|
From: CC Secretary[SMTP:bcca-cc@bcca.org]
Sent: Monday, September 22, 1997 4:22 PM
To: FG
Cc: CC Mail
Subject: Baha'i Discuss
Dear Mr Glaysher
The Co-ordinating Committee has been made aware that you have been
posting extracts from mail to Baha'i Discuss to one or more Usenet
groups, with the email address of the said list included. This behaviour
must be seen as quite unacceptable for two reasons.
First, it is a violation of the privacy of Baha'is who have posted to
Discuss in the belief that their messages will only be seen by other
Baha'is. Naturally, there can be no objection to your reposting them if
you have obtained the original sender's permission but we must instruct
you to desist where that is not the case.
Secondly, and even worse, you have now disclosed the address of a
Baha'is-only list to Net users who are not qualified by membership of the
Faith to participate. It is presently unclear whether any have availed
themselves of the opportunity with which you have so thoughtlessly
presented them but, in any case, you have also presented the Committee
with a completely unnnecessary and unlooked for headache.
We trust that you will desist from this behaviour forthwith.
In His service
Nick Sanders
Nicholas J A Sanders
_______________________
Secretary
BCCA Co-ordinating Committee
----------
From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 1997 8:43 AM
To: Bahai Studies; CC Secretary; Bahai Discuss
Subject: Bahai-discuss attacks on talk.religion.bahai
I appreciate your concerns. I hope we can work together on this
matter. Let me state first my concerns so that you understand
my thinking and then perhaps we can agree on a course of
action.
During the first vote for talk.religion.bahai this spring, an
individual Bahai, Mark Towfiq, posted instructions on why and
how to vote NO on the proposal to the women's listserv and
reportedly to two other Bahai listservs. No Bahai has had the
honesty to reveal which listservs those were. I can only
assume that Bahai-discuss may have been one of them,
given the tenor of the discussion that is already beginning
to develop it. I note this morning a message, appended to the end
of this one, calculated to violate the usual and acceptable
procedures of UseNet interest polling. I
Further, I have been personally slandered on Bahai-discuss,
both as an individual and as a Bahai, in a manner quite
similar to the character assassination practiced on
soc.religion.bahai.
I also append the two installments of messages I have posted to
alt.religion.bahai and elsewhere so that you might review the other
messages urging Bahais to vote NO for ideological and
pseudo-religious reasons.
I don't believe it is an appropriate use of a Bahai discussion
listserv to support such activities.
As a the Coordinating Committee for Bahai-discuss,
did you witness and permit the posting by Mark Towfiq of
his NO vote campaign message? Did you support him?
Do or will you support other such attempts to overwhelm the
voting process with NO votes during this second attempt to
form talk.religion.bahai?
Please explain for me why you find it permissible, if you do,
for Bahais to attack, in the secrecy and privacy of Bahai-discuss,
the God-given right of others to express their own religious
conscience and free speech and to scheme for the defeat of trb?
You mention some Bahais want such acts to take place without
non-Bahais seeing it. I find that statement perplexing and morally
confused since it seems to justify the denial of many Bahais and
non-Bahais of their right to establish a newsgroup free of the voter
distortion that occurred last time. I believe it is your duty as a
Coordinating Committee to expose and denounce such stratagems
instead of asking me to allow them to continue unabated.
I am baffled by your lack of concern for the headache, if you will,
created for me and 156+ Bahais and non-Bahais by the use of
Bahai-discuss and other listservs to marshall NO votes against
talk.religion.bahai before the second proposal has even yet been
presented to the group-mentors for their advice.
I trust you will consult and reflect on the seriousness of what you
are permitting Bahais to use Bahai-discuss for and counsel all
those subscribed to your listserv to show respect for the wishes
of others to form an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith.
I will be happy to refrain from reposting messages that attack
the forming of talk.religion.bahai if you can assure me it won't be
necessary since you will not allow or support misguided Bahais
from doing so.
I ask you to read prayerfully and meditate long on this passage by
Abdul-Baha before beginning your deliberations:
"This is a goodly temple and congregation, for--praise
be to God!--this is a house of worship [Central Congregational
Church in Brooklyn on 16 June 1912] wherein conscientious
opinion has free sway. Every religion and every religious
aspiration may be freely voiced and expressed here. Just as in the
world of politics there is need for free thought, likewise in the
world of religion there should be the right of unrestricted
individual belief. Consider what a vast difference exists between
modern democracy and the old forms of despotism. Under an
autocratic government the opinions of men are not free, and
development is stifled, whereas in a democracy, because thought
and speech are not restricted, the greatest progress is witnessed.
It is likewise true in the world of religion. When freedom of
conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech prevail--that is
to say, when every man according to his own idealization may
give expression to his beliefs--development and growth are
inevitable. Therefore, this is a blessed church because its pulpit
is open to every religion, the ideals of which may be set forth
with openness and freedom."
Abdul-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, 197.
--
FG
UseNet: alt.religion.bahai
Ask your ISP to add it; also available on
www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com.
----------
> From: CC Secretary <bcca-cc@bcca.org>
> To: FG <FG@hotmail.com>
> Cc: CC Mail <bcca-cc@bcca.org>
> Subject: Baha'i Discuss
> Date: Monday, September 22, 1997 4:22 PM
>
> Dear Mr Glaysher
>
> The Co-ordinating Committee has been made aware that you have been
> posting extracts from mail to Baha'i Discuss to one or more Usenet
> groups, with the email address of the said list included. This behaviour
> must be seen as quite unacceptable for two reasons.
>
> First, it is a violation of the privacy of Baha'is who have posted to
> Discuss in the belief that their messages will only be seen by other
> Baha'is. Naturally, there can be no objection to your reposting them if
> you have obtained the original sender's permission but we must instruct
> you to desist where that is not the case.
>
> Secondly, and even worse, you have now disclosed the address of a
> Baha'is-only list to Net users who are not qualified by membership of the
> Faith to participate. It is presently unclear whether any have availed
> themselves of the opportunity with which you have so thoughtlessly
> presented them but, in any case, you have also presented the Committee
> with a completely unnnecessary and unlooked for headache.
>
> We trust that you will desist from this behaviour forthwith.
>
> In His service
>
> Nick Sanders
>
>
> Nicholas J A Sanders
> _______________________
> Secretary
> BCCA Co-ordinating Committee
>
Appended message follows:
----------------------------------------
From bahai-discuss-x@bounty.bcca.org Mon Sep 22 13:23:32 1997
Received: by bcca.org (Smail3.1.29.1 #3)
id m0xDErq-0003rnC; Mon, 22 Sep 97 16:14 EDT
X-Loop: Bahai-Discuss-request@Bounty.BCCA.Org
Errors-To: Bahai-Discuss-x@Bounty.BCCA.Org
Sender: Bahai-Discuss-x@Bounty.BCCA.Org
X-IMPORTANT-NOTE: Please send unsubscribe messages
to Bahai-Discuss-Request@BCCA.Org
To: "Baha'i Discuss" <Bahai-Discuss@BCCA.Org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <3.0.32.19970922101903.00915620@persia.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <3426D0FD.3FF520AA@lightspeed.net>
Subject: Re: talk.religion.bahai
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (WinNT; I)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 13:11:41 -0700
From: "John B. Cornell" <jcornell@lightspeed.net> <Picture: Save Address>
<Picture: Block Sender>
<Picture: Reply/ReplyAll/Forward><Picture: Delete><Picture: Prev/Next
Message><Picture: Close><Picture: ->
Robert Moldenhauer wrote:
> My reason for bringing this up is that when the CFV occurs, some may
think
> that talk.bahai.religion is sponsored by Baha'i institutions.
It is logical to assume so.
> It is not.
> Nor is its would be predecessor (alt.religion.bahai) a particularly
> pleasant place.
That's what we discovered.
> On the other hand, the continual attacks on the Faith that come with
> alt.religion.bahai don't seem to have much effect either.
How do you measure harm, Robert? By whether or not
the House of Worship is blown up? The mere fact that an
uncontrolled newsgroup makes us appear to be a bunch of
crazies does no harm? It doesn't help our public image!
> So I guess it's
> not the end of the world if talk.religion.bahai gets approved...
Not the end of the world, but the Faith's reputation is
bound to suffer.
> I intend to vote no on "talk.religion.bahai" and urge others to do the
> same, but I must say that the Institutions have chosen not to comment on
> the group, so there is *no* official Baha'i position on the vote.
Institutions are wise to leave individual decisions to individuals.
Voting is the responsibility of individuals. For example, it is not
the role of institutions to tell us whom to elect to spiritual assemblies.
I think as Baha'is we have a responsibility to vote on newsgroups
that affect the public image of the Faith.
The way to protect a not-well-known religion from the crazy
image presented on alt.religion.bahai is to have newsgroups with
the name "Baha'i" under supervision by some responsible group
such as the Baha'i Computer and Communication Association.
This is one reason BCCA was created, to give any needed
supervision.
'Abdul-Baha said "...not to take any step without consulting
the Spiritual Assembly,...that things may be properly ordered and
well arranged. Otherwise every person will act independently
and after his own judgment, will follow his own desire, and do
harm to the Cause." (BA, p. 21) We have seen the harm an
unsupervised newsgroup like alt.religion bahai has done to our
image when operated by someone out of control. We should
worry about this influence being increased by his obtaining a
more visible newsgroup.
John
----------
From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 1997 7:30 AM
To: Nicholas Sanders
Cc: Bahai Discuss
Subject: Re: Bahai-discuss attacks on talk.religion.bahai
I'm concerned that this morning I find Bahai-Discuss is being
used for a campaign against me personally by someone
pretending to be me and posting from bahai@hotmail.com.
I request that your committee officially denounce this
abusive activity clearly calculated to inflame passions against
my person and against talk.religion.bahai, before the proper
period of discussion has even begun.
I must add that I have received two pieces of hate mail,
one of which personally threatens me. I will forward it to you
under separate posting.
I await patiently your answer to my previous communication.
FG
UseNet: alt.religion.bahai
Ask your ISP to add it; also available on
www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com.
----------
From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 1997 7:34 AM
To: BCCA CC
Cc: CC Secretary
Subject: Fw: hate mail#1
FG
UseNet: alt.religion.bahai
Ask your ISP to add it; also available on
www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com.
----------
> From: Nancy S Damren <ladyvadr@juno.com>
> To: FG@hotmail.com
> Subject:
> Date: Monday, September 29, 1997 2:35 PM
>
> Dear Mr. Glaysher,
>
> I have had the dubious privilege of receiving four email messages from
> you in the same retrieval, that of Monday afternoon, September 29, 1997.
>
> I have already reacted in earlier postings to your intemperate and
> inflammatory language. That reaction was negative. Now you send word
> that your impertinence has been inflicted on the Universal House of
> Justice, an institution of God that you have no business addressing in
> such a fashion.
>
> Your emphasis on your own selfish desire to do as you please, regardless
> of the consequences, rather than acting for the good of the Faith has
> cost you all respect in my eyes and, no doubt, in those of many others.
>
> You have nothing to say to me that I want to hear. Accordingly, I must
> request you to omit my email address from all of your postings in the
> future. Further bombardment - for I can call it nothing less - will
> result in notification of both my email service and yours of your email
> abuse. If that doesn't work, then perhaps prosecution will.
>
> You saw a threat in a perfectly innocent and concerned letter from an
> Auxiliary Board member where there was none. Fine the threat here. This
> threat is real.
>
> Nancy Damren
----------
From: Nicholas Sanders[SMTP:semiotek@post8.tele.dk]
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 1997 12:34 AM
To: FG
Cc: CC Mail
Subject: Re: Bahai-discuss attacks on talk.religion.bahai
Dear Mr Glaysher
Thank you for your post which is receiving our attention. I note from
your earlier message that you "await patiently [our] answer" - may I
presume to try that patience a little further by asking that you refrain
from any further postings on this matter, either to "Baha'i Discuss" or
"talk.religion.bahai"? I am confident that your doing so will help to
reduce the heat generated by this issue and thus facilitate its speedier
resolution.
By all means advise the Committee of any further mail which you receive
about it: indeed I hope that you will, but I prefer that you post to
<bcca-cc@bcca.org> in future as this will ensure your message gets
treated promply as incoming correspondence to the Coordinating Committee.
Please accept our apologies for the continued delay in finding a way
through this difficulty. I am sure that you can readily appreciate that
it has become increasingly complex, not least because there are now posts
circulating which purport to be sent by you but which, if we understand
correctly, you say are not yours. In order that we might be assisted
towards clarification, can you confirm whether the post entitled "Open
Letter: UHJ (Universal House of Justice)" and dated "1997/03/31" was
actually from you or not.
Thank you for your continuing assistance.
In His service
Nicholas Sanders
____________________ Reply Separator ____________________
In a message logged 30/09/97 13:30 Gudhjem Time, FG wrote:
>I'm concerned that this morning I find Bahai-Discuss is being
>used for a campaign against me personally by someone
>pretending to be me and posting from bahai@hotmail.com.
>
>I request that your committee officially denounce this
>abusive activity clearly calculated to inflame passions against
>my person and against talk.religion.bahai, before the proper
>period of discussion has even begun.
>
>I must add that I have received two pieces of hate mail,
>one of which personally threatens me. I will forward it to you
>under separate posting.
>
>I await patiently your answer to my previous communication.
>
>FG
>UseNet: alt.religion.bahai
>Ask your ISP to add it; also available on
>www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com.
----------------- End Forwarded Message -----------------
----------
From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 1997 6:36 AM
To: Nicholas Sanders
Subject: Re: Bahai-discuss attacks on talk.religion.bahai
----------
> From: Nicholas Sanders <semiotek@post8.tele.dk>
> To: FG <FG@hotmail.com>
> Cc: CC Mail <bcca-cc@bcca.org>
> Subject: Re: Bahai-discuss attacks on talk.religion.bahai
> Date: Thursday, October 02, 1997 12:34 AM
>
> Dear Mr Glaysher
>
> Thank you for your post which is receiving our attention. I note from
> your earlier message that you "await patiently [our] answer" - may I
> presume to try that patience a little further by asking that you refrain
> from any further postings on this matter, either to "Baha'i Discuss" or
> "talk.religion.bahai"? I am confident that your doing so will help to
> reduce the heat generated by this issue and thus facilitate its speedier
> resolution.
I'd prefer your not taking advantage of my patience.... Talk.religion.bahai
does not exist; you mean alt.religion.bahai. Although you might notice,
I have not been involved in generating the "heat." You seem quite
incorrectly to be blaming the victim.
I remain very concerned about the demonizing character assassination
that has and is taking place on b-d. I would like a response from you
as soon as possible as well as your taking positive and effective action
there to ensure b-d is not used to undermine UseNet voting procedure and
to attack and threaten the way Nancy Damren has done. I also request
at this time that you email her directly and obtain an apology or clear
statement from her that she has not done or is about to do something
rash in regard to my personal safety and that of my family.
>
> By all means advise the Committee of any further mail which you receive
> about it: indeed I hope that you will, but I prefer that you post to
> <bcca-cc@bcca.org> in future as this will ensure your message gets
> treated promply as incoming correspondence to the Coordinating Committee.
This is the email address that I have in my address book.
>
> Please accept our apologies for the continued delay in finding a way
> through this difficulty. I am sure that you can readily appreciate that
> it has become increasingly complex, not least because there are now posts
> circulating which purport to be sent by you but which, if we understand
> correctly, you say are not yours. In order that we might be assisted
> towards clarification, can you confirm whether the post entitled "Open
> Letter: UHJ (Universal House of Justice)" and dated "1997/03/31" was
> actually from you or not.
I do not agree. What I wrote six months ago is irrelevant to the threat
I have received. In my opinion, you are failing your duties as a
Coordinating Committee by not responding promptly to the disgraceful
uses Bahai-Discuss is being put to by many Bahais on it. The issue
is not whether I wrote the reposted message in question. It is whether
such low and contemptible tactics are acceptable on Bahai-Discuss
and in the context of a UseNet interest poll for both Bahais and
non-Bahais.
I assure you I did not repost any of the messages from "bahai@hotmail.com."
The motives of that individual are clearly to inflame animosity against me
and alt/talk.religion.bahai. Have you emailed bahai@hotmail.com?
>
> Thank you for your continuing assistance.
I find your failure as a committee to act promptly and responsibly in this
matter quite shameful....
>
> In His service
>
> Nicholas Sanders
>
> ____________________ Reply Separator ____________________
> In a message logged 30/09/97 13:30 Gudhjem Time, FG
wrote:
>
> >I'm concerned that this morning I find Bahai-Discuss is being
> >used for a campaign against me personally by someone
> >pretending to be me and posting from bahai@hotmail.com.
> >
> >I request that your committee officially denounce this
> >abusive activity clearly calculated to inflame passions against
> >my person and against talk.religion.bahai, before the proper
> >period of discussion has even begun.
> >
> >I must add that I have received two pieces of hate mail,
> >one of which personally threatens me. I will forward it to you
> >under separate posting.
> >
> >I await patiently your answer to my previous communication.
> >
> >FG
> >UseNet: alt.religion.bahai
> >Ask your ISP to add it; also available on
> >www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com.
>
>
>
> ----------------- End Forwarded Message -----------------
----------
From: Joseph Khoury[SMTP:joseph@bounty.bcca.org]
Sent: Monday, October 06, 1997 12:58 PM
To: FG
Cc: fglaysh@hotmail.com
Subject: BCCA Mailing Lists subscriptions
> I don't want to subscribe but unsubscribe from BINS, Tech,
> Bahai-singles, Helping, Homeschool, Teachers, Race Unity, and Readings.
> I'd appreciate it if you could make
> sure I'm off them. My email address for receiving them is
>
> fglaysh@hotmail.com
>
>
Dear FG,
You have been removed from the above mentioned mailing lists (you must
have been getting about five zillion messages per day!); you are still
subscribed to the following lists:
Announce;BCF;Discuss;Youth
If this is not what you want, please let us know!
Joseph Khoury
(just one of the BCCA Lists Managers)
----------
From: Bahai Lists Manager[SMTP:janet@Bounty.BCCA.Org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 1997 8:10 PM
To: FG
Subject: Re: Pointers to RFD: TRB: (Re: BCCA Mailing Lists subscriptions)
You may post to any list whether or not you are a member.
On Wed, 22 Oct 1997, FG wrote:
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 08:09:06 -0400
> From: FG <FG@hotmail.com>
> To: Baha'i Request <Bahai-Request@BCCA.org>
> Subject: Pointers to RFD: TRB: (Re: BCCA Mailing Lists subscriptions)
>
> I'd like to post the pointer to the RFD for talk.religion.bahai to the
> following lists,
> which I subscribed to a few weeks ago.... I know I'm no longer
> subscribed to some of them. Perhaps I should resubscribe and then post but
> it seems such a waste of your time, if not mine.... I have individually
> emailed
> in a pointer for each one, they should be around there already somewhere,
> but
> am concerned they'll bounce. I forgot I had unsubscribed from some of
> them....
> Would you be willing to post the RFD to them anyway, or should I
> resubscribe?
>
> FG
> UseNet: alt.religion.bahai
> The RFD for talk.religion.bahai can be found on news.groups,
> news.announce.newgroups, or at <https://www.baha.demon.co.uk/rfd.htm>
>
> ----------
> > From: Joseph Khoury <joseph@bounty.bcca.org>
> > To: FG <FG@hotmail.com>
> > Cc: fglaysh@hotmail.com
> > Subject: BCCA Mailing Lists subscriptions
> > Date: Monday, October 06, 1997 12:58 PM
> >
> > > I don't want to subscribe but unsubscribe from BINS, Tech,
> > > Bahai-singles, Helping, Homeschool, Teachers, Race Unity, and Readings.
>
> > > I'd appreciate it if you could make
> > > sure I'm off them. My email address for receiving them is
> > >
> > > fglaysh@hotmail.com
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Dear FG,
> >
> > You have been removed from the above mentioned mailing lists (you must
> > have been getting about five zillion messages per day!); you are still
> > subscribed to the following lists:
> > Announce;BCF;Discuss;Youth
> >
> > If this is not what you want, please let us know!
> >
> > Joseph Khoury
> > (just one of the BCCA Lists Managers)
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
----------
From: CC Secretary[SMTP:bcca-cc@bcca.org]
Sent: Monday, November 10, 1997 2:31 PM
To: FG
Cc: CC Mail
Subject: Message from the BCCA-CC
Mr Glaysher
I write to advise you that the following message has been mailed to BCCA
lists today.
On behalf of the BCCA-CC
Nicholas J A Sanders
-------------------
Dear Baha'i Friends
The Co-ordinating Committee of the Baha'i Computer and Communications
Association regrets to announce that Mr FG has been
unsubscribed from all of the BCCA lists which included his name and email
address and that steps have been taken to prevent his posting to any
forum for which we have responsibility.
We wish to make it quite clear that this action follows from Mr
Glaysher's persistent contravention of the conditions of the BCCA Charter
and our decision should not be taken as indicating any stance on the
question of his proposal for a new Usenet group. It has been made only
after our several attempts to settle difficulties amicably with Mr
Glaysher have produced no positive result.
The Committee now urges all the believers who participate in online
Baha'i activities to focus their attention on the urgent needs of the
time and to renew their efforts towards successful completion of the
Four-Year Plan. We earnestly hope that the acrimonious exchanges of past
weeks will now be forgotten and that there will be no repeat of them.
(Please note that this message is being posted to several BCCA lists - we
apologise for any multiple receipts.)
In His service
Nicholas Sanders
Nicholas J A Sanders
_______________________
Secretary
BCCA Co-ordinating Committee
----------
From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 1997 4:06 PM
To: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca
Subject: kicked off BCCA message
Subject:
Message from the BCCA-CC
Date:
Mon, 10 Nov 97 19:31:00 +0100
From:
CC Secretary <bcca-cc@bcca.org>
To:
"FG" <FG@hotmail.com>
CC:
"CC Mail" <bcca-cc@bcca.org>
Mr Glaysher
I write to advise you that the following message has been mailed to BCCA
lists today.
On behalf of the BCCA-CC
Nicholas J A Sanders
-------------------
Dear Baha'i Friends
The Co-ordinating Committee of the Baha'i Computer and Communications
Association regrets to announce that Mr FG has been
unsubscribed from all of the BCCA lists which included his name and
email
address and that steps have been taken to prevent his posting to any
forum for which we have responsibility.
We wish to make it quite clear that this action follows from Mr
Glaysher's persistent contravention of the conditions of the BCCA
Charter
and our decision should not be taken as indicating any stance on the
question of his proposal for a new Usenet group. It has been made only
after our several attempts to settle difficulties amicably with Mr
Glaysher have produced no positive result.
The Committee now urges all the believers who participate in online
Baha'i activities to focus their attention on the urgent needs of the
time and to renew their efforts towards successful completion of the
Four-Year Plan. We earnestly hope that the acrimonious exchanges of
past
weeks will now be forgotten and that there will be no repeat of them.
(Please note that this message is being posted to several BCCA lists -
we
apologise for any multiple receipts.)
In His service
Nicholas Sanders
Nicholas J A Sanders
_______________________
Secretary
BCCA Co-ordinating Committee
--
FG
UseNet: alt.religion.bahai
The RFD for talk.religion.bahai can be found on news.groups,
news.announce.newgroups, or at <https://www.baha.demon.co.uk/rfd2.htm>
Homepage
|