Subject: SRB Censored: 8-14-97
From: FG <FG@hotmail.com>
[Subscribe to alt.religion.bahai]
CENSORED BY SOC.RELIGION.BAHAI:
Re: censorship - moderators
Wed, 13 Aug 1997 16:19:46 -0600
"Rick Boatright" <email@example.com>
Topeka Business Computers
I am sure you expected that I would bounce this one to. It appears
that you especially constructed it just so that I would have to. So
here you are. An official rejection note. Have fun with it.
I DIDN'T EXPECT ANYTHING OF THE SORT. I DON'T CONSIDER IT "FUN"
TO HAVE TO POST CENSORED MESSAGES TO ALT.RELIGION.BAHAI AND
ELSEWHERE. IN FACT, I FEEL IT'S A DISGRACE TO THE BAHAI FAITH
THAT I HAVE TO IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE
THE BAHAI WRITINGS INDISPUTABLY STATED I HAVE A RIGHT TO....
It's kind of pointless to argue with you about your baseless
conspiracy theories about the NSA somehow majically controlling the
SRB mods, and the suspicious nature of the poor distribution of ARB,
so I won't bother.
SINCE YOU WRAP YOURSELVES IN THE ROBES OF ORTHODOXY, IT IS
DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE YOU CAN CONTINUOUSLY DO THAT WITHOUT
SOME ENCOURAGEMENT FROM SOMEWHERE.... THERE ARE MESSAGES
EXTANT ON WWW.DEJANEWS.COM WHEREIN YOU AND OTHERS STATE YOU
HAVE MET WITH A SPIRITUAL ASSEMBLY IN THE PAST FOR GUIDANCE
AND ADVICE. YOU KNOW QUITE WELL MOST BAHAIS TAKE
SOC.RELIGION.BAHAI AS GOD'S HOLY WORD WRIT LARGE....
AGAIN, YOU SEEM TO WANT TO CHARACTERIZE ME AS AN ABERRANT
INDIVIDUAL. THAT'S AN OLD TIRESOME PLOY, ALL THE MORE SO
NOW WHEN SO MANY HAVE FOUND THE COURAGE TO STATE THE
TRUTH ABOUT THE CENSORIOUS PRACTICES OF SOC.RELIGION.BAHAI.
> Isaac freeman wrote:
> > [Moderators Note: While the moderators allowed the original post,
> > and will allow reasonable replys, please note that the subject of the
> > newsgroup as stated in the monthly introduction posting is "the
> > beliefs and teachings of the Baha'i Faith. Followups to this
> > article should address the beliefs and teachings of the faith, or be
> > directed to talk.religon.misc, alt.religion.bahai or news.groups.
> How about the beliefs and teachings of the Bahai Faith ON
> censorship? I think that's a valid topic for discussion,
> not suppression as the above note intimates in my
> opinion. Using the charter as a means of silencing is not
> a legitimate use of it. "Reasonable replys [sic]" is a
> very suspicious construction in this context....
> > -- The Moderators]
> > On 10 Aug 1997 00:29:34 shahin nikjoo wrote about "Re: censorship -
> > moderator":
> > > I would like to question the wisdom of having moderators on this
> > > usenet.
> > It's a subject worth discussing. Note that the moderators of
> > soc.religion.bahai haven't vetoed this post.
> They just vetoed a posting of mine in response to shahin nikjoo!
> I'll post on alt.religion.bahai titled "SRB Censored: 7-13-97"
> and cc shahin nikjoo in case he/she doesn't have access (for
> reasons we all know) to alt.religion.bahai.
> > > My own post was not accepted on thi usenet because it was seen as a
> > > 'joke' (It was a serious joke).
> > Perhaps you could rewrite, and resubmit it.
> > Was it a joke that might have caused offense (even if you didn't mean
> > it to)? That might explain it. The moderators are also expected to
> > veto posts that don't discuss the Baha'i Faith.
> It seems to me this "principle" is highly abused....
> > > I've had a number of non-Bahais who were q. upset that their
> > > comments were not posted on this usenet, and have become very
> > > hostile to the group as a result.
> > I've read their posts.
> How if they were suppressed?
> > > Is the 'moderator' policy asked for by the NSA??
> > There's no official status to soc.religion.bahai - it has no
> > connection with the Baha'i administration.
> It operates as though it does, many believe it does,
> and one cannot help wondering whether there might
> not be a connection of some sort.... It seems to
> me that the long-term and consistent censorship
> imposed by the moderators sullies the reputation of
> the Bahai Faith and the institutions.... WHY is that
> being tolerated, if not supported?
> > > Is there an unmoderated Bahai usenet?
> > There is now. A Baha'i who became frustrated at not getting his
> > messages posted has started the alt.religion.bahai newsgroup, to be
> > used for general unmoderated discussion about the Baha'i Faith. So
> > far, it doesn't propagate very far, but we can expect to see it
> > carried by more and more servers over time.
> > Another option is talk.religion.misc.
> > > I think censorship decreases the regard non-bahais have for the
> > > faith & irritates to the extreme Bahais who gets censored.
> > >
> > > I also don't think Bahais have anything to be afraid of w.r.t.
> > > questions posed - surely there are Bahai scholars well versed in
> > > Laws etc.?
> > Personally, I think there's a difference between the tone of a message
> > and its content. If the content of messages was being vetoed by the
> > moderators, that would constitute censorship. Some people claim this
> > is happening, but I have yet to see any evidence I found convincing.
> > Many posts make it onto soc.religion.bahai that strongly challenge the
> > Baha'i Faith - they're welcomed.
> For vetoed CONTENT see my censored message mentioned above
> on alt.religion.bahai. Permit me to add you might find my
> censored message on the United Nations, currently reposted
> to alt.religion.bahai of interest in this regard. And MANY
> do not....
> > On the other hand, I don't think it's censorship if people are
> > required to write their messages in a polite tone, and not to give
> > undue offense. That's what the moderators are expected to do, and I
> > find it makes soc.religion.bahai very good reading.
> > Isaac Freeman
> UseNet: alt.religion.bahai
> Ask your ISP to add it; also available on
> www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com.
Ask your ISP to add it; also available on
www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com.