Should Rashmun take a break from posting?

by Guest Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:16 pm

should Rashmun take a break from posting?

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:25 pm

despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

by truthbetold Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:42 pm

Vb,
If god can be so kind to us and divert his attention to other tasks for few hours, it will refresh the air in the e forum.

by Guest Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:51 pm

I voted for 'yes, we are saturated up to *here*', but on second thoughts, i should've voted for,'yes, it's for his own good'. Yeah, he needs to take a break and probably seek some help.

by Guest Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:40 pm

lol, who voted 'rashmun who'?

by Guest Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:42 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote: there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

but i thot u liked him and talked to him offline.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:46 pm

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote: there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

but i thot u liked him and talked to him offline.

this post is a fishing expedition and is summarily rejected.

by Guest Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:46 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote: there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

but i thot u liked him and talked to him offline.

this post is a fishing expedition and is summarily rejected.

hahaha, i know.

by goodcitizn Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:18 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

I think you are wearing kit gloves in dealing with this guy. I don't know where you draw the line on malliciousness or maligning someone. This guy is here 24/7 abusing anyone who disagrees with him. I wouldn't be surprised if he starts up with me (which will only prove my point). It takes malice to insinuate something from Kinnera's chat with Bittu as he did in another post. Frankly, I am sick and tired of his "cry baby" and "name-calling" posts.

Rashmun used to post meaningful topics in Sulekha. Not any more. Now I see him inundate this forum with childish crap. As for as I am concerned, being an admin is a thankless job but someone has to do it. I am sure Carvaka will be happy to pass the baton over to you if you want it. At least that would stop all this PP bashing.

by Guest Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:28 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

I think you are wearing kit gloves in dealing with this guy. I don't know where you draw the line on malliciousness or maligning someone. This guy is here 24/7 abusing anyone who disagrees with him. I wouldn't be surprised if he starts up with me (which will only prove my point). It takes malice to insinuate something from Kinnera's chat with Bittu as he did in another post. Frankly, I am sick and tired of his "cry baby" and "name-calling" posts.

Rashmun used to post meaningful topics in Sulekha. Not any more. Now I see him inundate this forum with childish crap. As for as I am concerned, being an admin is a thankless job but someone has to do it. I am sure Carvaka will be happy to pass the baton over to you if you want it. At least that would stop all this PP bashing.

You seem to have developed a prejudice against me because of my Hindi posts. Also if I am posting nonsense why did you give answers to all the questions in my Godfather quiz?

by goodcitizn Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:41 pm

Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

I think you are wearing kit gloves in dealing with this guy. I don't know where you draw the line on malliciousness or maligning someone. This guy is here 24/7 abusing anyone who disagrees with him. I wouldn't be surprised if he starts up with me (which will only prove my point). It takes malice to insinuate something from Kinnera's chat with Bittu as he did in another post. Frankly, I am sick and tired of his "cry baby" and "name-calling" posts.

Rashmun used to post meaningful topics in Sulekha. Not any more. Now I see him inundate this forum with childish crap. As for as I am concerned, being an admin is a thankless job but someone has to do it. I am sure Carvaka will be happy to pass the baton over to you if you want it. At least that would stop all this PP bashing.

You seem to have developed a prejudice against me because of my Hindi posts. Also if I am posting nonsense why did you give answers to all the questions in my Godfather quiz?

Your Godfather quiz was meaningful as your posts used to be in Sulekha. I don't hold a prejudice against you on your Hindi posts. On the contrary, I should thank you for allowing me to study the literacy rate in India, the educational system today and the utter waste of tax payers' money in continuing to run DBHPS while neglecting literacy in Hindi belt states. My contention with you is that you called me a liar when I told you that your Tamil phrase was vulgar and abusive towards Uppili's mother. And I hope you revert back to your older ways and post interesting topics.

by bw Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:42 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

by b_A Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:44 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

I think you are wearing kit gloves in dealing with this guy. I don't know where you draw the line on malliciousness or maligning someone. This guy is here 24/7 abusing anyone who disagrees with him. I wouldn't be surprised if he starts up with me (which will only prove my point). It takes malice to insinuate something from Kinnera's chat with Bittu as he did in another post. Frankly, I am sick and tired of his "cry baby" and "name-calling" posts.

Rashmun used to post meaningful topics in Sulekha. Not any more. Now I see him inundate this forum with childish crap. As for as I am concerned, being an admin is a thankless job but someone has to do it. I am sure Carvaka will be happy to pass the baton over to you if you want it. At least that would stop all this PP bashing.

That's the power of flattery and Rashmun knows how to use it against Max.
And he is trying to ingratiate himself to all the tamilians too. Just observe the pattern of his posts today.
example 1: https://such.forumotion.com/t10142-there-is-a-tamilian-inside-every-indian
example 2: https://such.forumotion.com/t10138-why-do-punjabi-babes-like-tamil-guys-so-much

by b_A Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:45 pm

For the record , I voted , No I need my laughs.

by Guest Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:50 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

I think you are wearing kit gloves in dealing with this guy. I don't know where you draw the line on malliciousness or maligning someone. This guy is here 24/7 abusing anyone who disagrees with him. I wouldn't be surprised if he starts up with me (which will only prove my point). It takes malice to insinuate something from Kinnera's chat with Bittu as he did in another post. Frankly, I am sick and tired of his "cry baby" and "name-calling" posts.

Rashmun used to post meaningful topics in Sulekha. Not any more. Now I see him inundate this forum with childish crap. As for as I am concerned, being an admin is a thankless job but someone has to do it. I am sure Carvaka will be happy to pass the baton over to you if you want it. At least that would stop all this PP bashing.

You seem to have developed a prejudice against me because of my Hindi posts. Also if I am posting nonsense why did you give answers to all the questions in my Godfather quiz?

Your Godfather quiz was meaningful as your posts used to be in Sulekha. I don't hold a prejudice against you on your Hindi posts. On the contrary, I should thank you for allowing me to study the literacy rate in India, the educational system today and the utter waste of tax payers' money in continuing to run DBHPS while neglecting literacy in Hindi belt states. My contention with you is that you called me a liar when I told you that your Tamil phrase was vulgar and abusive towards Uppili's mother. And I hope you revert back to your older ways and post interesting topics.

I genuinely thought you were not telling the truth since the translation I had (link of the site given by Ponniyin Selvan) translated the words as son of a bitch and not son of a prostitute which is what you were claiming. Son of a bitch is a relatively innocuous term at least in English*. Subsequent to this when Max also said that the words mean son of a prostitute I did offer an apology to Uppili.

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitch_(insult)#Son_of_a_bitch

by southindian Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:00 pm

Rashmun is a troubled soul, who has already given 4-5 years of his life to CH and SuCH. Don't know why.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:02 pm

bw wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

oh most definitely yes!

by Guest Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:08 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
bw wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

oh most definitely yes!

is it a male or a female handle?

by goodcitizn Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:08 pm

Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

I think you are wearing kit gloves in dealing with this guy. I don't know where you draw the line on malliciousness or maligning someone. This guy is here 24/7 abusing anyone who disagrees with him. I wouldn't be surprised if he starts up with me (which will only prove my point). It takes malice to insinuate something from Kinnera's chat with Bittu as he did in another post. Frankly, I am sick and tired of his "cry baby" and "name-calling" posts.

Rashmun used to post meaningful topics in Sulekha. Not any more. Now I see him inundate this forum with childish crap. As for as I am concerned, being an admin is a thankless job but someone has to do it. I am sure Carvaka will be happy to pass the baton over to you if you want it. At least that would stop all this PP bashing.

You seem to have developed a prejudice against me because of my Hindi posts. Also if I am posting nonsense why did you give answers to all the questions in my Godfather quiz?

Your Godfather quiz was meaningful as your posts used to be in Sulekha. I don't hold a prejudice against you on your Hindi posts. On the contrary, I should thank you for allowing me to study the literacy rate in India, the educational system today and the utter waste of tax payers' money in continuing to run DBHPS while neglecting literacy in Hindi belt states. My contention with you is that you called me a liar when I told you that your Tamil phrase was vulgar and abusive towards Uppili's mother. And I hope you revert back to your older ways and post interesting topics.

I genuinely thought you were not telling the truth since the translation I had (link of the site given by Ponniyin Selvan) translated the words as son of a bitch and not son of a prostitute which is what you were claiming. Son of a bitch is a relatively innocuous term at least in English*. Subsequent to this when Max also said that the words mean son of a prostitute I did offer an apology to Uppili.

* [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitch_(insult)#Son_of_a_bitch

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitch_(insult)#Son_of_a_bitch[/quote[/url]]

Frankly, its not up to you but to the one on the receiving end who should decide what "innocuous" is. Be that as it may, I am terribly impressed that you apologized to Uppili.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:08 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

I don't know where you draw the line on malliciousness or maligning someone.

the PP bashing is very unfair and i have already said that many times. i thought i made it clear where i draw the line -- disclosing personal information about another poster one knows well to be true. that is malice. there are people who have done that, but have corrected their ways when requested politely.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:18 pm

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
bw wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

oh most definitely yes!

is it a male or a female handle?

it's not you.

by b_A Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:20 pm

[quote="goodcitizn"]

Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:

I think you are wearing kit gloves in dealing with this guy. I don't know where you draw the line on malliciousness or maligning someone. This guy is here 24/7 abusing anyone who disagrees with him. I wouldn't be surprised if he starts up with me (which will only prove my point). It takes malice to insinuate something from Kinnera's chat with Bittu as he did in another post. Frankly, I am sick and tired of his "cry baby" and "name-calling" posts.

Rashmun used to post meaningful topics in Sulekha. Not any more. Now I see him inundate this forum with childish crap. As for as I am concerned, being an admin is a thankless job but someone has to do it. I am sure Carvaka will be happy to pass the baton over to you if you want it. At least that would stop all this PP bashing.

You seem to have developed a prejudice against me because of my Hindi posts. Also if I am posting nonsense why did you give answers to all the questions in my Godfather quiz?

Your Godfather quiz was meaningful as your posts used to be in Sulekha. I don't hold a prejudice against you on your Hindi posts. On the contrary, I should thank you for allowing me to study the literacy rate in India, the educational system today and the utter waste of tax payers' money in continuing to run DBHPS while neglecting literacy in Hindi belt states. My contention with you is that you called me a liar when I told you that your Tamil phrase was vulgar and abusive towards Uppili's mother. And I hope you revert back to your older ways and post interesting topics.

I genuinely thought you were not telling the truth since the translation I had (link of the site given by Ponniyin Selvan) translated the words as son of a bitch and not son of a prostitute which is what you were claiming. Son of a bitch is a relatively innocuous term at least in English*. Subsequent to this when Max also said that the words mean son of a prostitute I did offer an apology to Uppili.

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitch_(insult)#Son_of_a_bitch[/quote]

Frankly, its not up to you but to the one on the receiving end who should decide what "innocuous" is. Be that as it may, I am terribly impressed that you apologized to Uppili.

Don't just go by his word. If you actually read his apology , it doesn't sound like apology at all.

by Guest Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:25 pm

[quote="b_A"]

goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

You seem to have developed a prejudice against me because of my Hindi posts. Also if I am posting nonsense why did you give answers to all the questions in my Godfather quiz?

Your Godfather quiz was meaningful as your posts used to be in Sulekha. I don't hold a prejudice against you on your Hindi posts. On the contrary, I should thank you for allowing me to study the literacy rate in India, the educational system today and the utter waste of tax payers' money in continuing to run DBHPS while neglecting literacy in Hindi belt states. My contention with you is that you called me a liar when I told you that your Tamil phrase was vulgar and abusive towards Uppili's mother. And I hope you revert back to your older ways and post interesting topics.

I genuinely thought you were not telling the truth since the translation I had (link of the site given by Ponniyin Selvan) translated the words as son of a bitch and not son of a prostitute which is what you were claiming. Son of a bitch is a relatively innocuous term at least in English*. Subsequent to this when Max also said that the words mean son of a prostitute I did offer an apology to Uppili.

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitch_(insult)#Son_of_a_bitch[/quote]

Frankly, its not up to you but to the one on the receiving end who should decide what "innocuous" is. Be that as it may, I am terribly impressed that you apologized to Uppili.
Don't just go by his word. If you actually read his apology , it doesn't sound like apology at all.

Rashmun wrote:
in that case i apologize unreservedly to Uppili.

https://such.forumotion.com/t10030p50-hindi-is-a-symbol-of-national-unity-integrity-and-harmony-andhra-pradesh-cm-ysr#76793

by Guest Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:26 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
bw wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

oh most definitely yes!

is it a male or a female handle?

it's not you.

I can't think of any poster, currently on this site, who is all that.

Talking about id of posters, didn't lukie repeatedly take tiana's full real name on forums? he did have some excuse about her putting up a link in her blogs, but the fact is, he repeated called her (mrs.) xxx "tiana" yyy on forums, and of course would go on his usual malicious posts. Was what that all about?

by goodcitizn Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:30 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

I don't know where you draw the line on malliciousness or maligning someone.

the PP bashing is very unfair and i have already said that many times. i thought i made it clear where i draw the line -- disclosing personal information about another poster one knows well to be true. that is malice. there are people who have done that, but have corrected their ways when requested politely.

Fine. Hopefully there will be no more polls slighting anyone.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:32 pm

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
bw wrote:

oh most definitely yes!

is it a male or a female handle?

it's not you.

I can't think of any poster, currently on this site, who is all that.

Talking about id of posters, didn't lukie repeatedly take tiana's full real name on forums? he did have some excuse about her putting up a link in her blogs, but the fact is, he repeated called her (mrs.) xxx "tiana" yyy on forums, and of course would go on his usual malicious posts. Was what that all about?

why are you asking me? the only poster i remember addressing by his name is seva aka lamberdar. and that's because he used to write blogs outside sulekha under his real name and link them on sulekha. when i did that once, it was clear he didn't appreciate it, so i stopped.

by Guest Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:34 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

oh most definitely yes!

is it a male or a female handle?

it's not you.

I can't think of any poster, currently on this site, who is all that.

Talking about id of posters, didn't lukie repeatedly take tiana's full real name on forums? he did have some excuse about her putting up a link in her blogs, but the fact is, he repeated called her (mrs.) xxx "tiana" yyy on forums, and of course would go on his usual malicious posts. Was what that all about?

why are you asking me? the only poster i remember addressing by his name is seva aka lamberdar. and that's because he used to write blogs outside sulekha under his real name and link them on sulekha. when i did that once, it was clear he didn't appreciate it, so i stopped.

The q was to general population of sulekha who may remember that. Having said that, where does your line drawing tools disappear when it comes to JM? You don't have to answer it. Friendships come without judgements I guess.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:36 pm

Rashmun wrote:

I genuinely thought you were not telling the truth since the translation I had (link of the site given by Ponniyin Selvan) translated the words as son of a bitch and not son of a prostitute which is what you were claiming. Son of a bitch is a relatively innocuous term at least in English*. Subsequent to this when Max also said that the words mean son of a prostitute I did offer an apology to Uppili.

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitch_(insult)#Son_of_a_bitch

Here is a fact:

Most SuCHERS dont take you seriously, and they think you are a liar, crazy, lunatic, bully, fanatic, or all of them together. In short, your credibility is Zero.

It has become routine for you to abuse a SuCHER, his female family members, then claim misunderstanding, ignorance, denial, and finally claim high moral ground.

There is practically nothing useful, new, or original in whatever you post in a very very long time. I am also actively considering putting you on ignore and save some of my time. And, if you put me on ignore first it is even better, and you can use that extra time to post more vomit.

People are just plain fed up with your childish routine. You can
fool somebody all the time, all the people sometime, and even all the
people all the time, but not this SaamiYaar.

by Guest Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:38 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

I genuinely thought you were not telling the truth since the translation I had (link of the site given by Ponniyin Selvan) translated the words as son of a bitch and not son of a prostitute which is what you were claiming. Son of a bitch is a relatively innocuous term at least in English*. Subsequent to this when Max also said that the words mean son of a prostitute I did offer an apology to Uppili.

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitch_(insult)#Son_of_a_bitch

Here is a fact:

Most SuCHERS dont take you seriously, and they think you are a liar, crazy, lunatic, bully, fanatic, or all of them together. In short, your credibility is Zero.

It has become routine for you to abuse a SuCHER, his female family members, then claim misunderstanding, ignorance, denial, and finally claim high moral ground.

There is practically nothing useful, new, or original in whatever you post in a very very long time. I am also actively considering putting you on ignore and save some of my time. And, if you put me on ignore first it is even better, and you can use that extra time to post more vomit.

People are just plain fed up with your childish routine. You can
fool somebody all the time, all the people sometime, and even all the
people all the time, but not this SaamiYaar.

Uppili the Poopili, go suck your thumb.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:47 pm

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:

is it a male or a female handle?

it's not you.

I can't think of any poster, currently on this site, who is all that.

Talking about id of posters, didn't lukie repeatedly take tiana's full real name on forums? he did have some excuse about her putting up a link in her blogs, but the fact is, he repeated called her (mrs.) xxx "tiana" yyy on forums, and of course would go on his usual malicious posts. Was what that all about?

why are you asking me? the only poster i remember addressing by his name is seva aka lamberdar. and that's because he used to write blogs outside sulekha under his real name and link them on sulekha. when i did that once, it was clear he didn't appreciate it, so i stopped.

The q was to general population of sulekha who may remember that. Having said that, where does your line drawing tools disappear when it comes to JM? You don't have to answer it. Friendships come without judgements I guess.

it's a fair question. i'd like to separate behavior at sulekha from here. one of the downsides of sulekha was that we never had recourse to corrective action when private info was disclosed. i'm happy that it's different here. the problem with giving you a direct answer is that answering it might itself result in disclosure of private info. i can only ask you to believe that i'd like to apply this rule uniformly and fairly.

by Hellsangel Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:15 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

it's a fair question. i'd like to separate behavior at sulekha from here. one of the downsides of sulekha was that we never had recourse to corrective action when private info was disclosed. i'm happy that it's different here. the problem with giving you a direct answer is that answering it might itself result in disclosure of private info. i can only ask you to believe that i'd like to apply this rule uniformly and fairly.

Yes.

by bw Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:29 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
bw wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

oh most definitely yes!

does gratitude encompass not disagreeing on any topic?

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:35 am

bw wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
bw wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

oh most definitely yes!

does gratitude encompass not disagreeing on any topic?

of course not. that would be too boring.

by bw Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:41 am

incidentally, i voted "no, this is a free forum".

i have a dream. i have a dream that rashmun will dump akbar, dump nizam, spend his time fruitfully learning tamil and post in proper tamil sans profanities.

by bw Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:00 am

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:

is it a male or a female handle?

it's not you.

I can't think of any poster, currently on this site, who is all that.

Talking about id of posters, didn't lukie repeatedly take tiana's full real name on forums? he did have some excuse about her putting up a link in her blogs, but the fact is, he repeated called her (mrs.) xxx "tiana" yyy on forums, and of course would go on his usual malicious posts. Was what that all about?

why are you asking me? the only poster i remember addressing by his name is seva aka lamberdar. and that's because he used to write blogs outside sulekha under his real name and link them on sulekha. when i did that once, it was clear he didn't appreciate it, so i stopped.

The q was to general population of sulekha who may remember that. Having said that, where does your line drawing tools disappear when it comes to JM? You don't have to answer it. Friendships come without judgements I guess.

it is a universal truth that almost every one aligns with their buddies/allies and turn a blind eye when they do something unsavoury. that's the expectation, i suppose.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:44 am

bw wrote:

it is a universal truth that almost every one aligns with their buddies/allies and turn a blind eye when they do something unsavoury. that's the expectation, i suppose.

Is that why people tell that a girl should first make friends with a guy before marrying him?... Wink

by yogi Mon Jan 21, 2013 7:14 am

yeah..from what i see everyone's fed up with rashmun saab and he should take a break and stop behaving like a crybaby Basketball

by Guest Mon Jan 21, 2013 7:22 am

bw wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

it's not you.

I can't think of any poster, currently on this site, who is all that.

Talking about id of posters, didn't lukie repeatedly take tiana's full real name on forums? he did have some excuse about her putting up a link in her blogs, but the fact is, he repeated called her (mrs.) xxx "tiana" yyy on forums, and of course would go on his usual malicious posts. Was what that all about?

why are you asking me? the only poster i remember addressing by his name is seva aka lamberdar. and that's because he used to write blogs outside sulekha under his real name and link them on sulekha. when i did that once, it was clear he didn't appreciate it, so i stopped.

The q was to general population of sulekha who may remember that. Having said that, where does your line drawing tools disappear when it comes to JM? You don't have to answer it. Friendships come without judgements I guess.

it is a universal truth that almost every one aligns with their buddies/allies and turn a blind eye when they do something unsavoury. that's the expectation, i suppose.

Turning a blind eye in public when your friend does something definitely becomes more questionable when you openly criticize someone else for the same thing. Uniformity calls for either openly criticizing everyone or no one. The tricky part here is that as a public we don't know if the friend is correcting the other in private or not. And it's something they may or may not want to share in public.

by Hellsangel Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:37 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

it's a fair question. i'd like to separate behavior at sulekha from here. one of the downsides of sulekha was that we never had recourse to corrective action when private info was disclosed. i'm happy that it's different here. the problem with giving you a direct answer is that answering it might itself result in disclosure of private info. i can only ask you to believe that i'd like to apply this rule uniformly and fairly.

I suppose that makes you a hypocrite, Il Professore, especially when you share a bigotry with someone.

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:10 am

Hellsangel wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

it's a fair question. i'd like to separate behavior at sulekha from here. one of the downsides of sulekha was that we never had recourse to corrective action when private info was disclosed. i'm happy that it's different here. the problem with giving you a direct answer is that answering it might itself result in disclosure of private info. i can only ask you to believe that i'd like to apply this rule uniformly and fairly.

I suppose that makes you a hypocrite, Il Professore, especially when you share a bigotry with someone.

if this is about the tiana business, i've posted a response in the other thread. if you want to call me a bigot, feel free to do so.

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:14 am

Vidya Bagchi wrote: And it's something they may or may not want to share in public.

my response. incidentally, i am not usually in the business of whining (or criticizing if you like) like rashmun does over pages and pages. if i find something unsavory, i simple request PP to fix it if he thinks it's appropriate. i didn't post rambling whines of twenty seven pages criticizing the original offender in the most recent blow up, did i?

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:21 am

lookie here and make your own conclusions. please make sure you read the blog, scroll down, and click more comments until you read all the comments. in particular the comment by the author of the book in question.

by Propagandhi711 Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:21 am

b_A wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:despite my exasperation with rashmun on many topics, and despite my many disagreements with him, despite his pointless dotting, despite his tendency to drone on about moghals, and despite his tendency to go off the rails on occasion to the point of abusing folks, rashmun is not malicious. he should post whatever he wants. most folks here are not malicious to my knowledge. there is one poster on this site i consider malicious, highly dislikable, and more importantly, ungrateful.

I think you are wearing kit gloves in dealing with this guy. I don't know where you draw the line on malliciousness or maligning someone. This guy is here 24/7 abusing anyone who disagrees with him. I wouldn't be surprised if he starts up with me (which will only prove my point). It takes malice to insinuate something from Kinnera's chat with Bittu as he did in another post. Frankly, I am sick and tired of his "cry baby" and "name-calling" posts.

Rashmun used to post meaningful topics in Sulekha. Not any more. Now I see him inundate this forum with childish crap. As for as I am concerned, being an admin is a thankless job but someone has to do it. I am sure Carvaka will be happy to pass the baton over to you if you want it. At least that would stop all this PP bashing.

That's the power of flattery and Rashmun knows how to use it against Max.
And he is trying to ingratiate himself to all the tamilians too. Just observe the pattern of his posts today.
example 1: https://such.forumotion.com/t10142-there-is-a-tamilian-inside-every-indian
example 2: https://such.forumotion.com/t10138-why-do-punjabi-babes-like-tamil-guys-so-much

This crazy fuckmun is really in kindergarten emotionally and the image he tries to cultivate during his brief moments of lucidity quickly falls apart when encountering resistance to his cuckoo ideas. His coalition building tactics are so childish they would be laughable if your didn't realize what a lying, manipulative douche is behind them.

by southindian Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:21 am

Max, you have a huge Q & A going here this weekend.

I guess, you must be managing your time perfectly. Smile

by Guest Mon Jan 21, 2013 11:50 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:lookie here and make your own conclusions. please make sure you read the blog, scroll down, and click more comments until you read all the comments. in particular the comment by the author of the book in question.

no, tiana does not mind. but sometimes we mind na, vut2do? this is sulekha or such. cromagnon had to change his real name for a moniker because tracy whitney and charvaka minded that he did not mind. i took offence when JM revealed my real name to me without my permission. such conduct cannot be allowed. let it be known to all that i mind if i or anyone else is addressed by our previous monikers. don't call me banwarilal, partha guha etc. now i am offended with myself.

by Guest Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:01 pm

Huzefa Kapasi wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:lookie here and make your own conclusions. please make sure you read the blog, scroll down, and click more comments until you read all the comments. in particular the comment by the author of the book in question.
no, tiana does not mind. but sometimes we mind na, vut2do? this is sulekha or such. cromagnon had to change his real name for a moniker because tracy whitney and charvaka minded that he did not mind. i took offence when JM revealed my real name to me without my permission. such conduct cannot be allowed. let it be known to all that i mind if i or anyone else is addressed by our previous monikers. don't call me banwarilal, partha guha etc. now i am offended with myself.

LOL. I had a started a thread in his name asking him if his name was for real. When it turned out that it was, and the thread became huge with all sorts of comments, I got sulekha to delete it. Didn't want it on my conscience. Why, I dunno. Just didn't feel right to me for being the one starting a thread that could potentially harm someone. He didn't like my deleting the thread. But I don't care. It was started by me so I sorta had the right to get it deleted. The rest was just general advising by many to not use real names.

by Jeremiah Mburuburu Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:33 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:the PP bashing is very unfair...

i couldn't disagree with you more.

pp (charvaka) has encouraged propagandhi, hellsangel, and huzefa kapasi, among others, to make crude posts that he knows violate others' privacy, and are otherwise harmful to them. he gave them the clear impression that they could make such posts with impunity. charvak has mentioned whom he dislikes, and these rogue posters target them, partly in order to please charvak. among the class of posters charvak coddles are women.

regardless of charvak's encouragement of rogue posters, suCH, which charvak started, and over which he has administrative control, serves as a platform from which innocent bystanders -- people with families, careers, professions, and interests, unknown to him and the rogues, and bearing no ill will towards any of them -- can be and are crudely attacked and harmed. charvak knows all this well. he has no excuses.

given all this, i have no idea why you support charvak. i can guess the reasons why, but for the same reasons, you have lost something valuable.

by Guest Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:49 pm

Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:the PP bashing is very unfair...
i couldn't disagree with you more.

pp (charvaka) has encouraged propagandhi, hellsangel, and huzefa kapasi, among others, to make crude posts that he knows violate others' privacy, and are otherwise harmful to them. he gave them the clear impression that they could make such posts with impunity. charvak has mentioned whom he dislikes, and these rogue posters target them, partly in order to please charvak. among the class of posters charvak coddles are women.

regardless of charvak's encouragement of rogue posters, suCH, which charvak started, and over which he has administrative control, serves as a platform from which innocent bystanders -- people with families, careers, professions, and interests, unknown to him and the rogues, and bearing no ill will towards any of them -- can be and are crudely attacked and harmed. charvak knows all this well. he has no excuses.

given all this, i have no idea why you support charvak. i can guess the reasons why, but for the same reasons, you have lost something valuable.

In my opinion, huzefa kapasi is mischievous but not malicious. I believe he has expressed regret for hacking into your sulekha account and making your private details public on sulekha. I never saw him revealing private info about you on this forum.

I agree with your assessment of Charvaka, Hellsangel, and Propa. One other poster who has indulged in mutual coddling with Charvaka is Tracy Whitney. Perhaps their shared hatred for QueenBee brought them together initially.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:01 pm

Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:the PP bashing is very unfair...
i couldn't disagree with you more.

pp (charvaka) has encouraged propagandhi, hellsangel, and huzefa kapasi, among others, to make crude posts that he knows violate others' privacy, and are otherwise harmful to them. he gave them the clear impression that they could make such posts with impunity. charvak has mentioned whom he dislikes, and these rogue posters target them, partly in order to please charvak. among the class of posters charvak coddles are women.

regardless of charvak's encouragement of rogue posters, suCH, which charvak started, and over which he has administrative control, serves as a platform from which innocent bystanders -- people with families, careers, professions, and interests, unknown to him and the rogues, and bearing no ill will towards any of them -- can be and are crudely attacked and harmed. charvak knows all this well. he has no excuses.

given all this, i have no idea why you support charvak. i can guess the reasons why, but for the same reasons, you have lost something valuable.

There is a problem here. If PP went in and started deleting such posts and threads, he will accused (by the same Rashmunullah) of censuring and controlling the content. So the solution is to let it all open and rely on self - control. This cannot be successful either bcz there are always bad elements who would distort and push the boundary.

So should he also control posters who attack personally? attack family members? use vulgar words? use unacceptable words? comment on religion? bring out the atrocities of iSalami terrorists?

Please state your boundaries, conditions, and punitive criteria.

by Guest Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:05 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:the PP bashing is very unfair...
i couldn't disagree with you more.

pp (charvaka) has encouraged propagandhi, hellsangel, and huzefa kapasi, among others, to make crude posts that he knows violate others' privacy, and are otherwise harmful to them. he gave them the clear impression that they could make such posts with impunity. charvak has mentioned whom he dislikes, and these rogue posters target them, partly in order to please charvak. among the class of posters charvak coddles are women.

regardless of charvak's encouragement of rogue posters, suCH, which charvak started, and over which he has administrative control, serves as a platform from which innocent bystanders -- people with families, careers, professions, and interests, unknown to him and the rogues, and bearing no ill will towards any of them -- can be and are crudely attacked and harmed. charvak knows all this well. he has no excuses.

given all this, i have no idea why you support charvak. i can guess the reasons why, but for the same reasons, you have lost something valuable.

There is a problem here. If PP went in and started deleting such posts and threads, he will accused (by the same Rashmunullah) of censuring and controlling the content. So the solution is to let it all open and rely on self - control. This cannot be successful either bcz there are always bad elements who would distort and push the boundary.

So should he also control posters who attack personally? attack family members? use vulgar words? use unacceptable words? comment on religion? bring out the atrocities of iSalami terrorists?

Please state your boundaries, conditions, and punitive criteria.

Just expressing his public disapproval of these tactics would go a long ways in eliminating this problem. Instead he preferred to laugh out loud when the pictures of JM's wife and daughter were posted on chat with the claim of the poster that he wanted to have sex with both of them--all this in the presence of JM.

by Sponsored content