposal can move forward, if >not let it come to a quick end. >END --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:45 1997 Received: from f9.hotmail.com (207.82.250.20) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:50:05 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f9.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA04612; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:55:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:55:43 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231255.EAA04612@f9.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:55:43 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: posted Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1179 >Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:32:44 -0500 (EST) >To: Frederick Glaysher >From: newgroups-request@UU.NET (David C Lawrence) >Subject: posted "RFD: talk.religion.bahai" >[ This is an automated message; no reply is necessary. ] > >On 17 Jan 1997 (Fri), at 23:32:39 GMT, your proposal was posted to >the following groups. This list might be different from what was >originally requested if the Newsgroups header was over 200 characters >long, some of the groups were bogus (ie, superseded Big 8 groups) or >not carried at UUNET (like defunct alt groups), or other relevant >groups were noted and added. > >news.announce.newgroups >news.groups >soc.religion.bahai >soc.culture.iranian >soc.culture.israel >soc.culture.indian >soc.rights.human > >It was also sent separately to the following groups, > for which another moderator must approve it: > >soc.religion.christian >soc.religion.islam > >David Lawrence, moderator, news.announce.newgroups > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:45 1997 Received: from f9.hotmail.com (207.82.250.20) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:50:05 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f9.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA04612; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:55:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:55:43 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231255.EAA04612@f9.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:55:43 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: posted Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1179 >Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:32:44 -0500 (EST) >To: Frederick Glaysher >From: newgroups-request@UU.NET (David C Lawrence) >Subject: posted "RFD: talk.religion.bahai" >[ This is an automated message; no reply is necessary. ] > >On 17 Jan 1997 (Fri), at 23:32:39 GMT, your proposal was posted to >the following groups. This list might be different from what was >originally requested if the Newsgroups header was over 200 characters >long, some of the groups were bogus (ie, superseded Big 8 groups) or >not carried at UUNET (like defunct alt groups), or other relevant >groups were noted and added. > >news.announce.newgroups >news.groups >soc.religion.bahai >soc.culture.iranian >soc.culture.israel >soc.culture.indian >soc.rights.human > >It was also sent separately to the following groups, > for which another moderator must approve it: > >soc.religion.christian >soc.religion.islam > >David Lawrence, moderator, news.announce.newgroups > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:45 1997 Received: from f9.hotmail.com (207.82.250.20) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:50:05 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f9.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA04612; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:55:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:55:43 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231255.EAA04612@f9.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:55:43 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: posted Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1179 >Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:32:44 -0500 (EST) >To: Frederick Glaysher >From: newgroups-request@UU.NET (David C Lawrence) >Subject: posted "RFD: talk.religion.bahai" >[ This is an automated message; no reply is necessary. ] > >On 17 Jan 1997 (Fri), at 23:32:39 GMT, your proposal was posted to >the following groups. This list might be different from what was >originally requested if the Newsgroups header was over 200 characters >long, some of the groups were bogus (ie, superseded Big 8 groups) or >not carried at UUNET (like defunct alt groups), or other relevant >groups were noted and added. > >news.announce.newgroups >news.groups >soc.religion.bahai >soc.culture.iranian >soc.culture.israel >soc.culture.indian >soc.rights.human > >It was also sent separately to the following groups, > for which another moderator must approve it: > >soc.religion.christian >soc.religion.islam > >David Lawrence, moderator, news.announce.newgroups > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:19 1997 Received: from f30.hotmail.com (207.82.250.41) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:34:41 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f30.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA09810; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:40:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:40:19 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231240.EAA09810@f30.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:40:19 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Draft Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 2313 >Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 17:45:25 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >cc:@moa.net >Subject: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Draft >On 4 Jan 1997, Fred Glaysher wrote: > >> A few questions. Who selects the neutral third party to handle the >> votes? I'm concerned that those who might be against the creation >> of an unmoderated forum might manipulate the voting.... That person >> would be someone on your staff? > >As soon as your RFD is posted, you will receive a Proponent Questionnaire >(PQ) from the Usenet Volunteer Votetakers. You should fill it out about >one week into the three-week discussion period. The UVV will arrange for >a neutral votetaker to conduct the vote. You can speak to him or her >about possible vote fraud. > >> Forgive my ignorance, but what are crosspostings? Messages sent to >> two newsgroups at the same time? If so, I don't see any harm in that. > >Yes, messages sent to two (or more) newsgroups at the same time. If these >messages are relevant to the groups in question, there's no harm in it. >However, frequently we see massive crossposts (4 or more groups) that >quickly lose their relevance to all the groups in which followups appear. > >Furthermore, many ignorant people will try to broadcast their message to >as many groups as possible even if they are only tangentially related to >the subject matter in question. Let's suppose, for instance, that we get >a Christian fundamentalist who is eager to prostelytize, or a radical >atheist who hates all religion. These types would be likely to broadcast >their message to all talk.religion.* groups, even where such messages are >unwelcome. > >Commercial advertisers are also likely to do massive crossposts. > >> Pointers: messages to other newsgroups that discussion is going on, >> right? > >Yes. > >> Tale: Feel free to submit the draft, if you think it's ready, I'm happy >> with >> it. > >OK, I'll do it! > >-Chris > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:19 1997 Received: from f30.hotmail.com (207.82.250.41) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:34:41 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f30.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA09810; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:40:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:40:19 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231240.EAA09810@f30.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:40:19 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Draft Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 2313 >Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 17:45:25 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >cc:@moa.net >Subject: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Draft >On 4 Jan 1997, Fred Glaysher wrote: > >> A few questions. Who selects the neutral third party to handle the >> votes? I'm concerned that those who might be against the creation >> of an unmoderated forum might manipulate the voting.... That person >> would be someone on your staff? > >As soon as your RFD is posted, you will receive a Proponent Questionnaire >(PQ) from the Usenet Volunteer Votetakers. You should fill it out about >one week into the three-week discussion period. The UVV will arrange for >a neutral votetaker to conduct the vote. You can speak to him or her >about possible vote fraud. > >> Forgive my ignorance, but what are crosspostings? Messages sent to >> two newsgroups at the same time? If so, I don't see any harm in that. > >Yes, messages sent to two (or more) newsgroups at the same time. If these >messages are relevant to the groups in question, there's no harm in it. >However, frequently we see massive crossposts (4 or more groups) that >quickly lose their relevance to all the groups in which followups appear. > >Furthermore, many ignorant people will try to broadcast their message to >as many groups as possible even if they are only tangentially related to >the subject matter in question. Let's suppose, for instance, that we get >a Christian fundamentalist who is eager to prostelytize, or a radical >atheist who hates all religion. These types would be likely to broadcast >their message to all talk.religion.* groups, even where such messages are >unwelcome. > >Commercial advertisers are also likely to do massive crossposts. > >> Pointers: messages to other newsgroups that discussion is going on, >> right? > >Yes. > >> Tale: Feel free to submit the draft, if you think it's ready, I'm happy >> with >> it. > >OK, I'll do it! > >-Chris > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:19 1997 Received: from f30.hotmail.com (207.82.250.41) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:34:41 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f30.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA09810; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:40:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:40:19 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231240.EAA09810@f30.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:40:19 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Draft Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 2313 >Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 17:45:25 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >cc:@moa.net >Subject: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Draft >On 4 Jan 1997, Fred Glaysher wrote: > >> A few questions. Who selects the neutral third party to handle the >> votes? I'm concerned that those who might be against the creation >> of an unmoderated forum might manipulate the voting.... That person >> would be someone on your staff? > >As soon as your RFD is posted, you will receive a Proponent Questionnaire >(PQ) from the Usenet Volunteer Votetakers. You should fill it out about >one week into the three-week discussion period. The UVV will arrange for >a neutral votetaker to conduct the vote. You can speak to him or her >about possible vote fraud. > >> Forgive my ignorance, but what are crosspostings? Messages sent to >> two newsgroups at the same time? If so, I don't see any harm in that. > >Yes, messages sent to two (or more) newsgroups at the same time. If these >messages are relevant to the groups in question, there's no harm in it. >However, frequently we see massive crossposts (4 or more groups) that >quickly lose their relevance to all the groups in which followups appear. > >Furthermore, many ignorant people will try to broadcast their message to >as many groups as possible even if they are only tangentially related to >the subject matter in question. Let's suppose, for instance, that we get >a Christian fundamentalist who is eager to prostelytize, or a radical >atheist who hates all religion. These types would be likely to broadcast >their message to all talk.religion.* groups, even where such messages are >unwelcome. > >Commercial advertisers are also likely to do massive crossposts. > >> Pointers: messages to other newsgroups that discussion is going on, >> right? > >Yes. > >> Tale: Feel free to submit the draft, if you think it's ready, I'm happy >> with >> it. > >OK, I'll do it! > >-Chris > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:21 1997 Received: from f6.hotmail.com (207.82.250.17) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:35:26 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f6.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA19253; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231241.EAA19253@f6.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:04 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Draft Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 454 >Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 17:46:15 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Draft >I need the submissions address for the Irfan mailing list. > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:21 1997 Received: from f6.hotmail.com (207.82.250.17) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:35:26 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f6.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA19253; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231241.EAA19253@f6.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:04 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Draft Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 454 >Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 17:46:15 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Draft >I need the submissions address for the Irfan mailing list. > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:21 1997 Received: from f6.hotmail.com (207.82.250.17) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:35:26 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f6.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA19253; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231241.EAA19253@f6.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:04 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Draft Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 454 >Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 17:46:15 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Draft >I need the submissions address for the Irfan mailing list. > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Apr 27 10:20:11 1997 >From grobe@worf.netins.net Sun Apr 27 07:02:45 1997 Received: from worf.netins.net (grobe@worf.netins.net [167.142.225.4]) by ins6.netins.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA26420 for ; Sun, 27 Apr 1997 09:02:30 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 09:02:30 -0500 (CDT) From: Jonathan Grobe To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: alt.religion.bahai In-Reply-To: <199704261140.EAA14947@f6.hotmail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 7930 No there is no list of what ISPs take a group. The best way is to just publicize the group and encourage people to ask their news administrators to add it. For example besides making posts on this you might put it in your signature. The propagation of new alt groups is slow so it will take a few months before it is broadly available. Here is the official archive at isc.org of newgroup messages Forward it to Newsmaster@aol.com if there is a problem (although they just send everybody the same form response apparently) >From grobe@netins.net Wed Apr 2 18:31:06 1997 Path: news.isc.org!uunet!in2.uu.net!128.230.129.106!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-p eer.sprintlink.net!newsrelay.netins.net!news.netins.net!grobe From: grobe@netins.net (Jonathan Grobe) Newsgroups: alt.config,alt.religion.bahai Subject: cmsg newgroup alt.religion.bahai Control: newgroup alt.religion.bahai Date: 3 Apr 1997 01:51:51 GMT Organization: netINS, Des Moines, IA, USA Lines: 42 Approved: grobe@netins.net Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: worf.netins.net X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.3.2 UNIX) Xref: news.isc.org control.newgroup:3421 For your newsgroups file: alt.religion.bahai Bahai faith. The vote for the unmoderated group talk.religion.bahai has just failed 157:691 But given that there were 157 Yes votes I believe there is sufficient interest for an alt.* group. As discussed in alt.config [Adapted from the talk.religion.bahai proposal] RATIONALE: alt.religion.bahai All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the Bahai faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this proposed newsgroup would meet that need. It is intended that alt.religion.bahai will complement, rather than supplant, the existing moderated group soc.religion.bahai. The establishment of unmoderated companion groups is a well-accepted practice on Usenet. CHARTER: alt.religion.bahai All topics or ideas relevant to the Bahai faith -- its history, teachings, theology -- and so on would be appropriate areas for discussion. Crossposting of articles not specifically relevant to the Bahai faith is strongly discouraged. Also discouraged are personal messages, large ASCII graphics, special-format files, and any postings of a purely commercial nature. Readers are asked not to start or prolong flamewars and excessive crossposts. Articles may be crossposted to soc.religion.bahai -- subject, of course, to the approval of the moderator of that group. Readers may also post articles that have been rejected from soc.religion.bahai, so long as they conform to the charter above. -- Jonathan Grobe >From grobe@netins.net Thu Apr 10 08:19:04 1997 Path: news.isc.org!uunet!in3.uu.net!167.142.225.5!news.netins.net!grobe From: grobe@netins.net (Jonathan Grobe) Newsgroups: alt.config,alt.religion.bahai Subject: cmsg newgroup alt.religion.bahai Control: newgroup alt.religion.bahai Date: 10 Apr 1997 15:09:40 GMT Organization: netINS, Des Moines, IA, USA Lines: 43 Approved: grobe@netins.net Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: worf.netins.net X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.3.2 UNIX) Xref: news.isc.org control.newgroup:3667 The vote for the unmoderated group talk.religion.bahai has just failed 157:691 But given that there were 157 Yes votes I believe there is sufficient interest for an alt.* group. For your newsgroups file: alt.religion.bahaiBahai faith. [Adapted from the talk.religion.bahai proposal] RATIONALE: alt.religion.bahai All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the Bahai faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this proposed newsgroup would meet that need. It is intended that alt.religion.bahai will complement, rather than supplant, the existing moderated group soc.religion.bahai. The establishment of unmoderated companion groups is a well-accepted practice on Usenet. CHARTER: alt.religion.bahai All topics or ideas relevant to the Bahai faith -- its history, teachings, theology -- and so on would be appropriate areas for discussion. Crossposting of articles not specifically relevant to the Bahai faith is strongly discouraged. Also discouraged are personal messages, large ASCII graphics, special-format files, and any postings of a purely commercial nature. Readers are asked not to start or prolong flamewars and excessive crossposts. Articles may be crossposted to soc.religion.bahai -- subject, of course, to the approval of the moderator of that group. Readers may also post articles that have been rejected from soc.religion.bahai, so long as they conform to the charter above. -- Jonathan Grobe Jonathan Grobe On Sat, 26 Apr 1997, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > Dear Jonathan, > > Sorry to keep bothering you but it's taking a long time to understand > how to set up a listserv for alt.religion.bahai and then to find > an ISP to host it. > > Someone who voted YES has contacted AOL and this is there response. > > Basically, they need to know if alt.religion.bahai was set up for > global distribution? > > I'm wondering too is there a site somewhere I can access that would > give me a list of what ISP now offer alt.religion.bahai? > > Thanks for your trouble and help. I don't take it for granted and > appreciate it. > -- > > >From johnwrldpc@aol.com Fri Apr 25 04:40:14 1997 > >Received: (from root@localhost) > > by emout13.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) > > id HAA02586 for FG@hotmail.com; > > Fri, 25 Apr 1997 07:40:13 -0400 (EDT) > >Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 07:40:13 -0400 (EDT) > >From: JohnWrldPc@aol.com > >Message-ID: <970425074012_-1634504026@emout13.mail.aol.com> > >To: FG@hotmail.com > >Subject: Re: alt.religion.bahai > > > >I asked aol to add alt.religion.bahai. This is the response that I received. > > > >John WorldPeace > > > ><< * Requests for new groups to be added will be processed, but we can > > not guarantee delivery unless the group has global propagation. The > > most common reason is that the special 'control' message which > > authorizes the creation of a group has not arrived at our site yet -- > > in which case, please be patient and we'll pick up the group as soon > > as we can. Another common reason is that the creation command wasn't > > properly issued -- USENET newsgroups are loosely organized into > > regions, and if a message isn't properly flagged for global > > distribution it will never be seen by the rest of the net. In this > > case, you should contact the admin. or user responsible for initially > > issuing the create-group command and ask them to re-issue it > > globally. We will then carry the group once the message arrives at our > > site. Finally, some newsgroups are deliberately restricted to a > > particular location or set of locations -- university newsgroups are > > an excellent example. In cases such as this, we usually cannot carry > > the group(s) unless the site of origin wishes to establish a special > > connection to AOL. If this is the case, you should ask the admins of > > the location where the group exists if they would be interested in > > establishing a special relationship with AOL. If they are, have them > > contact NewsMaster and we'll investigate further. We may not always be > > able to honor your request, > > however. > > > > > > Warm Regards, > > The Internet Development and Outreach Technologies Dept. > > > > > > > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com > --------------------------------------------------------- > From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:40 1997 Received: from f6.hotmail.com (207.82.250.17) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:31:35 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f6.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA23935; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:37:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:37:13 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231337.FAA23935@f6.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.33 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:37:13 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.33] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting error: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1250 >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Subject: Re: Posting error: talk.religion.bahai >Cc: group-advice@isc.org >From: Russ Allbery >Date: 08 Feb 1997 03:05:38 -0800 >Fred Glaysher writes: > >> It seems there was some error on instructions regarding where to post >> responses to talk.religion.bahai. People have been emailing me >> directly. A lot of confusion seems to exist out there. Could you an >> Christopher Stone figure out some way to straighten things out? Maybe >> repost the RFD with a pointer to news.groups? > >The best thing to do would probably be to just tell each person who mails >you that the discussion is taking place in news.groups and they should be >posting their comments to there. > >> I've tried to compensate by reposting everything sent to me in >> news.groups but it's not working I fear. > >I would be very hesitant to do this without the sender's permission. > >-- >Russ Allbery (rra@cs.stanford.edu) --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:24 1997 Received: from f5.hotmail.com (207.82.250.16) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:11:29 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f5.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA25284; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:17:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:17:07 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231317.FAA25284@f5.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:17:07 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting Problem on talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1984 >From: "Richard C. Detweiler" >Subject: Re: Posting Problem on talk.religion.bahai >To: FG@hotmail.com (Fred Glaysher) >Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 09:15:39 -0700 (MST) >Cc: srb-mods@bcca.org >Hello Fred, > >I was able to post your note on Monday to the newsgroup so all should >be aware. Let me know if there is anything else I can do. > >Dick Detweiler >co-moderator, soc.religion.bahai > >> >> The group-mentor I'm working with posted the RFD for talk.religion.bahai on the >> 17th to soc.religion.bahai. Apparently, >> it should have some instructions on where followup discussion >> would take place, namely in news.groups. I've tried to post a >> pointer to soc.religion.bahai but my software for some reason has >> a bug in it or something that keeps giving me an error message >> that it's not posting to your newsgroup. I hope I haven't sent >> several copies without knowing it. Apologies, if so. >> >> I appreciate it if you would post a pointer to news.groups like the following: >> >> >> >> As far as I can determine, the following header should perhaps have >> appeared in the original post regarding all followup discussion on >> creating an unmoderated newsgroup: >> >> >> > Subject: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >> > Followup-To: news.groups >> >> Please do not email me directly. Post your discussion to news.groups. >> >> -- >> Frederick Glaysher >> Rochester, Michigan USA >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Frederick Glaysher >> Rochester Hills, Michigan USA >> >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> > > >---#@!~:207.82.250.115:d0: --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:29 1997 Received: from f6.hotmail.com (207.82.250.17) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:14:02 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f6.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA22373; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:19:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:19:40 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231319.FAA22373@f6.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:19:40 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting Replys to t.r.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 933 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 12:38:04 EST >Subject: Re: Posting Replys to t.r.bahai >Dear Fred, > >Everyone got the message fine. I think they simply would rather talk >to you personally than the newsgroup. I don't know if there is >anything I could do that would change that. Did you fix your heading >so the reply would go directly to the newsgroup? Most of us reply >w/o paying attention to the address. The problem with your proposal >for a new forum is that those who object to censorship already >participate on Talisman and find it sufficiently open not to feel a >need to go elsewhere. Besides, we have such a reputation! > >Susan > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:44 1997 Received: from f10.hotmail.com (207.82.250.21) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:46:54 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f10.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA07681; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:52:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:52:32 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231252.EAA07681@f10.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:52:32 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 785 >Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 03:44:29 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for talk.religion.bahai >On 9 Jan 1997, Fred Glaysher wrote: > >> Chris, >> >> I'm wondering if you're waiting on me for something. I've given up >> on getting the irfan@umich.edu address for subscriptions. I've emailed them >> once and have requested it from other people but can't >> find it. It's not necessary. > >I've submitted it, and it should go out with the next queue of proposals >from Tale. > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:44 1997 Received: from f10.hotmail.com (207.82.250.21) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:46:54 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f10.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA07681; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:52:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:52:32 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231252.EAA07681@f10.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:52:32 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 785 >Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 03:44:29 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for talk.religion.bahai >On 9 Jan 1997, Fred Glaysher wrote: > >> Chris, >> >> I'm wondering if you're waiting on me for something. I've given up >> on getting the irfan@umich.edu address for subscriptions. I've emailed them >> once and have requested it from other people but can't >> find it. It's not necessary. > >I've submitted it, and it should go out with the next queue of proposals >from Tale. > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:44 1997 Received: from f10.hotmail.com (207.82.250.21) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:46:54 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f10.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA07681; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:52:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:52:32 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231252.EAA07681@f10.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:52:32 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 785 >Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 03:44:29 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for talk.religion.bahai >On 9 Jan 1997, Fred Glaysher wrote: > >> Chris, >> >> I'm wondering if you're waiting on me for something. I've given up >> on getting the irfan@umich.edu address for subscriptions. I've emailed them >> once and have requested it from other people but can't >> find it. It's not necessary. > >I've submitted it, and it should go out with the next queue of proposals >from Tale. > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:17 1997 Received: from f19.hotmail.com (207.82.250.30) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:29:02 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f19.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA09481; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:34:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:34:40 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231234.EAA09481@f19.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:34:40 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 513 >Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:02:15 -0500 (EST) >From: Juan R Cole >To: Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai >Fred: > >I'm glad you're going ahead with this. But the RFD is more appropriate >for Talisman than for irfan. > > >cheers Juan > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:18 1997 Received: from f16.hotmail.com (207.82.250.27) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:31:32 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f16.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA13577; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:37:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:37:10 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231237.EAA13577@f16.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:37:10 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1262 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:14:59 EST >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai >Dear Fred, > >I don't see any problem with that. Good to hear from you. I was >afraid from your last post that you might be contemplating hurting >yourself. > >Susan > >> Date: 3 Jan 1997 11:35:22 -0000 >> From: "Fred Glaysher" >> To: talisman@umich.edu >> Cc: @MOA.net >> Subject: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai > >> I'd like your permission to post, in a week or so, the RFD (Request >> For Discussion) for an unmoderated newsgroup: Talk.Religion.Bahai. >> >> I'd appreciate hearing from you. Thank you. >> >> >> -- >> Frederick Glaysher >> Rochester Hills, Michigan USA >> >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:18 1997 Received: from f16.hotmail.com (207.82.250.27) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:31:32 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f16.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA13577; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:37:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:37:10 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231237.EAA13577@f16.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:37:10 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1262 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:14:59 EST >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai >Dear Fred, > >I don't see any problem with that. Good to hear from you. I was >afraid from your last post that you might be contemplating hurting >yourself. > >Susan > >> Date: 3 Jan 1997 11:35:22 -0000 >> From: "Fred Glaysher" >> To: talisman@umich.edu >> Cc: @MOA.net >> Subject: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai > >> I'd like your permission to post, in a week or so, the RFD (Request >> For Discussion) for an unmoderated newsgroup: Talk.Religion.Bahai. >> >> I'd appreciate hearing from you. Thank you. >> >> >> -- >> Frederick Glaysher >> Rochester Hills, Michigan USA >> >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:18 1997 Received: from f16.hotmail.com (207.82.250.27) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:31:32 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f16.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA13577; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:37:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:37:10 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231237.EAA13577@f16.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:37:10 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1262 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:14:59 EST >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai >Dear Fred, > >I don't see any problem with that. Good to hear from you. I was >afraid from your last post that you might be contemplating hurting >yourself. > >Susan > >> Date: 3 Jan 1997 11:35:22 -0000 >> From: "Fred Glaysher" >> To: talisman@umich.edu >> Cc: @MOA.net >> Subject: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai > >> I'd like your permission to post, in a week or so, the RFD (Request >> For Discussion) for an unmoderated newsgroup: Talk.Religion.Bahai. >> >> I'd appreciate hearing from you. Thank you. >> >> >> -- >> Frederick Glaysher >> Rochester Hills, Michigan USA >> >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:18 1997 Received: from f16.hotmail.com (207.82.250.27) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:31:32 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f16.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA13577; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:37:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:37:10 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231237.EAA13577@f16.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:37:10 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1262 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:14:59 EST >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai >Dear Fred, > >I don't see any problem with that. Good to hear from you. I was >afraid from your last post that you might be contemplating hurting >yourself. > >Susan > >> Date: 3 Jan 1997 11:35:22 -0000 >> From: "Fred Glaysher" >> To: talisman@umich.edu >> Cc: @MOA.net >> Subject: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai > >> I'd like your permission to post, in a week or so, the RFD (Request >> For Discussion) for an unmoderated newsgroup: Talk.Religion.Bahai. >> >> I'd appreciate hearing from you. Thank you. >> >> >> -- >> Frederick Glaysher >> Rochester Hills, Michigan USA >> >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:23 1997 Received: from f5.hotmail.com (207.82.250.16) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:36:36 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f5.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA22030; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:14 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:14 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231242.EAA22030@f5.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:14 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 2199 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:35:13 EST >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai >Dear Fred > >You asked: > >> Oops! That went on Talisman? I thought it would be intercepted >> by the politburo's minions.... > >It is literally impossible to intercept anything on Talisman. It was >deliberately designed that way. If a CB were to post we couldn't stop >them, although we don't let the subscribe. > > Yours is the first friendly word >> I've had out here in Siberia.... God bless you.... > >Actually a lot of people were worried about you but no one wanted to >contact you directly because they were afraid you'd start it up >again. > >> >> Hurt myself? How odd. Why would I do that? > >I don't know, but you last message sounded very suicidal and >disturbed. Several of us were trying to figure out how to contact > people close to you to determine if you were all right. > >> >> So, you accepted the Party's line and my sentencing in silence, did you? > >To be perfectly honest, I played a part in it. >You were booted off because you kept making personal attacks on everyone > and offending people to such an extent that it became impossible to >discuss issues rather than personalities. There are no bars on *what* >you can discuss on Talisman, but you need to be able to do it in >something resembling an objective fashion. We are not out to censor >anybody. Juan, who basically runs the list, has withdrawn from the >Faith. The last listowner has been warned by a Counsellor for making >statements "contrary to the Covenant." Just what Politburo do you >think we are working for? We are driving the >Administration wild (and somewhat enjoying it in the process.) But >there are some rules for any kind of rational discourse. If you will >just stop the name-calling I'm sure people would be happy to let you >back on. > >love, Susan --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:23 1997 Received: from f5.hotmail.com (207.82.250.16) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:36:36 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f5.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA22030; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:14 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:14 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231242.EAA22030@f5.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:14 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 2199 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:35:13 EST >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai >Dear Fred > >You asked: > >> Oops! That went on Talisman? I thought it would be intercepted >> by the politburo's minions.... > >It is literally impossible to intercept anything on Talisman. It was >deliberately designed that way. If a CB were to post we couldn't stop >them, although we don't let the subscribe. > > Yours is the first friendly word >> I've had out here in Siberia.... God bless you.... > >Actually a lot of people were worried about you but no one wanted to >contact you directly because they were afraid you'd start it up >again. > >> >> Hurt myself? How odd. Why would I do that? > >I don't know, but you last message sounded very suicidal and >disturbed. Several of us were trying to figure out how to contact > people close to you to determine if you were all right. > >> >> So, you accepted the Party's line and my sentencing in silence, did you? > >To be perfectly honest, I played a part in it. >You were booted off because you kept making personal attacks on everyone > and offending people to such an extent that it became impossible to >discuss issues rather than personalities. There are no bars on *what* >you can discuss on Talisman, but you need to be able to do it in >something resembling an objective fashion. We are not out to censor >anybody. Juan, who basically runs the list, has withdrawn from the >Faith. The last listowner has been warned by a Counsellor for making >statements "contrary to the Covenant." Just what Politburo do you >think we are working for? We are driving the >Administration wild (and somewhat enjoying it in the process.) But >there are some rules for any kind of rational discourse. If you will >just stop the name-calling I'm sure people would be happy to let you >back on. > >love, Susan --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:40 1997 Received: from f6.hotmail.com (207.82.250.17) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:38:18 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f6.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA19445; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:43:56 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:43:56 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231243.EAA19445@f6.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:43:56 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1796 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 23:19:48 EST >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai >Dear Fred, > >> No warning, really, just a dictatorial, self-righteous sentence.... > >Juan sent me a copy of the warning he gave you before you were kicked >off. > >> How about people who offended me? No one cares apparently about MY >> little FEELINGS.... > >Fred, you blasted away at people who were trying to be friendly and >sympathetic. > >> >> Okay, I'll be open to criticism. I need to work more on presentation, shall we >> say. >> > >Just a bit. > >> That's what happened to me on both soc.religion.bahai and the enlightened >> Talisman. Juan shook his finger at me for telling Banani she or he was a >> self-righteous prig when she was.... > >And just what does it accomplish to say that? In the eyes of everyone >on the list you only justified what she was saying by addressing her >in that manner. Just a little respect can go a long way, and it might >even get you a hearing. >> > >> People name-called or characterized me unfairly without giving me a hearing, > >I didn't see them taking the same tone with you as you took with >them. I'm willing to listen to people I don't agree with but I refuse >to be their dumping ground. > >> Incidentally, would you know the submissions or subscription address, >> I suppose, for irfan@umich.edu? I'd like to post the RFD to it too. > >You already posted it there. We really can't stop you! > >love, Susan > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:40 1997 Received: from f6.hotmail.com (207.82.250.17) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:38:18 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f6.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA19445; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:43:56 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:43:56 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231243.EAA19445@f6.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:43:56 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1796 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 23:19:48 EST >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai >Dear Fred, > >> No warning, really, just a dictatorial, self-righteous sentence.... > >Juan sent me a copy of the warning he gave you before you were kicked >off. > >> How about people who offended me? No one cares apparently about MY >> little FEELINGS.... > >Fred, you blasted away at people who were trying to be friendly and >sympathetic. > >> >> Okay, I'll be open to criticism. I need to work more on presentation, shall we >> say. >> > >Just a bit. > >> That's what happened to me on both soc.religion.bahai and the enlightened >> Talisman. Juan shook his finger at me for telling Banani she or he was a >> self-righteous prig when she was.... > >And just what does it accomplish to say that? In the eyes of everyone >on the list you only justified what she was saying by addressing her >in that manner. Just a little respect can go a long way, and it might >even get you a hearing. >> > >> People name-called or characterized me unfairly without giving me a hearing, > >I didn't see them taking the same tone with you as you took with >them. I'm willing to listen to people I don't agree with but I refuse >to be their dumping ground. > >> Incidentally, would you know the submissions or subscription address, >> I suppose, for irfan@umich.edu? I'd like to post the RFD to it too. > >You already posted it there. We really can't stop you! > >love, Susan > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:42 1997 Received: from f12.hotmail.com (207.82.250.23) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:45:31 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f12.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA08196; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:51:08 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:51:08 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231251.EAA08196@f12.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:51:08 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 3332 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 09:31:28 EST >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai >Fred, > >Sorry for the last message. It was sent prematurely. > >To my comment: > >> >Juan sent me a copy of the warning he gave you before you were kicked >> >off. >> > >> >> It wasn't clear to me.... Just before is it too, as in the next thing >> I knew.... > >That was the problem, Fred. Everyone was telling you to tone it down, >and you just weren't "getting" it. > >> I learnt something about the usual approach of wrapping oneself in >> the cloak of the moral highground.... It usually works in the >> Bahai Faith. I've known that, though, for years.... What surprised >> me was so many obsequiously came to her defense. > >Sheila is one of the most conservative Baha'is on the list, but we >all show her a certain amount of respect. Her husband Amind Banani, >was Juan's teacher. "Taking the moral highground" was probably the >most polite way she could think of responding to what she saw as your >vicious and possibly racist attacks. I'm sorry, but that's the way >you were coming on. Quanta has said similar things to Sheila on this >listserv, but she generally calms down after awhile. You were getting >louder and louder. > > >> "Dumping ground" is not accurate. Nothing personal intended. What >> a psychological century we live in, if you understand what I mean. >> Your willingness is more than can be said for the fascists who run >> soc.religion.bahai. (Oh my, is "fascists" name-calling? Maybe I >> shouldn't use the term, it might hurt their feelings. I should let >> them choose a term that conceals what they're doing.) > >I think they too were objecting more to tone than to content. As far >as the use of the term fascist, if you direct it at a person, who >doesn't consider themselves fascist, it probably is. But it is quite >possible (and we do) to discuss (as objectively as possible) >how the structure of the Administrative Order sometimes resembles the >Fascist party structure. Do you see the difference? This will earn >you a visit from Counselor Birkland but it won't get you kicked off >Talisman. > >> Double OOPS! I thought they'd have minions over there too. > >Whatever you post on Talisman or Irfan appears on the list >automatically within a few minutes after you send it. I told you, >there are no minions. People on the list, just got fed up. >> >> Samizdat flowed through many channels.... Something about the nature of the >> human soul needs to be free.... > >Yes, it does. But you were depriving other people of their right to >express themselves without being attacked. This is especially an >issue for the women on the list. They are sometimes more easily cowed >into silence by the aggressive style of male communication. > >All I'm asking is that you show some consideration for >the rights of others as well. At the risk using a cliche, couldn't we >try a more consultative approach? > >love, Susan > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:42 1997 Received: from f12.hotmail.com (207.82.250.23) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:45:31 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f12.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA08196; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:51:08 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:51:08 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231251.EAA08196@f12.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:51:08 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 3332 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 09:31:28 EST >Subject: Re: Posting RFD for Talk.Religion.Bahai >Fred, > >Sorry for the last message. It was sent prematurely. > >To my comment: > >> >Juan sent me a copy of the warning he gave you before you were kicked >> >off. >> > >> >> It wasn't clear to me.... Just before is it too, as in the next thing >> I knew.... > >That was the problem, Fred. Everyone was telling you to tone it down, >and you just weren't "getting" it. > >> I learnt something about the usual approach of wrapping oneself in >> the cloak of the moral highground.... It usually works in the >> Bahai Faith. I've known that, though, for years.... What surprised >> me was so many obsequiously came to her defense. > >Sheila is one of the most conservative Baha'is on the list, but we >all show her a certain amount of respect. Her husband Amind Banani, >was Juan's teacher. "Taking the moral highground" was probably the >most polite way she could think of responding to what she saw as your >vicious and possibly racist attacks. I'm sorry, but that's the way >you were coming on. Quanta has said similar things to Sheila on this >listserv, but she generally calms down after awhile. You were getting >louder and louder. > > >> "Dumping ground" is not accurate. Nothing personal intended. What >> a psychological century we live in, if you understand what I mean. >> Your willingness is more than can be said for the fascists who run >> soc.religion.bahai. (Oh my, is "fascists" name-calling? Maybe I >> shouldn't use the term, it might hurt their feelings. I should let >> them choose a term that conceals what they're doing.) > >I think they too were objecting more to tone than to content. As far >as the use of the term fascist, if you direct it at a person, who >doesn't consider themselves fascist, it probably is. But it is quite >possible (and we do) to discuss (as objectively as possible) >how the structure of the Administrative Order sometimes resembles the >Fascist party structure. Do you see the difference? This will earn >you a visit from Counselor Birkland but it won't get you kicked off >Talisman. > >> Double OOPS! I thought they'd have minions over there too. > >Whatever you post on Talisman or Irfan appears on the list >automatically within a few minutes after you send it. I told you, >there are no minions. People on the list, just got fed up. >> >> Samizdat flowed through many channels.... Something about the nature of the >> human soul needs to be free.... > >Yes, it does. But you were depriving other people of their right to >express themselves without being attacked. This is especially an >issue for the women on the list. They are sometimes more easily cowed >into silence by the aggressive style of male communication. > >All I'm asking is that you show some consideration for >the rights of others as well. At the risk using a cliche, couldn't we >try a more consultative approach? > >love, Susan > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:14 1997 Received: from f21.hotmail.com (207.82.250.32) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:27:48 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f21.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA29272; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:33:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:33:25 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231233.EAA29272@f21.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:33:25 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Rough Draft Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4882 >Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 22:45:43 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Rough Draft >Here is the RFD. I have not made many changes, but you should look and >see if these changes meet with your approval nonetheless. > >There is a 200-character limit in the "newsgroups" line for the >distribution of the RFD. You can post pointers to other groups beyond >that. I have selected the group I think are most relevant for the >"official" distribution, but again, you may change these. > >Do you want to allow crossposts from soc.religion.bahai? > >When the RFD meets with your approval, I will submit it to Tale. > >-Chris >=================== > REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) > unmoderated group talk.religion.bahai > >Newsgroup line: >talk.religion.bahai Discussion of the Bahai faith (unmoderated). > >This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create an unmoderated >worldwide discussion group called talk.religion.bahai. This is not a Call >for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural details appear >below. All followup discussion should be crossposted to news.groups. > >RATIONALE: talk.religion.bahai > >All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the >Bahai faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated >forum, and this proposed newsgroup would meet that need. > >The proponents intend that talk.religion.bahai will complement, rather >than supplant, the existing moderated group soc.religion.bahai. The >establishment of unmoderated companion groups is a well-accepted practice >on Usenet. This newsgroup will be part of the talk.* hierarchy, which is >exclusively for unmoderated groups. > >CHARTER: > >All topics or ideas relevant to the Bahai faith -- its history, teachings, >theology -- and so on would be appropriate areas for discussion. > >Crossposting of articles not specifically relevant to the Bahai >faith is strongly discouraged. Also discouraged are personal >messages, large ASCII graphics, special-format files, and any >postings of a purely commercial nature. > >Readers are asked not to start or prolong flamewars and excessive >crossposts. Articles may be crossposted to soc.religion.bahai -- subject, >of course, to the approval of the moderator of that group. > >Readers may also post articles that have been rejected from >soc.religion.bahai, so long as they conform to the charter above. > >END CHARTER. > >PROCEDURE: > >The process of creating newsgroups is twofold. First is the RFD stage, >when someone writes a Request for Discussion (RFD) outlining the purpose >of the proposed group. The RFD appears in news.announce.newgroups, >news.groups, and other relevant discussion groups. Anyone may publicly >comment on the RFD in news.groups for a three-week period. During the >discussion phase, proponents may modify the RFD in response to suggestions >from posters on news.groups. > >The second stage is the Call for Votes (CFV) stage. The proposal must >pass a Usenet-wide vote with a 2/3 supermajority -- and at least 100 more >votes in favor than against -- to be created. Anyone with an e-mail >address may cast a ballot. A neutral votetaker from the Usenet >Volunteer Votetakers (UVV) conducts all CFV's. > >This RFD attempts to comply with the Usenet newsgroup creation >guidelines outlined in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup" and >"Writing an RFD." Please refer to these documents if you have further >questions about the process. > >DISTRIBUTION: > >This RFD has been posted to the following newsgroups: > >news.announce.newgroups >news.groups >soc.religion.bahai, >soc.culture.iranian >soc.culture.israel >soc.religion.christian, >soc.religion.islam >soc.rights.human, >talk.religion.misc > >and the following mailing lists: > >Talisman@umich.edu (academic discussion of the Bahai Faith) > Subscribe via: jsgreen@umich.edu > >Irfan@umich.edu (academic discussion of Bahai gnosis) > Subscribe via: (working on getting address) > >Pointers will appear in the following newsgroups: > >soc.religion.unitarian-univ >soc.religion.eastern, >soc.religion.gnosis >soc.religion.hindu, >soc.religion.mormon >soc.religion.paganism >soc.religion.quaker, >soc.religion.sikhism, >soc.religion.vaishnava, >soc.religion.atheism, >talk.religion.buddhism, >talk.religion.newage > >-- >Proponent: Frederick Glaysher >Mentor: Christopher Stone > > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:14 1997 Received: from f21.hotmail.com (207.82.250.32) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:27:48 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f21.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA29272; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:33:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:33:25 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231233.EAA29272@f21.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:33:25 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Rough Draft Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4882 >Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 22:45:43 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Rough Draft >Here is the RFD. I have not made many changes, but you should look and >see if these changes meet with your approval nonetheless. > >There is a 200-character limit in the "newsgroups" line for the >distribution of the RFD. You can post pointers to other groups beyond >that. I have selected the group I think are most relevant for the >"official" distribution, but again, you may change these. > >Do you want to allow crossposts from soc.religion.bahai? > >When the RFD meets with your approval, I will submit it to Tale. > >-Chris >=================== > REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) > unmoderated group talk.religion.bahai > >Newsgroup line: >talk.religion.bahai Discussion of the Bahai faith (unmoderated). > >This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create an unmoderated >worldwide discussion group called talk.religion.bahai. This is not a Call >for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural details appear >below. All followup discussion should be crossposted to news.groups. > >RATIONALE: talk.religion.bahai > >All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the >Bahai faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated >forum, and this proposed newsgroup would meet that need. > >The proponents intend that talk.religion.bahai will complement, rather >than supplant, the existing moderated group soc.religion.bahai. The >establishment of unmoderated companion groups is a well-accepted practice >on Usenet. This newsgroup will be part of the talk.* hierarchy, which is >exclusively for unmoderated groups. > >CHARTER: > >All topics or ideas relevant to the Bahai faith -- its history, teachings, >theology -- and so on would be appropriate areas for discussion. > >Crossposting of articles not specifically relevant to the Bahai >faith is strongly discouraged. Also discouraged are personal >messages, large ASCII graphics, special-format files, and any >postings of a purely commercial nature. > >Readers are asked not to start or prolong flamewars and excessive >crossposts. Articles may be crossposted to soc.religion.bahai -- subject, >of course, to the approval of the moderator of that group. > >Readers may also post articles that have been rejected from >soc.religion.bahai, so long as they conform to the charter above. > >END CHARTER. > >PROCEDURE: > >The process of creating newsgroups is twofold. First is the RFD stage, >when someone writes a Request for Discussion (RFD) outlining the purpose >of the proposed group. The RFD appears in news.announce.newgroups, >news.groups, and other relevant discussion groups. Anyone may publicly >comment on the RFD in news.groups for a three-week period. During the >discussion phase, proponents may modify the RFD in response to suggestions >from posters on news.groups. > >The second stage is the Call for Votes (CFV) stage. The proposal must >pass a Usenet-wide vote with a 2/3 supermajority -- and at least 100 more >votes in favor than against -- to be created. Anyone with an e-mail >address may cast a ballot. A neutral votetaker from the Usenet >Volunteer Votetakers (UVV) conducts all CFV's. > >This RFD attempts to comply with the Usenet newsgroup creation >guidelines outlined in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup" and >"Writing an RFD." Please refer to these documents if you have further >questions about the process. > >DISTRIBUTION: > >This RFD has been posted to the following newsgroups: > >news.announce.newgroups >news.groups >soc.religion.bahai, >soc.culture.iranian >soc.culture.israel >soc.religion.christian, >soc.religion.islam >soc.rights.human, >talk.religion.misc > >and the following mailing lists: > >Talisman@umich.edu (academic discussion of the Bahai Faith) > Subscribe via: jsgreen@umich.edu > >Irfan@umich.edu (academic discussion of Bahai gnosis) > Subscribe via: (working on getting address) > >Pointers will appear in the following newsgroups: > >soc.religion.unitarian-univ >soc.religion.eastern, >soc.religion.gnosis >soc.religion.hindu, >soc.religion.mormon >soc.religion.paganism >soc.religion.quaker, >soc.religion.sikhism, >soc.religion.vaishnava, >soc.religion.atheism, >talk.religion.buddhism, >talk.religion.newage > >-- >Proponent: Frederick Glaysher >Mentor: Christopher Stone > > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:14 1997 Received: from f21.hotmail.com (207.82.250.32) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:27:48 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f21.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA29272; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:33:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:33:25 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231233.EAA29272@f21.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:33:25 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Rough Draft Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 4882 >Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 22:45:43 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: Proposal for a newsgroup RFD: Rough Draft >Here is the RFD. I have not made many changes, but you should look and >see if these changes meet with your approval nonetheless. > >There is a 200-character limit in the "newsgroups" line for the >distribution of the RFD. You can post pointers to other groups beyond >that. I have selected the group I think are most relevant for the >"official" distribution, but again, you may change these. > >Do you want to allow crossposts from soc.religion.bahai? > >When the RFD meets with your approval, I will submit it to Tale. > >-Chris >=================== > REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) > unmoderated group talk.religion.bahai > >Newsgroup line: >talk.religion.bahai Discussion of the Bahai faith (unmoderated). > >This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create an unmoderated >worldwide discussion group called talk.religion.bahai. This is not a Call >for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural details appear >below. All followup discussion should be crossposted to news.groups. > >RATIONALE: talk.religion.bahai > >All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the >Bahai faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated >forum, and this proposed newsgroup would meet that need. > >The proponents intend that talk.religion.bahai will complement, rather >than supplant, the existing moderated group soc.religion.bahai. The >establishment of unmoderated companion groups is a well-accepted practice >on Usenet. This newsgroup will be part of the talk.* hierarchy, which is >exclusively for unmoderated groups. > >CHARTER: > >All topics or ideas relevant to the Bahai faith -- its history, teachings, >theology -- and so on would be appropriate areas for discussion. > >Crossposting of articles not specifically relevant to the Bahai >faith is strongly discouraged. Also discouraged are personal >messages, large ASCII graphics, special-format files, and any >postings of a purely commercial nature. > >Readers are asked not to start or prolong flamewars and excessive >crossposts. Articles may be crossposted to soc.religion.bahai -- subject, >of course, to the approval of the moderator of that group. > >Readers may also post articles that have been rejected from >soc.religion.bahai, so long as they conform to the charter above. > >END CHARTER. > >PROCEDURE: > >The process of creating newsgroups is twofold. First is the RFD stage, >when someone writes a Request for Discussion (RFD) outlining the purpose >of the proposed group. The RFD appears in news.announce.newgroups, >news.groups, and other relevant discussion groups. Anyone may publicly >comment on the RFD in news.groups for a three-week period. During the >discussion phase, proponents may modify the RFD in response to suggestions >from posters on news.groups. > >The second stage is the Call for Votes (CFV) stage. The proposal must >pass a Usenet-wide vote with a 2/3 supermajority -- and at least 100 more >votes in favor than against -- to be created. Anyone with an e-mail >address may cast a ballot. A neutral votetaker from the Usenet >Volunteer Votetakers (UVV) conducts all CFV's. > >This RFD attempts to comply with the Usenet newsgroup creation >guidelines outlined in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup" and >"Writing an RFD." Please refer to these documents if you have further >questions about the process. > >DISTRIBUTION: > >This RFD has been posted to the following newsgroups: > >news.announce.newgroups >news.groups >soc.religion.bahai, >soc.culture.iranian >soc.culture.israel >soc.religion.christian, >soc.religion.islam >soc.rights.human, >talk.religion.misc > >and the following mailing lists: > >Talisman@umich.edu (academic discussion of the Bahai Faith) > Subscribe via: jsgreen@umich.edu > >Irfan@umich.edu (academic discussion of Bahai gnosis) > Subscribe via: (working on getting address) > >Pointers will appear in the following newsgroups: > >soc.religion.unitarian-univ >soc.religion.eastern, >soc.religion.gnosis >soc.religion.hindu, >soc.religion.mormon >soc.religion.paganism >soc.religion.quaker, >soc.religion.sikhism, >soc.religion.vaishnava, >soc.religion.atheism, >talk.religion.buddhism, >talk.religion.newage > >-- >Proponent: Frederick Glaysher >Mentor: Christopher Stone > > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:55 1997 Received: from f17.hotmail.com (207.82.250.28) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:58:07 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f17.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA04599; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:03:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:03:45 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231303.FAA04599@f17.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:03:45 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: re: proposal for an unmoderated newsgroup Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 787 >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 14:05:22 -0500 (EST) >From: EdP94@aol.com >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: re: proposal for an unmoderated newsgroup >In a message dated 97-01-19 08:07:07 EST, FG@hotmail.com wrote: > ><< Ed, I don't see how an unmoderated newsgroup could do this. Seems >contradictory, don't you think? >> > >As the originator of this proposal, you would know. So if that's the case, >then my view is to not go forward with the proposal. Please see my other >emails which explain my view. Sorry if this disappoints you. > >Regards, > >Ed Price >edp94@aol.com > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:16 1997 Received: from f15.hotmail.com (207.82.250.26) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:07:31 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f15.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA10163; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:13:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:13:09 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231313.FAA10163@f15.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:13:09 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: proposal for an unmoderated newsgroup Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1272 >Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:33:22 -0500 (EST) >From: EdP94@aol.com >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: Re: proposal for an unmoderated newsgroup >In a message dated 97-01-20 07:05:02 EST, you write: > ><< I respect your opinion "to not go forward with the proposal." I do not >share it. Can you respect mine and other Bahais who think as I do? >> > >Fred: > >Thank you. Sure, I can respect your view, but that doesn't change anything. > Respect is not the issue here, never was. In my view, a disagreement does >not necessarily imply disrespect. > >You previously answered my question, which enabled me to make up my mind , so >I am thnakful for your honest explanation. I believe in three weeks we'll >all be going by one man one vote. You vote your way and I'll vote mine. > I'll accept whatever the majority chooses. No problem on my end. Hopefully >none on yours. > >Until then, I've said all I have to say on this subject. However, as a >courtesy to you I'll send you a copy of one of my earlier posts. > >Regards, > >Ed Price >edp94@aol.com --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:56 1997 Received: from f22.hotmail.com (207.82.250.33) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:58:54 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f22.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA19667; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:04:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:04:32 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231304.FAA19667@f22.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:04:32 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: rfd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1420 >From: "Sen McGlinn" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 20:08:04 +0100 >Subject: Re: rfd >>Talisman, in practice, if not theory, is moderated.... > >First I knew about that - and I am a subscriber! > >Sen >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----- >Sonja van Kerkhoff > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * > > Ask me for information about Arts Dialogue > international * all art forms * 4 times a year > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * > > >s.mc_glinn@thuisnet.leidenuniv.nl > >Moerweg 434, >2531 BK, >The Hague, >The Netherlands. tel: 31 (0)70-3808347 >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >When, however, thou dost contemplate the innermost essence of things, > and the individuality of each, > thou wilt behold the signs of thy Lord's mercy . . ." >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:46 1997 Received: from f3.hotmail.com (207.82.250.14) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:50:43 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f3.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA06044; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:56:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:56:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231256.EAA06044@f3.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:56:21 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: Bahai.talk.religion (proposal for an unmoderated newsgroup) Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1012 >Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:30:12 -0500 (EST) >From: EdP94@aol.com >To: PETE_H@delta.pra-ww.com, FG@hotmail.com >cc: EdP94@aol.com >Subject: Re: RFD: Bahai.talk.religion (proposal for an unmoderated newsgroup) >I am in favor of this group, however, only on the condition that >covenant-breakers and their material would be excluded from the forum. The >Faith is clear as can be that we are to separate ourselves from these people. > They on the other hand, do not respect our laws or our wishes. Since the >issue has come up in the past on other Baha'i forums and the answer has been >that they cannot be excluded because our charter doesn't let us, since this >group is forming its charter now, this seems the best time to implement all >necessary precautions. > >Regards, > >Ed Price >edp94@aol.com --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:46 1997 Received: from f3.hotmail.com (207.82.250.14) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:50:43 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f3.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA06044; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:56:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:56:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231256.EAA06044@f3.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:56:21 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: Bahai.talk.religion (proposal for an unmoderated newsgroup) Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1012 >Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:30:12 -0500 (EST) >From: EdP94@aol.com >To: PETE_H@delta.pra-ww.com, FG@hotmail.com >cc: EdP94@aol.com >Subject: Re: RFD: Bahai.talk.religion (proposal for an unmoderated newsgroup) >I am in favor of this group, however, only on the condition that >covenant-breakers and their material would be excluded from the forum. The >Faith is clear as can be that we are to separate ourselves from these people. > They on the other hand, do not respect our laws or our wishes. Since the >issue has come up in the past on other Baha'i forums and the answer has been >that they cannot be excluded because our charter doesn't let us, since this >group is forming its charter now, this seems the best time to implement all >necessary precautions. > >Regards, > >Ed Price >edp94@aol.com --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:46 1997 Received: from f3.hotmail.com (207.82.250.14) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:50:43 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f3.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA06044; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:56:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:56:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231256.EAA06044@f3.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:56:21 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: Bahai.talk.religion (proposal for an unmoderated newsgroup) Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1012 >Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:30:12 -0500 (EST) >From: EdP94@aol.com >To: PETE_H@delta.pra-ww.com, FG@hotmail.com >cc: EdP94@aol.com >Subject: Re: RFD: Bahai.talk.religion (proposal for an unmoderated newsgroup) >I am in favor of this group, however, only on the condition that >covenant-breakers and their material would be excluded from the forum. The >Faith is clear as can be that we are to separate ourselves from these people. > They on the other hand, do not respect our laws or our wishes. Since the >issue has come up in the past on other Baha'i forums and the answer has been >that they cannot be excluded because our charter doesn't let us, since this >group is forming its charter now, this seems the best time to implement all >necessary precautions. > >Regards, > >Ed Price >edp94@aol.com --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:50 1997 Received: from f6.hotmail.com (207.82.250.17) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:53:38 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f6.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA20435; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:59:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:59:16 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231259.EAA20435@f6.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:59:16 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 609 >Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 11:52:08 -0500 (EST) >From: johnwrldpc@aol.com (JohnWrldPc) >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >To: Frederick Glaysher >How can we manifest peace on earth if we do not include everyone >(all races, all religions, all nations, both sexes) in our vision of >peace? > >John WorldPeace > >WorldPeace Peace Page at: > >https://members.aol.com/JohnWrldPc/index.html --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:50 1997 Received: from f6.hotmail.com (207.82.250.17) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:53:38 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f6.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA20435; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:59:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:59:16 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231259.EAA20435@f6.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:59:16 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 609 >Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 11:52:08 -0500 (EST) >From: johnwrldpc@aol.com (JohnWrldPc) >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >To: Frederick Glaysher >How can we manifest peace on earth if we do not include everyone >(all races, all religions, all nations, both sexes) in our vision of >peace? > >John WorldPeace > >WorldPeace Peace Page at: > >https://members.aol.com/JohnWrldPc/index.html --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:50 1997 Received: from f6.hotmail.com (207.82.250.17) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:53:38 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f6.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA20435; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:59:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:59:16 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231259.EAA20435@f6.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:59:16 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 609 >Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 11:52:08 -0500 (EST) >From: johnwrldpc@aol.com (JohnWrldPc) >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >To: Frederick Glaysher >How can we manifest peace on earth if we do not include everyone >(all races, all religions, all nations, both sexes) in our vision of >peace? > >John WorldPeace > >WorldPeace Peace Page at: > >https://members.aol.com/JohnWrldPc/index.html --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:51 1997 Received: from f25.hotmail.com (207.82.250.36) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:54:45 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f25.hotmail.com (8.8.3/8.8.3) id FAA16148; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:00:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:00:23 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231300.FAA16148@f25.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:00:23 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 429 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 23:13:22 EST >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Dear Fred, > >Your message was received and posted on Irfan. > >Susan --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:51 1997 Received: from f25.hotmail.com (207.82.250.36) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:54:45 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f25.hotmail.com (8.8.3/8.8.3) id FAA16148; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:00:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:00:23 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231300.FAA16148@f25.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:00:23 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 429 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 23:13:22 EST >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Dear Fred, > >Your message was received and posted on Irfan. > >Susan --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:51 1997 Received: from f25.hotmail.com (207.82.250.36) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:54:45 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f25.hotmail.com (8.8.3/8.8.3) id FAA16148; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:00:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:00:23 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231300.FAA16148@f25.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:00:23 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 429 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 23:13:22 EST >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Dear Fred, > >Your message was received and posted on Irfan. > >Susan --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:51 1997 Received: from f12.hotmail.com (207.82.250.23) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:55:47 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f12.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA09237; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:01:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:01:25 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231301.FAA09237@f12.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:01:25 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 402 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:45:29 EST >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Received and posted on Talisman. > >Susan > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:51 1997 Received: from f12.hotmail.com (207.82.250.23) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:55:47 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f12.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA09237; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:01:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:01:25 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231301.FAA09237@f12.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:01:25 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 402 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:45:29 EST >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Received and posted on Talisman. > >Susan > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:51 1997 Received: from f12.hotmail.com (207.82.250.23) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:55:47 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f12.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA09237; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:01:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:01:25 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231301.FAA09237@f12.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:01:25 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 402 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:45:29 EST >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Received and posted on Talisman. > >Susan > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:52 1997 Received: from f24.hotmail.com (207.82.250.35) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:56:35 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f24.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA12708; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:02:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:02:13 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231302.FAA12708@f24.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:02:13 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 402 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:45:29 EST >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Received and posted on Talisman. > >Susan > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:52 1997 Received: from f24.hotmail.com (207.82.250.35) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:56:35 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f24.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA12708; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:02:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:02:13 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231302.FAA12708@f24.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:02:13 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 402 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:45:29 EST >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Received and posted on Talisman. > >Susan > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:52 1997 Received: from f24.hotmail.com (207.82.250.35) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:56:35 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f24.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA12708; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:02:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:02:13 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231302.FAA12708@f24.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:02:13 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 402 >From: "Susan Maneck" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:45:29 EST >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Received and posted on Talisman. > >Susan > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:54 1997 Received: from f19.hotmail.com (207.82.250.30) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:57:23 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f19.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA11704; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:03:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:03:01 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231303.FAA11704@f19.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:03:01 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1023 >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 14:49:01 -0500 (EST) >From: JohnWrldPc@aol.com >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >In a message dated 97-01-19 08:09:09 EST, you write: > ><< Subj:Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai > Date:97-01-19 08:09:09 EST > From:FG@hotmail.com (Fred Glaysher) > To:johnwrldpc@aol.com > > Do you intend this as a contribution to discussion? Can you flesh > out a little bit more your ideas? > > I appreciate your response. > > > >How can we manifest peace on earth if we do not include everyone > >(all races, all religions, all nations, both sexes) in our vision of > >peace? > > > >John WorldPeace >> > >You would need to look at the Sayings of Baha'U'llah under the Table of >Contents on my web page at https://members.aol.com/JohnWrldPc/index.html > >John > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:54 1997 Received: from f19.hotmail.com (207.82.250.30) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:57:23 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f19.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA11704; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:03:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:03:01 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231303.FAA11704@f19.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:03:01 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1023 >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 14:49:01 -0500 (EST) >From: JohnWrldPc@aol.com >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >In a message dated 97-01-19 08:09:09 EST, you write: > ><< Subj:Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai > Date:97-01-19 08:09:09 EST > From:FG@hotmail.com (Fred Glaysher) > To:johnwrldpc@aol.com > > Do you intend this as a contribution to discussion? Can you flesh > out a little bit more your ideas? > > I appreciate your response. > > > >How can we manifest peace on earth if we do not include everyone > >(all races, all religions, all nations, both sexes) in our vision of > >peace? > > > >John WorldPeace >> > >You would need to look at the Sayings of Baha'U'llah under the Table of >Contents on my web page at https://members.aol.com/JohnWrldPc/index.html > >John > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:54 1997 Received: from f19.hotmail.com (207.82.250.30) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:57:23 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f19.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA11704; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:03:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:03:01 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231303.FAA11704@f19.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:03:01 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1023 >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 14:49:01 -0500 (EST) >From: JohnWrldPc@aol.com >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >In a message dated 97-01-19 08:09:09 EST, you write: > ><< Subj:Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai > Date:97-01-19 08:09:09 EST > From:FG@hotmail.com (Fred Glaysher) > To:johnwrldpc@aol.com > > Do you intend this as a contribution to discussion? Can you flesh > out a little bit more your ideas? > > I appreciate your response. > > > >How can we manifest peace on earth if we do not include everyone > >(all races, all religions, all nations, both sexes) in our vision of > >peace? > > > >John WorldPeace >> > >You would need to look at the Sayings of Baha'U'llah under the Table of >Contents on my web page at https://members.aol.com/JohnWrldPc/index.html > >John > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:57 1997 Received: from f7.hotmail.com (207.82.250.18) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:59:37 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f7.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA23204; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:05:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:05:15 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231305.FAA23204@f7.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:05:15 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1089 >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:46:12 -0500 (EST) >To: "Fred Glaysher" >From: jrcole@j.imap.itd.umich.edu (Juan R. I. Cole) >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Frederick: > >It is not actually clear to whom the reply to this call for discussion >should be sent. I'm sending my reply to you in hopes you will forward it >wherever necessary. You may want to clarify this on Talisman and Irfan. > >Irfan subscriptions are currently handled by me, jrcole@umich.edu. Irfan is >not for discussion of gnosis so much as for discussion by academics of >academic issues in the study of the Baha'i religion. > >--------------------------------------------- > > >I very much agree that an unmoderated listserv for the discussion of Baha'i >topics is sorely neeeded. > >Sincerely > >Juan R.I. Cole >Professor >Department of History >University of Michigan > > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:57 1997 Received: from f7.hotmail.com (207.82.250.18) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:59:37 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f7.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA23204; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:05:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:05:15 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231305.FAA23204@f7.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:05:15 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1089 >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:46:12 -0500 (EST) >To: "Fred Glaysher" >From: jrcole@j.imap.itd.umich.edu (Juan R. I. Cole) >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Frederick: > >It is not actually clear to whom the reply to this call for discussion >should be sent. I'm sending my reply to you in hopes you will forward it >wherever necessary. You may want to clarify this on Talisman and Irfan. > >Irfan subscriptions are currently handled by me, jrcole@umich.edu. Irfan is >not for discussion of gnosis so much as for discussion by academics of >academic issues in the study of the Baha'i religion. > >--------------------------------------------- > > >I very much agree that an unmoderated listserv for the discussion of Baha'i >topics is sorely neeeded. > >Sincerely > >Juan R.I. Cole >Professor >Department of History >University of Michigan > > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:57 1997 Received: from f7.hotmail.com (207.82.250.18) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:59:37 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f7.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA23204; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:05:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:05:15 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231305.FAA23204@f7.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:05:15 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1089 >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:46:12 -0500 (EST) >To: "Fred Glaysher" >From: jrcole@j.imap.itd.umich.edu (Juan R. I. Cole) >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Frederick: > >It is not actually clear to whom the reply to this call for discussion >should be sent. I'm sending my reply to you in hopes you will forward it >wherever necessary. You may want to clarify this on Talisman and Irfan. > >Irfan subscriptions are currently handled by me, jrcole@umich.edu. Irfan is >not for discussion of gnosis so much as for discussion by academics of >academic issues in the study of the Baha'i religion. > >--------------------------------------------- > > >I very much agree that an unmoderated listserv for the discussion of Baha'i >topics is sorely neeeded. > >Sincerely > >Juan R.I. Cole >Professor >Department of History >University of Michigan > > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:08 1997 Received: from f18.hotmail.com (207.82.250.29) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:02:41 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f18.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA02181; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:08:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:08:19 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231308.FAA02181@f18.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:08:18 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 810 >Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:46:05 -0700 (MST) >From: Eric Indiogine >To: Frederick Glaysher >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Hi! > >I like your proposal for t.r.b. very much. > >Bye, > > Eric Indiogine (sindiogi@nmsu.edu), Dept. Civil, Agricultural, > and Geological Engineering, New Mexico State University, >Las Cruces, New Mexico, U.S.A. > > ## True loss is for him whose days have been ## > ## spent in utter ignorance of his self ## > -* Baha'u'llah, Words of Wisdom #21 *- > > >---#@!~:207.82.250.115:d0: --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:09 1997 Received: from f4.hotmail.com (207.82.250.15) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:03:33 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f4.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA15834; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:09:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:09:11 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231309.FAA15834@f4.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:09:11 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 923 >Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:41:32 -0500 (EST) >From: "Joshua S. Greenbaum" >To: Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >I have passed your message along to parties who may be interested. > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~ >Josh Greenbaum"For we are like tree trunks in the snow. >Program AssistantIn appearance they lie sleekly and a >Center for Middle Eastern &little push should be enough to set them >North African Studiesrolling. No, it can't be done, for they >University of Michiganare firmly wedded to the ground. >144 Lane HallBut see, even that is only an appearance." >(313) 764-0350 -Franz Kafka > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:10 1997 Received: from f25.hotmail.com (207.82.250.36) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:04:51 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f25.hotmail.com (8.8.3/8.8.3) id FAA17315; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:10:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:10:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231310.FAA17315@f25.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:10:22 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6284 >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >To: newgroups-crossposts@uunet.uu.net (David C Lawrence), tale@uunet.uu.net >Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:22:15 -0800 (PST) >Cc: ariel@best.com (Catherine Hampton), ahm@cbmi.upmc.edu (Ahmad Hashem), >From: ariel@best.com (Catherine Hampton) >David -- I discussed this with my comoderator and we both feel that, >while Islam may be relevant to the Baha'i faith, the opposite is not >strictly true. Given the current guidelines of soc.religion.islam, >which require posts to be relevant to Islam, we feel that we cannot >approve this for posting. > >I'm sorry, Frederick. If you want to write a post which ties this >in with Islam, we'll be glad to review it, and we will also be >glad to include it in our "Rejections Report" for this week. > > >-- >Catherine Hampton >Interim Moderator, soc.religion.islam > > >> The following message was just posted to news.announce.newgroups, and >> the submitter requested that it also be posted to your group. Since I >> did not have prior approval for posting there, it is being submitted >> to you separately. If you accept it for your group, please use the >> headers below. >> >> Please let me know whether any following "official" stages of this >> proposal can be cross-posted directly to your group from >> news.announce.newgroups, and if so whether that permission extends to >> other future proposals which are relevant to the topic of your group. >> If you have already contacted me about this, I am sorry for the redundancy. >> My posting script does not have enough AI to know. >> >> Thank you. >> >> David Lawrence, moderator, news.announce.newgroups >> >> Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam >> From: FG >> Subject: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >> Followup-To: news.groups >> Organization: . >> >> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) >> unmoderated group talk.religion.bahai >> >> This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create an unmoderated >> worldwide discussion group called talk.religion.bahai. This is not a Call >> for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural details appear >> below. All followup discussion should be crossposted to news.groups. >> >> Newsgroup line: >> talk.religion.bahaiUnmoderated discussion of the Bahai faith. >> >> RATIONALE: talk.religion.bahai >> >> All newsgroups and listservs given to the discussion of the Bahai >> faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this >> proposed newsgroup would meet that need. >> >> The proponents intend that talk.religion.bahai will complement, rather >> than supplant, the existing moderated group soc.religion.bahai. The >> establishment of unmoderated companion groups is a well-accepted >> practice on Usenet. This newsgroup will be part of the talk.* >> hierarchy, which is exclusively for unmoderated groups. >> >> CHARTER: talk.religion.bahai >> >> All topics or ideas relevant to the Bahai faith -- its history, >> teachings, theology -- and so on would be appropriate areas for >> discussion. >> >> Crossposting of articles not specifically relevant to the Bahai faith >> is strongly discouraged. Also discouraged are personal messages, large >> ASCII graphics, special-format files, and any postings of a purely >> commercial nature. >> >> Readers are asked not to start or prolong flamewars and excessive >> crossposts. Articles may be crossposted to soc.religion.bahai -- >> subject, of course, to the approval of the moderator of that group. >> >> Readers may also post articles that have been rejected from >> soc.religion.bahai, so long as they conform to the charter above. >> >> END CHARTER. >> >> PROCEDURE: >> >> The process of creating newsgroups is twofold. First is the RFD >> stage, when someone writes a Request for Discussion (RFD) outlining >> the purpose of the proposed group. The RFD appears in >> news.announce.newgroups, news.groups, and other relevant discussion >> groups. Anyone may publicly comment on the RFD in news.groups for a >> three-week period. During the discussion phase, proponents may modify >> the RFD in response to suggestions from posters on news.groups. >> >> The second stage is the Call for Votes (CFV) stage. The proposal must >> pass a Usenet-wide vote with a 2/3 supermajority -- and at least 100 >> more votes in favor than against -- to be created. Anyone with an >> e-mail address may cast a ballot. A neutral votetaker from the Usenet >> Volunteer Votetakers (UVV) conducts all CFV's. >> >> This RFD attempts to comply with the Usenet newsgroup creation >> guidelines outlined in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup" and >> "Writing an RFD." Please refer to these documents if you have further >> questions about the process. >> >> DISTRIBUTION: >> >> This RFD has been posted to the following newsgroups: >> >> news.announce.newgroups news.groups soc.religion.bahai, >> soc.culture.iranian soc.culture.israel soc.religion.christian, >> soc.religion.islam soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc >> >> and the following mailing lists: >> >> Academic discussion of Bahai faith >> Subscribe via: jsgreen@umich.edu >> >> Academic discussion of Bahai gnosis >> Subscribe via: (working on getting address) >> >> Bahai discussion list >> >> Pointers will appear in the following newsgroups: >> >> soc.religion.unitarian-univ soc.religion.eastern, >> soc.religion.gnosis soc.religion.hindu, soc.religion.mormon >> soc.religion.paganism soc.religion.quaker, >> soc.religion.sikhism, soc.religion.vaishnava, >> soc.religion.atheism, talk.religion.buddhism, >> talk.religion.newage talk.religion.misc >> >> -- >> Proponent: Frederick Glaysher >> > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:14 1997 Received: from f15.hotmail.com (207.82.250.26) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:05:34 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f15.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA09949; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:11:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:11:12 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231311.FAA09949@f15.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:11:12 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 973 >Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 09:25:16 +1300 >To: Fred Glaysher >From: Nasser Kaviani >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >At 04:11 PM 1/18/97 -0000, Fred Glaysher wrote: >> >> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) >> unmoderated group talk.religion.bahai >> >>This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create an unmoderated > >Dear Fred > >I hope you are happy and well. Thank you for your email re unmoderated >group to discuss the Faith. I don't know why, but I have an uneasy feeling >about this and hope you have consulted about this with your LSA/NSA before >carrying out this job. I would like to know more about the reasons and >motives of having this group. > >Regards Nasser > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:20 1997 Received: from f15.hotmail.com (207.82.250.26) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:09:19 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f15.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA10331; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:14:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:14:57 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231314.FAA10331@f15.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:14:57 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 1129 >Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 11:07:59 -0500 (EST) >To: "Fred Glaysher" >From: jrcole@j.imap.itd.umich.edu (Juan R. I. Cole) >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Frederick: > >news.groups is not an e-mail address! Such a posting would go nowhere. > > >Juan > >>As far as I can determine, the following header should perhaps have >>appeared in the original post regarding all followup discussion on >>creating an unmoderated newsgroup: >> >> >> > Subject: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >> > Followup-To: news.groups >> >>Please do not email me directly. Post your discussion to news.groups. >> >> >> >> >>-- >>Frederick Glaysher >>Rochester Hills, Michigan USA >> >>--------------------------------------------------------- >>Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >>--------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > > >---#@!~:207.82.250.115:d0: --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:27 1997 Received: from f19.hotmail.com (207.82.250.30) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:12:53 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f19.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA13091; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:18:31 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:18:31 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231318.FAA13091@f19.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:18:31 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1324 >Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 13:27:02 -0500 (EST) >From: johnwrldpc@aol.com (JohnWrldPc) >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >To: Frederick Glaysher >If I understand correctly, the only thing that I can do at this time is to >post my comments to news.groups. Since I am new to this particular >process, can you tell me how I will know when the vote takes place. > >This is a great idea, especially for someone like myself who encounters >the worries of potential posters to my independent investigation of the >truth comments. This newsgroup will take the lease off a lot of Bahais >who I know have something to contribute outside a censored format. > >It will also give a true picture of Bahai concerns about the policies and >doctrine of their faith as opposed to a view skewed by censorship. > >John >John WorldPeace USA email welcomed >How can we manifest Peace on Earth if we do not include everyone (all nations, all races, all religions, both sexes) in our vision of Peace? >WorldPeace Peace Page: https://members.aol.com/JohnWrldPc/index.html > > >---#@!~:207.82.250.115:d0: --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:39 1997 Received: from f25.hotmail.com (207.82.250.36) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:17:57 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f25.hotmail.com (8.8.3/8.8.3) id FAA18531; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:23:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:23:35 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231323.FAA18531@f25.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:23:35 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1331 >From: "John Dale" >To: "Fred Glaysher" >Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 02:25:27 -0700 >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >Dear Mr. Glaysher, > >Could you tell me about talk.religion.bahai and how I can >participate in this list? > >Thanks, > >John Dale > > > >> Date: 21 Jan 1997 11:56:06 -0000 >> From: "Fred Glaysher" >> To: irfan@umich.edu >> Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai > >> As far as I can determine, the following header should perhaps have >> appeared in the original post regarding all followup discussion on >> creating an unmoderated newsgroup: >> >> >> > Subject: RFD: talk.religion.bahai >> > Followup-To: news.groups >> >> Please do not email me directly. Post your discussion to news.groups. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Frederick Glaysher >> Rochester Hills, Michigan USA >> >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> >> --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:15 1997 Received: from f12.hotmail.com (207.82.250.23) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:06:26 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f12.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA10298; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:12:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:12:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231312.FAA10298@f12.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:12:04 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai--Responses to whom? Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 906 >Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:14:53 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >cc:cbstone@phoenix.Princeton.EDU >Subject: Re: RFD: talk.religion.bahai--Responses to whom? >On 20 Jan 1997, Fred Glaysher wrote: > >> Chris, >> >> The RFD was posted on the 17th, and I've had several responses >> since then. One person is asking to whom should he email his >> response, me or someone else? I've assumed it's me, correct me >> if I'm wrong. Or should responses be posted in news.announce.newgroups? > >All followup response should be posted in news.groups -- no posted to >news.announce.newgroups, and not mailed to the proponent. > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:25 1997 Received: from f29.hotmail.com (207.82.250.40) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:12:05 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f29.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA28126; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:17:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:17:43 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231317.FAA28126@f29.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:17:43 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: t.r.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1388 >Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 13:24:11 -0500 (EST) >To: "Fred Glaysher" >From: jrcole@j.imap.itd.umich.edu (Juan R. I. Cole) >Subject: Re: t.r.bahai >I figured there would be opposition from the Bahais. All I can do is >suggest you have a friend repost to talisman with clearer instructions as to >where to imply, and explaining what is at stake; you yourself are not >popular enough there to sway them. > >>Sentiment seems to be 3 or 4 against to every 2 in favor at the >>moment. Any ideas? I'd appreciate any help you might suggest. >> >>Main opposition seems to be regarding covenant breakers. Any >>thoughts on that one? > >The problem of covenant breakers is there on all the chat rooms, since >company rules of AOL and MSN would not allow discrimination against them. >In that regard, talk.religion.bahai would be no different. > >good luck Juan > > >> >> >>-- >>Frederick Glaysher >>Rochester Hills, Michigan USA >> >>--------------------------------------------------------- >>Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com >>--------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > > >---#@!~:207.82.250.115:d0: --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:28 1997 Received: from f17.hotmail.com (207.82.250.28) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:13:31 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f17.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA05863; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:19:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:19:09 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231319.FAA05863@f17.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:19:09 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 841 >Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 15:56:41 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >cc:cbstone@phoenix.Princeton.EDU >Subject: Re: Talk.religion.bahai >On 22 Jan 1997, Fred Glaysher wrote: > >> Chris, >> >> The problem is people don't know yet where to respond to. The RFD >> had no instructions on where to discuss the proposal. Can you resend >> some kind of pointer message? > >Yes, it does, unless it got seriously mangled. Right at the beginning it >says, "all followup discussion should be conducted in news.groups." > >I will post a message in s.r.bahai about this. > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:30 1997 Received: from f10.hotmail.com (207.82.250.21) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:14:36 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f10.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA10294; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:20:14 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:20:14 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231320.FAA10294@f10.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:20:14 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 880 >Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 00:04:55 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:FG@hotmail.com >Subject: Re: Talk.religion.bahai >I'm going to say this once more, and then let the matter drop. There has >been some discussion of your RFD in news.groups. You have not made a >single post there in an attempt to address the concerns brought up. I >have, but it is not my role to do so; it is up to you to state *why* you >want an unmoderated group. News.groups regulars do not like it when a >proponent refuses to discuss his or her RFD whatsoever. Some will even >vote against the group on that basis, even when the group is technically >sound. > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:33 1997 Received: from f8.hotmail.com (207.82.250.19) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:15:55 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f8.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA20146; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:21:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:21:33 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231321.FAA20146@f8.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:21:33 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: Talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 960 >Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 16:21:01 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >cc:cbstone@phoenix.Princeton.EDU >Subject: Re: Talk.religion.bahai >On 25 Jan 1997, Fred Glaysher wrote: > >> Something must be wrong with my version of Netscape 2.02. Every time >> I log in to news.groups since the RFD was posted I get nothing on >> the proposal! I can only read the messages I've myself have already >> posted. Do you think I have this thing set up wrong? > >The real problem is hotmail.com. Don't you have e-mail at another site, >as I recall? Votes cast from web pages are supposedly invalid, though in >practice it depends on which votetaker you get. > > >---#@!~:207.82.250.115:d0: > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:24 1997 Received: from f5.hotmail.com (207.82.250.16) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:37:14 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f5.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA22098; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:51 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231242.EAA22098@f5.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:51 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: TRB distribution Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 730 >Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 16:54:38 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: TRB distribution >Tale is the moderator of news.announce.newgroups. He is also the person >who issues newgroup messages once proposals pass a CFV. > >You might want to read the newsgroup creation FAQ's, available on >news.announce.newgroups. > >It did not seem to take long for the SRB moderators to decide to post the >RFD. Three of them responded immediately. > > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:24 1997 Received: from f5.hotmail.com (207.82.250.16) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:37:14 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f5.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA22098; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:51 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231242.EAA22098@f5.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:51 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: TRB distribution Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 730 >Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 16:54:38 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: TRB distribution >Tale is the moderator of news.announce.newgroups. He is also the person >who issues newgroup messages once proposals pass a CFV. > >You might want to read the newsgroup creation FAQ's, available on >news.announce.newgroups. > >It did not seem to take long for the SRB moderators to decide to post the >RFD. Three of them responded immediately. > > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:24 1997 Received: from f5.hotmail.com (207.82.250.16) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:37:14 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f5.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA22098; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:51 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231242.EAA22098@f5.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:42:51 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: TRB distribution Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 730 >Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 16:54:38 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:Fred Glaysher >Subject: Re: TRB distribution >Tale is the moderator of news.announce.newgroups. He is also the person >who issues newgroup messages once proposals pass a CFV. > >You might want to read the newsgroup creation FAQ's, available on >news.announce.newgroups. > >It did not seem to take long for the SRB moderators to decide to post the >RFD. Three of them responded immediately. > > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:48 1997 Received: from f4.hotmail.com (207.82.250.15) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:51:34 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f4.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA14546; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:57:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:57:12 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231257.EAA14546@f4.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:57:12 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: rfd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1784 >From: "Sen McGlinn" >To: FG@hotmail.com >Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 14:53:41 +0100 >Subject: rfd >I suggest you look in on Talisman. It covers the topics you suggest >and is unmoderated. Academic discussion is more for Irfan >(unmoderated), which has a prerequisite of an arts or humanities >degree or substantial contribution to Baha'i Studies. The name >'irfan' is rather misleading - since matters of Baha'i worship & >mysticism are the topic of the Mashriq list (also unmoderated). > >Talisman is already quite busy. People have been signing off because >there is too much traffic. Perhaps it would be useful to divide >the topics in some way, since any great number of new subscribers on >Talisman would probably be unwelcome. What about a split betweeen >community affairs on one list and theology & principles on the other? >I suspect Juan would be happy to see some of the more 'community >affairs' stuff not appearing on Talisman > >Sen >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Sen McGlinn Sen.McGlinn@Bahai.NL > *** > Let the friends recall and ever bear in mind > the repeated exhortations and glowing promises of our beloved Master > with reference to the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar, > the crowning institution in every Baha'i community. > > (Shoghi Effendi, Baha'i Administration, page 108) >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:48 1997 Received: from f4.hotmail.com (207.82.250.15) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:51:34 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f4.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA14546; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:57:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:57:12 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231257.EAA14546@f4.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:57:12 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: rfd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1784 >From: "Sen McGlinn" >To: FG@hotmail.com >Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 14:53:41 +0100 >Subject: rfd >I suggest you look in on Talisman. It covers the topics you suggest >and is unmoderated. Academic discussion is more for Irfan >(unmoderated), which has a prerequisite of an arts or humanities >degree or substantial contribution to Baha'i Studies. The name >'irfan' is rather misleading - since matters of Baha'i worship & >mysticism are the topic of the Mashriq list (also unmoderated). > >Talisman is already quite busy. People have been signing off because >there is too much traffic. Perhaps it would be useful to divide >the topics in some way, since any great number of new subscribers on >Talisman would probably be unwelcome. What about a split betweeen >community affairs on one list and theology & principles on the other? >I suspect Juan would be happy to see some of the more 'community >affairs' stuff not appearing on Talisman > >Sen >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Sen McGlinn Sen.McGlinn@Bahai.NL > *** > Let the friends recall and ever bear in mind > the repeated exhortations and glowing promises of our beloved Master > with reference to the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar, > the crowning institution in every Baha'i community. > > (Shoghi Effendi, Baha'i Administration, page 108) >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:48 1997 Received: from f4.hotmail.com (207.82.250.15) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:51:34 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f4.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA14546; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:57:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:57:12 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231257.EAA14546@f4.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:57:12 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: rfd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1784 >From: "Sen McGlinn" >To: FG@hotmail.com >Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 14:53:41 +0100 >Subject: rfd >I suggest you look in on Talisman. It covers the topics you suggest >and is unmoderated. Academic discussion is more for Irfan >(unmoderated), which has a prerequisite of an arts or humanities >degree or substantial contribution to Baha'i Studies. The name >'irfan' is rather misleading - since matters of Baha'i worship & >mysticism are the topic of the Mashriq list (also unmoderated). > >Talisman is already quite busy. People have been signing off because >there is too much traffic. Perhaps it would be useful to divide >the topics in some way, since any great number of new subscribers on >Talisman would probably be unwelcome. What about a split betweeen >community affairs on one list and theology & principles on the other? >I suspect Juan would be happy to see some of the more 'community >affairs' stuff not appearing on Talisman > >Sen >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Sen McGlinn Sen.McGlinn@Bahai.NL > *** > Let the friends recall and ever bear in mind > the repeated exhortations and glowing promises of our beloved Master > with reference to the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar, > the crowning institution in every Baha'i community. > > (Shoghi Effendi, Baha'i Administration, page 108) >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:21 1997 Received: from f11.hotmail.com (207.82.250.22) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:10:14 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f11.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA17333; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:15:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:15:52 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231315.FAA17333@f11.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:15:52 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 781 >Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 03:14:02 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:FG@hotmail.com >Subject: Talk.religion.bahai >I strongly suggest you respond to some of the discussion about your RFD on >news.groups. It is not up to me, as the mentor, to defend your proposal. >I have made some comments from the standpoint of someone concerned with >Usenet policy, but you need to explain why you think this group is needed, >or else no one will vote for it. I'm quite certain you can do this >without attacking the moderators of soc.religion.bahai. > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:22 1997 Received: from f8.hotmail.com (207.82.250.19) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:11:00 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f8.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA19500; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:16:37 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:16:37 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231316.FAA19500@f8.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:16:37 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: Talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 781 >Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 03:14:02 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:FG@hotmail.com >Subject: Talk.religion.bahai >I strongly suggest you respond to some of the discussion about your RFD on >news.groups. It is not up to me, as the mentor, to defend your proposal. >I have made some comments from the standpoint of someone concerned with >Usenet policy, but you need to explain why you think this group is needed, >or else no one will vote for it. I'm quite certain you can do this >without attacking the moderators of soc.religion.bahai. > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:21 1997 Received: from f18.hotmail.com (207.82.250.29) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:36:02 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f18.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA00166; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:40 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231241.EAA00166@f18.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:40 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: TRB distribution Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 446 >Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 00:32:22 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:FG@www.hotmail.com >Subject: TRB distribution >It seems the moderators of soc.religion.bahai are willing to let Tale post >our RFD there. > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:21 1997 Received: from f18.hotmail.com (207.82.250.29) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:36:02 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f18.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA00166; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:40 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231241.EAA00166@f18.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:40 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: TRB distribution Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 446 >Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 00:32:22 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:FG@www.hotmail.com >Subject: TRB distribution >It seems the moderators of soc.religion.bahai are willing to let Tale post >our RFD there. > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 07:45:21 1997 Received: from f18.hotmail.com (207.82.250.29) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 07:36:02 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f18.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA00166; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:40 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231241.EAA00166@f18.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 04:41:40 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.56] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: TRB distribution Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 446 >Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 00:32:22 -0500 (EST) >From:Christopher Stone >To:FG@www.hotmail.com >Subject: TRB distribution >It seems the moderators of soc.religion.bahai are willing to let Tale post >our RFD there. > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:40:00 1997 Received: from f21.hotmail.com (207.82.250.32) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:01:44 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f21.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA01677; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:07:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:07:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231307.FAA01677@f21.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:07:22 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: UVV Questionnaire: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 14448 >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 14:52:44 -0500 (EST) >From: Bill Aten >To: FG@hotmail.com (Frederick Glaysher) >Subject: UVV Questionnaire: talk.religion.bahai >Ref: talk.religion.bahai > >Our records show that you are the proponent of the referenced RFD. >This message is being sent to you as a reminder that a completed UVV >Proponent Questionnaire (PQ) for your proposal needs to be sent to the >UVV Coordinators before a votetaker can be assigned. > >Completed questionnaires are normally provided by the proponent 5 to 7 days >prior to the anticipated CFV submission date, but that timing may vary >depending on the activity generated by your RFD. A properly completed >questionnaire MUST be on file in our database before we will be able to >assign a votetaker to conduct the vote on your proposal. Any delay in >providing this information at the proper time will cause a corresponding >delay in the posting of your CFV. > >**************************************************************************** ** >A CFV for a proposal cannot be advanced until at least 21 days from the >date of the first RFD, or ten days from any subsequent RFD, whichever is >later. If more than 60 days have passed since the most recent RFD on the >proposal, then another RFD is required before it can go to vote. The UVV >must have time to process your questionnaire and submit the CFV before the >60 day limit, so do not wait until the last minute to provide your answers. >**************************************************************************** ** > >For your convenience, I have attached a copy of the current questionnaire to >this message. Please take some time to review it ASAP. Your answers to the >questions are based on the RFD discussions that occur. By reviewing this >questionnaire now, you will be in a better position to properly complete the >questionnaire at the end of the RFD discussion period. > >Once you have filled out the questionnaire as accurately and completely as >possible, please forward it to: > > contact@uvv.org > >The above address may also be used if you have any questions regarding the >voting process or procedures. > >As a reminder, you can easily monitor the current status of all proposals >tracked by the UVV. Simply look in the "news.groups" newsgroup for the >daily posting of the article "UVV: Daily RFD, PQ, and CFV status report". >If you have any questions regarding the status of your proposal, please >check this article first before writing to us with your questions. > > -- Bill Aten > Member, UseNet Volunteer Votetakers > > UseNet Volunteer Votetakers WWW page: > >==================================================================== ========== > >UVV Pre-CFV Proponent Questionnaire (PQ) for Newsgroup Proposals >**************************************************************** > >Note: This document is for proponents of newsgroups which have completed >the required initial 21-day discussion period and are ready for a vote. >If you are looking for information about a new proposal, you need to start >with a Request for Discussion (RFD). The Usenet group mentor program can >help with this process; see . > >**************************************************************************** ** >A CFV for a proposal cannot be advanced until at least 21 days from the >date of the first RFD, or ten days from any subsequent RFD, whichever is >later. If more than 60 days have passed since the most recent RFD on the >proposal, then another RFD is required before it can go to vote. The UVV >must have time to process your questionnaire and submit the CFV before the >60 day limit, so do not wait until the last minute to provide your answers. > >Please -- DO NOT return the completed questionnaire until 5 to 7 days prior >to the anticipated CFV submission date. The answers you provide must reflect >the discussion generated by your RFD(s). If you send it in too soon, we will >simply return it to you and ask you to resubmit it at a later date when the >RFD discussions are more or less complete. >**************************************************************************** ** > >Last updated: August 23, 1996 > > >The UseNet Volunteer Votetakers (UVV) coordinate all the details of the >newsgroup VOTING process, including two postings of the CFV and a final >RESULT. Your vote will be given to a neutral member of an experienced >cadre of votetakers. In order for this to work, we need the information >requested in this questionnaire. > >All groups must have appeared in an official RFD under the same group names >that you are requesting in the CFV. If you are still in the RFD process, >please wait before filling out this form so that changes based upon the >discussion can be incorporated. Proponents are expected to react to issues >raised during the RFD process and incorporate changes based upon this >process; if there are substantial changes from the last RFD, then you need >to submit another RFD, not this questionnaire. Review Question #1 (in the >"before you start" section below) to ensure that you're in compliance with >this requirement. > >About a week before the desired CFV date is ideal timing for submitting this >form since it takes at least a few days to assign the vote to a volunteer. >If you don't send us this information, it will be assumed that you decided >not to go through with the vote (it often happens). > >We will take the answers you provide in this questionnaire and add the voting >instructions, dates, etc. to create the actual CFV, you don't need to do that. >All we need from you is an accurate and properly completed questionnaire. > >Please fill in the requested information and return the entire form in plain >text (ie. no MIME, BINHEX, BASE64, PGP, miscellaneous attachments, etc.) to >. > > >Pre-CFV Questions >================= > >1. Please confirm that you participated in the required RFD discussion. >In order to show compliance with the discussion phase of the newsgroup >creation process, please give a brief description (following the text of >this question) of the input that was given to you in response to the RFD, >and what changes were made as a result of them. You do not have to >implement every suggestion, but you must have answered them; indicate here >what the answers were if any serious suggestions were not implemented. >For simple non-controversial proposals, it is acceptable to say, "all input >was positive," but only if that's true. (If, based on the input you've >received, it appears that changes to the names or charters of the groups >are necessary, you must make those changes and issue another RFD before >submitting this form.) > >2. List the proposed newsgroup name(s), whether each group is unmoderated >or moderated, and any applicable comments. For example: > >comp.foo.bar.miscunmoderated (renames comp.foo.bar) >comp.foo.bar.announcemoderated > >3. Please provide a one-line description of each newsgroup. Enter the group >name, then a tab (you must tab past column 24). You now have until the end >of an 80-character line to enter a description for system newsgroups files >(which you must end with a period). The "(Moderated)" doesn't count in the >80 character limit. Please avoid phrases like "Discussion of..." since we >already know that. > >Repeat this once per proposed newsgroup. For example: > >comp.foo.bar.miscThe foo bar system in general. >comp.foo.bar.announceAnnouncements about the foo bar system. (Moderated) > ( you must tab to here ^ using a tabstop of 8 ) > >4. Proponent's name and email address for this vote (usually you). If there >is more than one proponent, list the "primary" proponent first. If you are >working with a Group Mentor, please include that person's name and email >address also. Please use the form "name ". For example: > >Proponent: John Foo >Mentor: Jane Doe (or "none" if you don't have one) > >Proponent: >Mentor: > >5. Which groups should the CFV be crossposted to? These are usually the >same groups you posted the RFD to because you don't want the vote to come >as a surprise to whole newsgroups. There needs to be a good reason to add >newsgroups to the distribution. Indicate with an asterisk ('*') which >groups were *not* crossposted to in the RFDs and then provide a good reason >for adding them to the CFV. > >IMPORTANT! news.announce.newgroups and news.groups are always crossposted >to. If these, plus the Newsgroups: header name, your other newsgroups, and >the commas (",") that separate each newsgroup name, total more than 200 >characters, there are several Usenet sites which will not be able to handle >the CFV and will discard it. Even though 200 characters are available, >shorter newsgroup lists and less crossposting are generally a good idea. >We will NOT accept a Newsgroups: header that is longer than 200 characters >because the "news.announce.newgroups" moderator's posting scripts will simply >reject it. When you are doing your math to determine the length of the >Newsgroups: header line, don't forget that the header name and the commas >that separate the newsgroup names, must be counted as part of the allowed 200 >characters. Since "Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups," is 48 >characters in length, that leaves you with 152 characters for your desired >newsgroup names and the separating commas (no spaces after the commas, BTW). > >Please add the newsgroups that you want crossposted to the newsgroup header >line that follows: > >Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups, > >In addition to "news.announce.newgroups", which (if any) of the newsgroups >you just listed are moderated? (if none, say "none"): > >If you plan to post "pointers" to the CFV in additional newsgroups, list the >intended newsgroups here (if none, say "none"): > >6. Would you like the CFV sent to any mailing lists? Although allowed, >the use of mailing lists is strongly discouraged due to the numerous voting >problems that continually arise during the CFVs that use them. If you feel >that mailing lists are essential, please keep the number of lists requested >to an absolute minimum. More lists mean more potential problems, and it >becomes more difficult to find a volunteer votetaker to run your proposal. > >These mailing lists have to be named up front, so please give their names >and submission addresses so that this information can be included in the CFV. >You may wish to include the request address as well as the posting address, >so anyone who is interested and wants to join won't send messages to the >mailing list itself. IMPORTANT! For each mailing list you name, we need >to know whether or not the list honors Reply-To: headers in messages sent to >it, and whether or not non-members can directly post messages to the list. >CFVs can only be posted to mailing lists that allow the votetaker to directly >post messages, so if the list is closed to non-members, the actual CFV will >not be posted to that list (unless the votetaker happens to also be a member >of the closed list). For closed lists, you have the option of posting a >"pointer" message to the list to advise the members that a CFV is in progress >and to tell them where they can find a copy of the actual CFV. The intent to >use "pointer" messages in mailing lists does not need to be listed in the CFV. > >Please provide the following information and answer the questions for each >mailing list you name. The CFV will not be sent to any mailing lists missing >this information, or to closed lists (unless the votetaker happens to be a >member). > >Mailing list name: >Submission address: >Request address (optional): >List honors Reply-To: headers (yes/no)?: >List allows non-members to post messages (yes/no)?: > >7. What is/are the charter(s) for the group(s). This includes the name of >the group(s), what is acceptable and unacceptable on the group(s), and what >exactly is going on if this is a reorganization. This information can >usually be taken directly from the most recent RFD. If the information has >changed substantially since the last RFD, then a new RFD should be prepared >instead of proceeding with a CFV. A new RFD is mandatory if any changes to >a newsgroup name are made (no matter how minor). > >If any of the groups are moderated, give the names of their moderators, >their mail addresses, and the addresses they will be using to moderate the >group. For example: > >Moderated newsgroup name: foo.bar.chess >Moderator: jfrobs@host.domain (J. Frobs) > -or- >Moderator: "J. Frobs" > (note: the ""'s are necessary if there is a . in the name) >Administrative contact address: chess-request@anotherhost.domain >Article submission address: chess@anotherhost.domain > >Moderated newsgroup name: >Moderator: >Administrative contact address: >Article submission address: > >If any groups are going to be gatewayed with a mailing list, give the name >and address of the mailing list. > >Gateway mailing list name: >Submission address: >Request address (optional): > >8. Please provide a rationale for each group. A rationale is a (short) >paragraph explaining why you think this group creation/reorganization/ >whatever should pass. This paragraph will be used for the "Rationale" >section of the CFV. This is not optional and is quite important in >convincing potential voters to cast a positive vote. Multi-group proposals >must have a rationale section for each group. This information is usually >taken directly from the most recent RFD. > >Thanks, >UVV Coordinators > >==================================================================== ========== --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Feb 23 08:39:58 1997 Received: from f29.hotmail.com (207.82.250.40) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 08:00:21 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by f29.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA27204; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:05:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:05:59 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199702231305.FAA27204@f29.hotmail.com> Received: from 204.38.255.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 05:05:59 PST X-Originating-IP: [204.38.255.38] From: "Fred Glaysher" To: @moa.net Cc: Subject: Fwd: UVV RFD tracking: talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1124 >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 12:51:56 -0500 (EST) >From: bill@netagw.com (Bill Aten) >To: Frederick Glaysher >Subject: UVV RFD tracking: talk.religion.bahai >Ref: talk.religion.bahai > >Your RFD has been entered into the UVV tracking database. I will forward >a copy of the UVV Proponent Questionnaire (PQ) to you within the next >couple of days. > >You can easily monitor the status of all proposals tracked in the UVV >database by looking in the "news.groups" newsgroup for the daily posting >of the article "UVV: Daily RFD, PQ, and CFV status report". If you have >a question regarding the status of your proposal, please remember to check >this posting first. There's a good chance that you will find the answer to >your question in the article. > > -- Bill Aten > Member, UseNet Volunteer Votetakers > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:42 1997 >From brentreed@aol.com Fri Mar 7 00:45:16 1997 Received: (from root@localhost) by emout16.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) id DAA05569 for FG@hotmail.com; Fri, 7 Mar 1997 03:43:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 03:43:45 -0500 (EST) From: BrentReed@aol.com Message-ID: <970307034344_-1573421478@emout16.mail.aol.com> To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Fwd: Vote X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 677 Dear Fred: I wanted to forward this to you, because I'm not confident that the vote counter will preserve all of the votes. Are there any safeguards to prevent this? The group that strongly wants censorship is capable of doing some shady work to prevent the creation of talk.religion.bahai. Richard Detweiler, one of the Grand Inquisitor Baha'is, who is in favor of censorship, has a primenet address, I believe. He is not affiliated with the vote counter is he? Brent Reed --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Vote Date: 97-03-07 03:38:20 EST From: BrentReed To: jjd@primenet.com I vote YES on talk.religion.bahai Brent Reed From - Mon Apr 07 07:28:18 1997 >From jjd@primenet.com Fri Mar 7 07:28:04 1997 Received: from usr03.primenet.com (jjd@usr03.primenet.com [206.165.5.103]) by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA23913; Fri, 7 Mar 1997 08:27:25 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 08:27:25 -0700 (MST) From: Jim Davis Reply-To: Jim Davis To: Frederick Glaysher cc: cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu, bill@netagw.com, rra@cs.stanford.edu Subject: Re: Fwd: Vote In-Reply-To: <199703071207.EAA20719@f3.hotmail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 432 On Fri, 7 Mar 1997, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >Richard > >Detweiler, one of the Grand Inquisitor Baha'is, who is in favor of > >censorship, has a primenet address, I believe. He is not affiliated with the > >vote counter is he? If you're going to question either primenet's security measures, or my integrity, you'd better have stronger evidence than just email from someone peddling clueless conspiracy theories. From - Tue Apr 08 07:19:46 1997 >From jjd@primenet.com Fri Mar 7 07:28:04 1997 Received: from usr03.primenet.com (jjd@usr03.primenet.com [206.165.5.103]) by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA23913; Fri, 7 Mar 1997 08:27:25 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 08:27:25 -0700 (MST) From: Jim Davis Reply-To: Jim Davis To: Frederick Glaysher cc: cbstone@phoenix.princeton.edu, bill@netagw.com, rra@cs.stanford.edu Subject: Re: Fwd: Vote In-Reply-To: <199703071207.EAA20719@f3.hotmail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 432 On Fri, 7 Mar 1997, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >Richard > >Detweiler, one of the Grand Inquisitor Baha'is, who is in favor of > >censorship, has a primenet address, I believe. He is not affiliated with the > >vote counter is he? If you're going to question either primenet's security measures, or my integrity, you'd better have stronger evidence than just email from someone peddling clueless conspiracy theories. From - Tue Jan 28 06:38:24 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32EDE530.66C4@moa.net> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:38:24 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: group-advice@uunet.uu.net Subject: Group Creation Problem Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 3250 Since my RFD was posted on Jan. 17th for talk.religion.bahai, I have not been able to join in ANY of the discussion in news.groups or elsewhere because of some kind of server problem that prevents me from reading messages posted by other people. For days I didn't even realize there was a problem. Christopher Stone, my group mentor, made me aware of it when he repeatedly advised me to join in the discussion. I could not tell there was any going on. The only messages I can still read on news.groups are the ones I've posted there myself. I'm attaching a message I sent to my systems administrator to help you understand what's happening. If they can fix the problem, can you post a 2nd RFD? There haven't been any changes to the original one because I've received no discussion on it expect for a few people that emailed me directly, and which I reposted to news.groups. ---------------------- Subject: [Fwd: Re: Newsgroup error messages] Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:52:18 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> To: Christopher Stone Chris, I appreciate your advising me to respond to others' messages because if you hadn't I would never have known something was wrong with my system server. Jeff Maracini at Oakland University has just emailed that they're trying to fix it. Thanks. Subject: Re: Newsgroup error messages Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 10:17:35 -0500 (EST) From: Jeff Marraccini To: Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> A fix is in progress by the MOAnet core team. I am not involved in its implementation, but I'll ask if I can help. Thanks, Jeff Jeff Marraccini jeff@oak.oakland.edu OCIS Network & Integration Services 810/981-0568 Oakland University "The Computer is your Friend." -- Paranoia Jeff Marraccini's Home Page On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > I keep getting an error message when I try to post to newsgroups on > MOA.net: > > A News (NNTP) error occurred: posting failed, sorry > > I'm working with Christopher Stone at the group-mentors for USEnet > at Princeton trying to get a RFD for a new newsgroup discussed and > voted on. This problem is preventing me from properly responding > to the discussion and half the time has run out for the 30 day > discussion period. Chris Stone has emailed me asking why I'm not > joining in all the discussion in news.groups, but when I use the > news browser to download from news.groups, I get only old messages, > my own, and a few new ones, not the responses he says should be > there. > > I thought the problem might have been Netscape 2.02, so I upgraded on > Saturday to Netscape Gold but it has not made any difference. That > seems to confirm it's a server problem or something. I'm using Windows > 95 too. > > Urgently, I ask for your suggestions? > > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > From - Tue Jan 28 16:22:15 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.43) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:31:01 -0500 Message-ID: <32EDE530.66C4@moa.net> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:38:24 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: group-advice@uunet.uu.net Subject: Group Creation Problem Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 3250 Since my RFD was posted on Jan. 17th for talk.religion.bahai, I have not been able to join in ANY of the discussion in news.groups or elsewhere because of some kind of server problem that prevents me from reading messages posted by other people. For days I didn't even realize there was a problem. Christopher Stone, my group mentor, made me aware of it when he repeatedly advised me to join in the discussion. I could not tell there was any going on. The only messages I can still read on news.groups are the ones I've posted there myself. I'm attaching a message I sent to my systems administrator to help you understand what's happening. If they can fix the problem, can you post a 2nd RFD? There haven't been any changes to the original one because I've received no discussion on it expect for a few people that emailed me directly, and which I reposted to news.groups. ---------------------- Subject: [Fwd: Re: Newsgroup error messages] Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:52:18 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> To: Christopher Stone Chris, I appreciate your advising me to respond to others' messages because if you hadn't I would never have known something was wrong with my system server. Jeff Maracini at Oakland University has just emailed that they're trying to fix it. Thanks. Subject: Re: Newsgroup error messages Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 10:17:35 -0500 (EST) From: Jeff Marraccini To: Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> A fix is in progress by the MOAnet core team. I am not involved in its implementation, but I'll ask if I can help. Thanks, Jeff Jeff Marraccini jeff@oak.oakland.edu OCIS Network & Integration Services 810/981-0568 Oakland University "The Computer is your Friend." -- Paranoia Jeff Marraccini's Home Page On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > I keep getting an error message when I try to post to newsgroups on > MOA.net: > > A News (NNTP) error occurred: posting failed, sorry > > I'm working with Christopher Stone at the group-mentors for USEnet > at Princeton trying to get a RFD for a new newsgroup discussed and > voted on. This problem is preventing me from properly responding > to the discussion and half the time has run out for the 30 day > discussion period. Chris Stone has emailed me asking why I'm not > joining in all the discussion in news.groups, but when I use the > news browser to download from news.groups, I get only old messages, > my own, and a few new ones, not the responses he says should be > there. > > I thought the problem might have been Netscape 2.02, so I upgraded on > Saturday to Netscape Gold but it has not made any difference. That > seems to confirm it's a server problem or something. I'm using Windows > 95 too. > > Urgently, I ask for your suggestions? > > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > From - Sat Feb 08 07:18:16 1997 Received: from cyclone.stanford.edu (36.220.0.221) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 08 Feb 1997 06:18:26 -0500 Received: (from eagle@localhost) by cyclone.stanford.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA18382; Sat, 8 Feb 1997 03:24:00 -0800 (PST) To: @moa.net Subject: Re: Group Creation Problem References: <32EDE530.66C4@moa.net> Cc: group-advice@isc.org Reply-To: group-advice@isc.org From: Russ Allbery In-Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher's message of Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:38:24 -0500 Date: 08 Feb 1997 03:24:00 -0800 Message-ID: Lines: 15 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 653 Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> writes: > If they can fix the problem, can you post a 2nd RFD? > There haven't been any changes to the original one because I've received > no discussion on it expect for a few people that emailed me directly, > and which I reposted to news.groups. Second RFDs are only posted if there are substantial changes to the proposal or 60 days have passed since the first RFD. You can certainly, however, repost a copy of the first RFD to all the newsgroups the first RFD went to, excluding news.announce.newgroups. -- Russ Allbery (rra@cs.stanford.edu) From - Sun Apr 06 08:01:24 1997 BCC: FG@hotmail.com Message-ID: <33479094.24D3@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 06 Apr 1997 08:01:24 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: comment@dejanews.com Subject: Help Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 229 I'd appreciate it if you'd add a new group: alt.religion.bahai I've helped get it started and would like to access through your service, which is great, incidentally.... -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sun Apr 06 09:54:54 1997 BCC: FG@hotmail.com Message-ID: <3347AB2E.673A@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 06 Apr 1997 09:54:54 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: joe@zippo.com Subject: How? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 306 How do I login to zippo.com? It looked good, so I registered but have been very frustrated with it. Can I subscribe to newsgroups? Where do I login, using my user name and password? There's nothing on the main homepage that I can figure out.... -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sun Feb 16 08:44:34 1997 Received: from mail.cei.net (204.117.117.29) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 15 Feb 1997 23:05:32 -0500 Received: from major.cei.net (max1-41.cei.net [204.180.118.50]) by mail.cei.net (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA09638 for <@moa.net>; Sat, 15 Feb 1997 22:11:01 -0600 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970214175921.006c6208@mail.cei.net> X-Sender: lisarm@mail.cei.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 11:59:21 -0600 To: @moa.net From: Lisa Armstrong Subject: Re: I agree about the "bossy" Baha'is X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 2619 Dear Fred, (or Pam) At 08:13 AM 2/15/97 -0700, you wrote: >@moa.net wrote: > > I've been a Bahai for over twenty years, and I believe many >> individuals do indeed "seek to control" others' thoughts... I tend to agree with you. I have also been a Baha'i for more than 20 years. It will be 24 years this summer, to be exact. Most of the problem, as I see it , as far as Baha'is being "bossy" or whatever (trying to control others thoughts) centers a lack of either personal maturity and/or a lack of deepening. Of course, there are also those who think that they know "everything" there is to know about the Cause. I compare this type of Baha'i (often obnoxious) to those who could perhaps submit and be given a "permit" to say that they know almost everything (Hands of the Cause, Counsellors, Universal House of Justice members, occasionally some beloved, spiritual souls who have no "titles") We do, indeed, I think, have a unique perspective having been Baha'is as long as we have. We are old enough to remember some of the "oldster" in the Faith (those who had met Abd'ul-Baha'- we remember when Glenford Mitchell was still Secretary of the NSA), and we have seen the Faith in the U.S. go through some _pretty_ strange things. However, at this juncture, at least where I am in the U.S., the biggest test is to just "keep on keepin' on". Sometimes I have such a struggle maintaining any sort of Baha'i identity, as the communities close to where I live are pretty "dead", and many of the friends are apathetic, or lip-service what should be done, and seldom to never do anything. Everyone seems "too busy" to want to teach the Faith, work with the youth, teach children's classes, have prayer meetings, sing in the choir, etc.,etc. This is perhaps the saddest that I have ever seen it here. I pray that it will change someday, but I have lived in this area for the entire time I have been a Baha'i. My main goal is to move to the southwestern part of the U.S., where I am very drawn,spiritually. What about you and your area of the states? What goes on? What is behind your feeling that Baha'is seem to want to control your thoughts? (Just curious) Lisa Armstrong** lisarm@cei.net // "...God hath sent down His Messengers to succeed to Moses // // and Jesus, and He will continue to do so till 'the end // // that hath no end'; so that His grace may, from the heaven// // of Divine bounty, be continually vouchsafed to mankind." // // - Baha'u'llah // (**Ask me about this quote from the Baha'i Faith**) From - Mon Mar 10 06:58:02 1997 Received: from default (199.179.42.117) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 06:50:06 -0500 Message-ID: <3323F73B.635C@moa.net> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 06:57:47 -0500 From: <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jjd@primenet.com Subject: I vote YES for talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 390 I vote YES on talk.religion.bahai (This is my separate account from my husband, Frederick Glaysher, proponent, though he has used this account in the past. He has a separate one for access to FG@hotmail.com) Please delete my earlier message with his name still in the FROM slot and count this one, not that one. He's already voted from his own address. From - Mon Mar 10 06:57:47 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <3323F73B.635C@moa.net> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 06:57:47 -0500 From: <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jjd@primenet.com Subject: I vote YES for talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 392 I vote YES on talk.religion.bahai (This is my separate account from my husband, Frederick Glaysher, proponent, though he has used this account in the past. He has a separate one for access to FG@hotmail.com) Please delete my earlier message with his name still in the FROM slot and count this one, not that one. He's already voted from his own address. From - Mon Mar 10 06:52:36 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <3323F604.25E7@moa.net> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 06:52:36 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jjd@primenet.com Subject: I vote Yes on talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 241 I vote YES on talk.religion.bahai (This is my separate account from my husband, Frederick Glaysher, proponent, though he has used this account in the past. He has a separate one for access to FG@hotmail.com) From - Fri Feb 14 06:49:58 1997 Received: from falcon.liunet.edu (148.4.5.2) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Thu, 13 Feb 1997 17:06:54 -0500 Received: from hornet.liunet.edu by falcon.liunet.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA13771; Thu, 13 Feb 1997 17:07:02 -0500 Received: from hornet.liunet.edu by hornet.liunet.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA14245; Thu, 13 Feb 1997 17:05:10 -0500 Message-Id: <33039108.4BD@hornet.liunet.edu> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 17:09:12 -0500 From: C Hanson X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: @moa.net Subject: inquiry Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 155 I notice your name in a lot of these user net messages. I am curious about your Bahai background and do you work with the BCCA? chanson@hornet.liunet.edu From - Fri Feb 14 08:40:10 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.60) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 14 Feb 1997 06:45:18 -0500 Message-ID: <3304520E.7E5D@moa.net> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 06:52:46 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: C Hanson Subject: Re: inquiry References: <33039108.4BD@hornet.liunet.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 365 C Hanson wrote: > > I notice your name in a lot of these user net messages. I am curious > about your Bahai background and do you work with the BCCA? > chanson@hornet.liunet.edu I've been a member of the Bahai Faith for over twenty years. What's the BCCA? How about your Bahai background? -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sat Feb 15 05:48:22 1997 Received: from falcon.liunet.edu (148.4.5.2) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Fri, 14 Feb 1997 18:49:22 -0500 Received: from hornet.liunet.edu by falcon.liunet.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA09458; Fri, 14 Feb 1997 18:41:22 -0500 Received: from hornet.liunet.edu by hornet.liunet.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA06763; Fri, 14 Feb 1997 18:38:38 -0500 Message-Id: <3304F867.1B6E@hornet.liunet.edu> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 18:42:31 -0500 From: C Hanson X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: @moa.net Subject: Re: inquiry References: <33039108.4BD@hornet.liunet.edu> <3304520E.7E5D@moa.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1080 Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > C Hanson wrote: > > > > I notice your name in a lot of these user net messages. I am curious > > about your Bahai background and do you work with the BCCA? > > chanson@hornet.liunet.edu > > I've been a member of the Bahai Faith for over twenty years. > > What's the BCCA? > > How about your Bahai background? > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA I have been a bahai only for about 12 years and I am trying to set up a cyber pioneering post on the Internet. I would also like to know if you know of any active fireside or chat servers devoted for Bahai Faith. BCCA is the main computer service from the Bahai's in the U.S. I am surprised that you never hear of it. The site is www.bcca.org. I am sure you would find it interesting. If you are interested in new Bahai sites, altavista.digital.com and yahoo.com have a faithly complete list including current convent breakers. Watch out for them!!!. Keep the line open and maybe we can have some cyber deepenings. New Concept?? Sincerely Carl Hanson From - Sat Feb 15 08:10:13 1997 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.34) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Sat, 15 Feb 1997 05:44:21 -0500 Message-ID: <33059545.1E1E@moa.net> Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1997 05:51:49 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: C Hanson Subject: Re: inquiry References: <33039108.4BD@hornet.liunet.edu> <3304520E.7E5D@moa.net> <3304F867.1B6E@hornet.liunet.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1347 C Hanson wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > C Hanson wrote: > > > > > > I notice your name in a lot of these user net messages. I am curious > > > about your Bahai background and do you work with the BCCA? > > > chanson@hornet.liunet.edu > > > > I've been a member of the Bahai Faith for over twenty years. > > > > What's the BCCA? > > > > How about your Bahai background? > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > I have been a bahai only for about 12 years and I am trying to set up a > cyber pioneering post on the Internet. I would also like to know if you > know of any active fireside or chat servers devoted for Bahai Faith. > BCCA is the main computer service from the Bahai's in the U.S. I am > surprised that you never hear of it. The site is www.bcca.org. I am sure > you would find it interesting. If you are interested in new Bahai sites, > altavista.digital.com and yahoo.com have a faithly complete list > including current convent breakers. Watch out for them!!!. Keep the line > open and maybe we can have some cyber deepenings. New Concept?? > Sincerely Carl Hanson I guess I have heard of bbca but never looked at the web page. Beyond yahoo and altavista, I don't know of anything else. Good luck! -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sat Feb 15 05:51:49 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <33059545.1E1E@moa.net> Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1997 05:51:49 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: C Hanson Subject: Re: inquiry References: <33039108.4BD@hornet.liunet.edu> <3304520E.7E5D@moa.net> <3304F867.1B6E@hornet.liunet.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 1349 C Hanson wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > C Hanson wrote: > > > > > > I notice your name in a lot of these user net messages. I am curious > > > about your Bahai background and do you work with the BCCA? > > > chanson@hornet.liunet.edu > > > > I've been a member of the Bahai Faith for over twenty years. > > > > What's the BCCA? > > > > How about your Bahai background? > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > I have been a bahai only for about 12 years and I am trying to set up a > cyber pioneering post on the Internet. I would also like to know if you > know of any active fireside or chat servers devoted for Bahai Faith. > BCCA is the main computer service from the Bahai's in the U.S. I am > surprised that you never hear of it. The site is www.bcca.org. I am sure > you would find it interesting. If you are interested in new Bahai sites, > altavista.digital.com and yahoo.com have a faithly complete list > including current convent breakers. Watch out for them!!!. Keep the line > open and maybe we can have some cyber deepenings. New Concept?? > Sincerely Carl Hanson I guess I have heard of bbca but never looked at the web page. Beyond yahoo and altavista, I don't know of anything else. Good luck! -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Fri Feb 14 06:52:46 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <3304520E.7E5D@moa.net> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 06:52:46 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: C Hanson Subject: Re: inquiry References: <33039108.4BD@hornet.liunet.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Content-Length: 367 C Hanson wrote: > > I notice your name in a lot of these user net messages. I am curious > about your Bahai background and do you work with the BCCA? > chanson@hornet.liunet.edu I've been a member of the Bahai Faith for over twenty years. What's the BCCA? How about your Bahai background? -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA From - Sun Feb 09 10:44:05 1997 BCC: @MOA.net Message-ID: <32FDF0C5.77BA@moa.net> Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 10:44:05 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> Reply-To: @moa.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: momen@northill.demon.co.uk Subject: installment 2 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------66BCAC671B4" X-Mozilla-Status: 0005 Content-Length: 46868 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------66BCAC671B4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit #10-19. -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA --------------66BCAC671B4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="srb10-19.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="srb10-19.txt" Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 06:35:36 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: boatright@cjnetworks.com CC: @MOA.net Subject: Re: Incredibly Disillusioned with the Baha'i Community References: <199611181639.KAA16177@topeka.cjnetworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Rick Boatright wrote: > > Dear Frederick, > > I was trying to say two unrelated things. > > First, that was a really nice message. Well thought, cohesive, good > writing, I was trying to give you a compliment. > I don't need nor want your unsolicted editorial comments BIG BROTHER. I want the freedom to speak the conscience God has given me and the freedom to be responded to by OTHERS' unconstrained consciences. Stay out of the way. > Second, I was expressing my gratitude that the conflict between you > and the moderators a couple of weeks ago did not result in your > leaving the newsgroup. I appriciate your continued participation. > I feel nothing but contempt for the way you and Richard Detweiler have handled my postings. Make no mistake in that regard. Neither one of you, or anybody, has the prescience to exercise such power and control over others' consciences. The abuse of your power is a proper subject for discussion on the newsgroup. > > Rick Boatright wrote: > > > > > > Really nice message. Good work. Thanks for hanging in there with > > > us Frederick. I really appriciate it. > > > > > > Rick Boatright > > > > > > > Frankly, I don't know what you mean here. > > > > -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester, Michigan USA Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 06:47:54 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: boatright@cjnetworks.com CC: @MOA.net Subject: Re: The Integrity of Bahai Marriage (revised) References: <199611181657.KAA17797@topeka.cjnetworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Rick Boatright wrote: > > And in your internal model, what is the difference between a > moderator and a censor? See previous message to you. I asked a polite question. Did you intend > to post this? I sent it to the newsgroup, didn't I? Lots of people post things they didn't intend to, and > we catch a lot of those. In such cases, you'd be properly assisting discussion. They are generally greatful. I didn't > complain that you characterize Baha'i women as bloodless. Why should you? What business is it of yours? I'm not writing to you, nor do I want to. Yet here I am stuck in a non-productive task dealing with you and Richard.... I probebly > should. Why should you. Who the hell are you? I didn't complain that your comment was bigoted and > offensive to the vast majority of sexually active and spirited Baha'i > women, though I probebly should. A complaint you're entitled to make. In public. In response to me on the Net. Not shunting anything YOU don't like off into obscurity. Let them tell you that themselves. > I am saying the freedom for them to say so should be extended to them. You are robbing them of that God-given freedom of expression of conscience. > I asked a polite question. > > Lighten up. > Don't tell me to lighten up when you and Richard are perverting and screening the newsgroup self-righteous, prudishly suppressing opinions you don't like. Again, who are you two to make such decisions? Do you really imagine God has given you the ability to make such judgements? > Don't try to put a nazi mantle on my shoulders. > It's already there, Rick. Wake up. > Rick Boatright > co-moderator > soc.religion.bahai > > -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester, Michigan USA >From - Wed Nov 20 10:10:58 1996 Received: from glaysher.library (204.38.255.58) by atlas.moa.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id ; Wed, 20 Nov 1996 08:46:37 -0500 Message-ID: <32930D52.2FC8@moa.net> Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 08:53:22 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Richard C. Detweiler" CC: @MOA.net Subject: Re: Incredibly Disillusioned with the Baha'i Community References: <199611191434.HAA23362@primenet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Richard C. Detweiler wrote: > > Dear Mr. Glaysher, > > Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. > > As your post contains sarcastic comments and argues with the > moderation of the group in a demeaning and disrespectful manner, > it will not be posted. These issues are also peripheral to > the purpose of the newsgroup in any case. > > If you are seeking full vent to your frustrations, I suggest > news.admin or talk.religion.misc on the Internet as the first > is appropriate and the other is unmoderated. This newsgroup, > however, is for discussion of the Baha'i Faith in an atmosphere > of respect and free from topical tangents of all kinds. > > Thank you for participating, > > Dick Detweiler > rdetweil@primenet.com > Co-moderator, soc.religion.bahai > I'm not at all surprised Richardt.... Fascists and totalitarians have always sought to conceal and manipulate reality. > ================ Begin submitted post ========================= > > > To: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net > > Path: ppp-pm01-dy-26.ouhub.moa.net > > From: FG <@MOA.net> > > Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai > > Subject: Re: Incredibly Disillusioned with the Baha'i Community > > Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 05:44:11 -0500 > > Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. > > Lines: 68 > > Message-ID: <32918F7B.76FA@moa.net> > > References: <"-ER8GC.A.gTH.UGkiy"@bounty> <56qogd$rii@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> > > NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.moa.net > > Mime-Version: 1.0 > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) > > To: Sian Smith > > CC: @MOA.net > > > > Sian Smith wrote: > > > > > > In article <"-ER8GC.A.gTH.UGkiy"@bounty>, Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> says: > > > > > > > > > > [snip extracts from previous messages about being disillusioned] > > > > > > >> : >As you know, the Bahai Faith doesn't have priests, preachers, or any > > > >> : >individuals who have the responsibility of telling people what to do, unlike > > > >> : >churches. However, from my experience I've discovered associating with > > > >> : >"Bahais" and not expecting them to play the roles of surrogate priests and > > > >> : > surrogate parish to be incredibly wishful and foolish thinking. > > > >> > > > >> : Since the Baha'i Community does not have a paid clergy, every Baha'is is > > > >> : to perform the service that the clergy of previous religions performed. We > > > >> : are each to study the Holy Writings, and to teach and deepen others in the > > > >> : Faith. It may be hard for one of a traditional religious background that > > > >> : does not encourage study to take responsibility for one's own spiritual > > > >> : growth, but we all have to struggle to change our shortcomings. > > > >> > > > > > > > >Miguel, you utterly miss Karl's well-taken point here again. It's the abuse of > > > >the responsibility that is the crux of his observation. Power corrupts. > > > >And it can corrupt Baha'is as well as Christians, Muslims, Nazis, etc. > > > > > > Excuse my ignorance, but WHO in the Baha'i Faith has any "power"? I've > > > never met anyone in the Faith who has power of any kind (i.e: power in > > > the sense that they can exert some kind of binding influence over > > > another person). > > > > I'll give you an example: The "moderators" of this newsgroup. They've > > censored a number of messages I've tried to post during the last few weeks. > > They have the "power" to determine what you and everyone else OUT THERE > > reads.... It that's not control and power to SHAPE thought and opinion what > > is it? > > > > Maybe the previous writer was referring to some other > > > kind of power - in which case I would be grateful to receive a > > > "definition", so to speak, of this power and how it compares to the > > > "definition" I had in mind which, in my own humble opinion, is the sort > > > of power which is contained in the assertion "power corrupts". > > > > > > > The "moderators" power is corrupting and inhibiting the exchange of ideas > > on this newsgroup. When I attempted to bring this to the attention of > > contributors by posting a message to this effect earlier, I was told > > > > THOU SHALT NOT QUESTION THE AUTHORITY AND POWER OF THE "MODERATORS." > > Kitab-i-Oppression, page 999. > > > > > The only person who has any kind of power over my spiritual development > > > is ME. I cannot abdicate that responsibility to someone else. > > > > > > > There's a sense in which you're right. But secular and religious history > > is wracked with the abuse of POWER and the devastating results of it.... > > It always began in little ways.... A little at a time.... People shrugged.... > > Let's not make waves.... Let's build UNITY! > > > > > Loving greetings > > > > > > Sian Smith > > > Wellington > > > New Zealand > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester, Michigan USA > > > > ================ End submitted post =========================== -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester, Michigan USA Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 09:26:05 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff CC: @MOA.net Subject: Re: Incredibly Disillusioned with the Baha'i Community References: <"BYWGWC.A.PdB.pm0iy"@bounty> <328C806E.295C@moa.net> <32908412.2C44@oro.net> <3291A53E.78A1@moa.net> <3291CC64.9F@oro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0010 Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > It > > > may be failing on my part if I don't try to correct > > > their view of me, but it is a far grosser failing if > > > I resent them for their views and let myself become > > > embittered by it. I won't change anything by lashing > > > out in anger, or by intentional alienation. Worst of all > > > if I separate myself from the entire Baha'i community > > > and Baha'u'allah because of these people, I'm only > > > doing myself a disservice. If they're really my enemies, > > > then my being a "weak sister" would be quite pleasing > > > to them. > > > > > > > You're a lovely soul. A more pious answer than I can muster. > > Piety has nothing to do with it. It's common sense. If we are > to unify, we must be unified. Unity can never be served by > anger or alienation. The only way to get rid of darkness is > to throw light on it. More darkness only conduces to, well... > more darkness. > > To my mind, after twenty years in the Baha'i Faith, the "unity" is a fraud, doesn't exist.... > > How will they deal with such things? What are the mechanisms? > > For "Evil is the Nature of Mankind." > > The mechanisms are those clearly laid down by Baha'u'llah, > Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi. They involve a certain > giving up of self, consultation, respect, courtesy and > other attributes with which God has fully invested us. If these are the "mechanisms," they're insufficient. > I have served on assemblies for over 15 years. I've seen > this at work. Sometimes we need reminders, sometimes we > fail utterly, but the fact that we try is of paramount > importance and has great power. > > ""Evil is the Nature of Mankind?" Not according to > Baha'u'llah: > > "O Son of the Wondrous Vision! I have breathed upon thee > a breath of My own Spirit that thou mayest be My lover. > Why hast thou forsaken me and sought a beloved other > than Me?" > > "O Son of Spirit! Noble have I created thee, yet thou > hast abased thyself. Rise then, unto that for which > thou wast created." > > These passages and others make it clear that it is > our nature to be noble. Antinomy is presupposed. There is tragedy in Baha'u'llah's writings, tragedy minds like yours (I mean no insult), typically fail to understand. The other part is nurture. > We learn deceit and we teach it to others. We learn > hatred and we pass it along like a disease. > > > > Buddha said: Hatred does not cease by hatred, hatred ceases > > > by love. > > > > > > > Tell that to the Tibetans who have had their whole civilization > > wiped out.... > > They understand this better than anyone. What, after all, > nearly wiped out their civilization? Hatred and fear of what > was different and not controllable by the powers that would > be. > Even the Dali Lama has had second thoughts.... Much too late. > > They must. Let's be practical. What though when Assemblies self- > > righteously abuse their authority and persecute individuals? That > > can happen too, and then what? > > If a person feels he is being persecuted he has recourse to > the Auxiliary Board, another spiritual assembly, the National > Spiritual Assembly or even the House of Justice. Any and all > of these avenues of redress is open to the individual. Of > course, there is always the possibility that the individual's > perception that he's being "persecuted" is false. It's never > pleasant to be wrong about something, less pleasant to have > someone call your attention to it and ask that your behavior > change. I know this from personal experience. > > > > > As > > > an individual, I still had to treat the subject of consultation > > > with compassion. > > > > > > > A very dehumanizing phrase, Maya. It seems to me. This human tendency > > worries me. Don't tell me to pray about it. > > I'm sorry. I certainly didn't intend it to be. I intended it to be > neutral. Look, I have served on assemblies long enough to have > seen a gamut of personal problems and situations arise. I have > NEVER known an assembly to EVER lose sight of the fact that > what they were dealing with wasn't a problem, but a person. > Usually, the person is much loved, and their situation causes > the members of the institution very personal grief. > > The sad thing is that the soul involved doesn't always realize > this. And regardless of the actual feelings of the assembly > members, treats them as if they were indeed, a persecuting > force. One young man an assembly I sat on counseled had a > drug problem for which he refused to get help. He viewed > the mere fact that the assembly called him for consultation > as an act of personal persecution. He thought the people on > the assembly were "out to get him," when in fact, every one > of them loved him, valued him and wanted him to be well both > spiritually and physically. After one meeting in which we had > attempted to talk to him, several members of the assembly burst > into tears. > Anything in the name of love? Nine amateur spiritual psychologists are just going to talk someone straight? I've seen it attempted too with similar results.... > > > > Reasonable. Many in the Faith thinks this way. I do too in some regards. > > But then we're no longer in a world of ideal beauty.... > > But Baha'u'llah is clear that His teachings and the power > released by His revelation have the capacity to light that > spark He says lies latent within us. I've seen what that > spark can accomplish in the lives of ordinary human beings. > We have within our grasp the means of bringing that world > of ideal beauty out of the realm of spirit and onto this > earth. The scriptures of God's faith in every age proclaim > this unequivocally. > And have always failed.... By there own self-definitions, failed. Why? What is it about human nature? Do you actually believe the Baha'i Faith will do any better? I don't. I don't believe the deepest suggestions of the writings suggest any such thing. > > My post, I believe, was about the individual capacity to sully anything > > and everything in "this world of gloom." > > May I call you Eeyore? :) (Sorry, couldn't help myself.) > I tried to post a reply to on the newsgroup. I used the same phrase in the copy I mailed you: "utterly naive" Richard Detweiler has banned my post because it might hurt your feelings--not my intention. A good example of the self-righteous Fascism build the new world order inspires in Baha'i fanatics.... Calling me Eeyore doesn't hurt my feelings. I have, unlike fanatics, a sense of humor and relish the variety of human temperaments God has so blessed the world with. Yours is not mine, that is all. Do the Faith a favor, write the CENSOR and tell him to respect the human conscience of others, not only mine. > In the Kitab-i-Iqan, Baha'u'llah says that when we truly > accept Him, recognize Him, the Holy Spirit will confer > upon us "a new ear, a new eye, a new heart and a new mind." > We are capable of being transformed, and the Word of God > (and only the Word of God ) is capable of causing that > transformation. > Beautiful metaphors. Understand? > I am deeply sorry that your experience within the > Baha'i community has been so negative. The lack of complexity is what concerns me, and the lack of acknowledgement of proportion. But every > negative experience in life offers us more than one > way to react. I've often marveled how adversity can > make one person opt for a life of misery and > recrimination (it was mother's fault, it was God's > fault, it was...) and another come to the decision that > they will simply NOT let that adversity steal their > joy, or their life. > > I know there are Baha'i communities that are ruled > by a small clique of set in stone believers, or > groups where a number of petty-minded souls seem > to have things in control. Indeed, I have a friend > who lived in such a community until a new Baha'i > family moved in and changed the dynamics of the > situation. My friend chose to deal with the problem > by withdrawing. The new friends set about and > accomplished the renewal of that community by > opening their house to firesides, getting the > assembly to meet, teaching the faith, and most > important, showering everyone in their community, > including those set in stone souls with love. They > gave the community the medicine Baha'u'llah > prescribed and saved the patient. > The usual answer. Lacking complexity. > You may argue against the idea that hatred ceases > only through love, but this is a prescription from > a Physician who knows far more about the ills of > human kind than either you or I. > It has never truly healed the patient. Baha'u'llah, unlike Baha'is, understands the condition is terminal.... > Mir, Maya > +----------------------------------------+ > | Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff syntax@oro.net | > +----------------------------------------+ > | "The beginning of all things is the | > | knowledge of God." - Baha'u'llah | > +----------------------------------------+ -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester, Michigan USA From: "Richard C. Detweiler" Message-Id: <199611191443.HAA24131@primenet.com> Subject: Re: Incredibly Disillusioned with the Baha'i Community To: @moa.net (Frederick Glaysher) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 07:43:07 -0700 (MST) Cc: srb-mods@bcca.org In-Reply-To: <3291959D.7D9C@moa.net> from "Frederick Glaysher" at Nov 19, 96 06:10:21 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Dear Mr. Glaysher, Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. I ask that you strike the comment "utterly naive" as an attack on the previous poster. If you would like to say you disagree, that would be acceptable. Also, your sarcastic comments in the following paragraph: > Excellent point. A profound moral problem arises here. How can the individual > maintain the moral strength of character to resist abuse and manipulation when > power can be wielded in such a way as to undermine that very ability? To > discredit it. Ban it. Brand it as outlaw, heretic, disruptive, anti-social, > working against the realization, e.g., of the communist Kingdom of Freedom. If you would turn this into a meaningful criticism based on actual events than the readership could evaluate and enter into a dialog with you on these events. Again, let me make it clear that if you have a grievance with the Faith, you are free to air it here, but it must be the facts and your reasons for the grievance presented and not belittling insults, broad stereotypes, and blatant sarcasm. Thank you for participating, Dick Detweiler rdetweil@primenet.com Co-moderator, soc.religion.bahai ================ Begin submitted post ========================= > To: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net > Path: ppp-pm01-dy-26.ouhub.moa.net > From: FG <@moa.net> > Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai > Subject: Re: Incredibly Disillusioned with the Baha'i Community > Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 06:10:21 -0500 > Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. > Lines: 78 > Message-ID: <3291959D.7D9C@moa.net> > References: <"-ER8GC.A.gTH.UGkiy"@bounty> <56qoi9$rmd@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> > NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.moa.net > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) > To: Anne Furlong > CC: @moa.net > > Anne Furlong wrote: > > > > The reference to power probably helps poinpoint the difficulty some of > > the friends have here. The point is that in this Faith, for the first > > time in religious history, power and authority have been intentionally > > and effectively severed. The authority to make decisions, to legislate, > > to guide, rests with the elected institutions of the Faith. However, > > these institutions - and the individuals who make them up - have no power > > whatsoever. > > "No power whatsoever": Utterly naive.... > > [clip] > > > > > Why do people become disillusioned with the community? with individuals? > > Well, we all know people who, by force of personality, or because of > > defects of character and personality, receive, demand, or desire > > acquiescence from other individuals. But note: if such people do in fact > > poison a community, who ultimately must take the responsibility? Power > > is not theirs to command: it is ceded to them by those who have not the > > wisdom or the courage to recognise that what is being asked is both > > contrary to the Faith, and ultimately impossible to give. > > > > Excellent point. A profound moral problem arises here. How can the individual > maintain the moral strength of character to resist abuse and manipulation when > power can be wielded in such a way as to undermine that very ability? To > discredit it. Ban it. Brand it as outlaw, heretic, disruptive, anti-social, > working against the realization, e.g., of the communist Kingdom of Freedom. > > > Yes, impossible: for since in the Administrative order which is > > Baha'u'llah's gift to the world, power and authority are divided, > > In theory, yes; in practice, I'm not convinced. > > then the > > efforts of a few misguided individuals to bring power and authority > > together in their own persons; or to build up factions; or to do anything, > > in fact, which is contravenes the spirit and the reality of the Covenant, > > are doomed to failure. 'Abdu'l-Baha said that the ocean of the Covenant > > will surge and surge until it casts the bodies of the (spiritually) dead > > onto the shore. We cannot ultimately harm the progress of the Cause, but > > can cut ourselves off from the abundant share of the blessings which > > obedience to the Covenant brings to us. > > > > If we are disillusioned with the community we live in, then our response > > will either add to the problem or be the start of its eradication. The > > whole purpose of consultation is to allow the individual to exercise > > responsibility - his power - within the "unit of civilization". > > What I am saying is that there are situations when it is not allowed. You're > too quick to leap over that fact for me. > > We are > > all going to be responsible for our actions to Baha'u'llah when we pass > > from this earth; are we going to plead the immaturity of others as the > > reason for our failure to love? > > > > Your dragging "love" into this confuses the issue. > > > Baha'u'llah did more than despise tyranny; in his Administrative Order, > > He, as the Divine Physician, prescribed the effective and permanent remedy. > > > > The point from the original post was in regard to the abuse of the remedy, > turning it into a cheap medicine show elixir. What then of the community > or individuals under that Tyranny? > > > All the best, > > > > Anne Furlong > > St John's Newfoundland Canada > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > Rochester, Michigan USA > ================ End submitted post =========================== Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 10:27:04 -0500 From: FG <@moa.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Richard C. Detweiler" CC: @MOA.net Subject: Re: Incredibly Disillusioned with the Baha'i Community References: <199611191434.HAA23362@primenet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0015 Richard C. Detweiler wrote: > > Dear Mr. Glaysher, > > Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. > > As your post contains sarcastic comments and argues with the > moderation of the group in a demeaning and disrespectful manner, > it will not be posted. These issues are also peripheral to > the purpose of the newsgroup in any case. > False. They go to the heart of the matter, i.e., how it functions. > If you are seeking full vent to your frustrations, I suggest > news.admin or talk.religion.misc on the Internet as the first > is appropriate and the other is unmoderated. "Vent your frustrations" is in the same category as my "Utterly naive." I don't seek to deprive you of your conscience that apparently believes that. You may say what you wish. It won't hurt my little feelings. I believe you're again manipulating discussion in a dictatorial, oppressive manner unjustified by anything in the Baha'i Writings which you apparently cloak your shameless deeds in. This newsgroup, > however, is for discussion of the Baha'i Faith in an atmosphere > of respect and free from topical tangents of all kinds. > The abuse of the conscience of a member of the Baha'i Faith and, apparently regular practice of distortion and censorship is not a suitable topic? I can understand why you wouldn't wish to have anyone else know.... > Thank you for participating, > I'm not participating at all. You are self-righteous depriving me of that. You are also depriving others of hearing or disagreeing with my opinions. > Dick Detweiler > rdetweil@primenet.com > Co-moderator, soc.religion.bahai > > ================ Begin submitted post ========================= > > > To: soc-religion-bahai@uunet.uu.net > > Path: ppp-pm01-dy-26.ouhub.moa.net > > From: FG <@MOA.net> > > Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai > > Subject: Re: Incredibly Disillusioned with the Baha'i Community > > Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 05:44:11 -0500 > > Organization: Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, U.S.A. > > Lines: 68 > > Message-ID: <32918F7B.76FA@moa.net> > > References: <"-ER8GC.A.gTH.UGkiy"@bounty> <56qogd$rii@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> > > NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.moa.net > > Mime-Version: 1.0 > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) > > To: Sian Smith > > CC: @MOA.net > > > > Sian Smith wrote: > > > > > > In article <"-ER8GC.A.gTH.UGkiy"@bounty>, Frederick Glaysher <@moa.net> says: > > > > > > > > > > [snip extracts from previous messages about being disillusioned] > > > > > > >> : >As you know, the Bahai Faith doesn't have priests, preachers, or any > > > >> : >individuals who have the responsibility of telling people what to do, unlike > > > >> : >churches. However, from my experience I've discovered associating with > > > >> : >"Bahais" and not expecting them to play the roles of surrogate priests and > > > >> : > surrogate parish to be incredibly wishful and foolish thinking. > > > >> > > > >> : Since the Baha'i Community does not have a paid clergy, every Baha'is is > > > >> : to perform the service that the clergy of previous religions performed. We > > > >> : are each to study the Holy Writings, and to teach and deepen others in the > > > >> : Faith. It may be hard for one of a traditional religious background that > > > >> : does not encourage study to take responsibility for one's own spiritual > > > >> : growth, but we all have to struggle to change our shortcomings. > > > >> > > > > > > > >Miguel, you utterly miss Karl's well-taken point here again. It's the abuse of > > > >the responsibility that is the crux of his observation. Power corrupts. > > > >And it can corrupt Baha'is as well as Christians, Muslims, Nazis, etc. > > > > > > Excuse my ignorance, but WHO in the Baha'i Faith has any "power"? I've > > > never met anyone in the Faith who has power of any kind (i.e: power in > > > the sense that they can exert some kind of binding influence over > > > another person). > > > > I'll give you an example: The "moderators" of this newsgroup. They've > > censored a number of messages I've tried to post during the last few weeks. > > They have the "power" to determine what you and everyone else OUT THERE > > reads.... If that's not control and power to SHAPE thought and opinion what > > is it? > > > > Maybe the previous writer was referring to some other > > > kind of power - in which case I would be grateful to receive a > > > "definition", so to speak, of this power and how it compares to the > > > "definition" I had in mind which, in my own humble opinion, is the sort > > > of power which is contained in the assertion "power corrupts". > > > > > > > The "moderators" power is corrupting and inhibiting the exchange of ideas > > on this newsgroup. When I attempted to bring this to the attention of > > contributors by posting a message to this effect earlier, I was told > > > > THOU SHALT NOT QUESTION THE AUTHORITY AND POWER OF THE "MODERATORS." > > Kitab-i-Oppression, page 999. > > > > > The only person who has any kind of power over my spiritual development > > > is ME. I cannot abdicate that responsibility to someone else. > > > > > > > There's a sense in which you're right. But secular and religious history > > is wracked with the abuse of POWER and the devastating results of it.... > > It always began in little ways.... A little at a time.... People shrugged.... > > Let's not make ways.... Let's build UNITY! > > > > > Loving greetings > > > > > > Sian Smith > > > Wellington > > > New Zealand > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester, Michigan USA > > > = End submitted post =========================== YOU DEAR CENSORS have shown your true colors once again.