Attention Admin Charvaka

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 4:44 pm

In an earlier thread, Tracy had asked you to delete one of her user ID's.

https://such.forumotion.com/t2256-admin#19243

In your reply to her, you had written: "I will see if it's something I want to do, and if so login over the weekend to do it" in response to her request.

It turns out that you do not have the power to deny anyone the right to have any of their User ID's removed from here as per the forummotion rules:
-------

A person who decides to withdraw himself from a forum and
requests the suppression of his account from the administrator. However
this last refuses. What are the obligations of the administrator?

In
accordance with article 34 of the data-processing law and freedoms of
January 6, 1978, each member of a forum has a right of access, of
modification, correction and suppression of the data which relate to it.
This is why the administrator cannot refuse to remove an account.
If such is the case, warn Forumotion who will require of the
administrator to remove this account. In the event of refusal of his
share, it will be exposed to the pure and simple removal of his forum
for nonrespect of the "data-processing and freedoms"...

http://help.forumotion.com/t1526-account-deletion-administrators-obligations

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:24 pm

lol... well will let caru answer himself here.

Just a clarification of my post. I had asked him to let me know how to do it. And not to delete it for me. Here I quote myself:

it was to see if that id could be deleted. I cldn't find any option to delete, so was asking you knew how to.

Rashmun, it's your habit to take a fact and add god knows what all masala to it, and then expect the other person to say whether it's true or not. case in point, you would say 'didn't [whoever] do that to you'. that part would be somewhat right. Then you would say, 'because blah blah blah', and in this 'because' part of the sentence you would put your entire imaginary bullshit.... and you will make all that a part of the same sentence, which would be in a form of a question. And then you would keep asking if that's true or not. Now unless the other person has half a day and will to strip those sentences apart, they won't reply, or just mock you back. And you would get a false sense of victory.

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:30 pm

Tracy Whitney wrote:lol... well will let caru answer himself here.

Just a clarification of my post. I had asked him to let me know how to do it. And not to delete it for me. Here I quote myself:

it was to see if that id could be deleted. I cldn't find any option to delete, so was asking you knew how to.

Rashmun, it's your habit to take a fact and add god knows what all masala to it, and then expect the other person to say whether it's true or not. case in point, you would say 'didn't [whoever] do that to you'. that part would be somewhat right. Then you would say, 'because blah blah blah', and in this 'because' part of the sentence you would put your entire imaginary bullshit.... and you will make all that a part of the same sentence. And then keep asking if that's true or not. Now unless the other person has half a day and will to strip those sentences apart, they won't reply, or just mock you back. And you would get a false sense of victory.

--> This is your first post in a thread titled 'Admin':

since today is friday, i am guessing you gonna log in. i had sent a
request from my darker other id. Please see if you got it. Please see if
you can process that request.

And oh, had forgotten to send this earlier.

--> This is your second post in the same thread:

ah nvm then... it was to see if that id could be deleted. I cldn't find any option to delete, so was asking you knew how to.

--> i just wanted to bring the rules of forummotion to Admin Charvaka's attention: he cannot deny a request by any poster of this forum to have one of their user IDs on this forum deleted. This was a general post, applicable to everyone, and not just to you.

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:32 pm

What i wish to also know is whether forummotion provides protection to a user on their user forum against an admin of that forum who becomes hostile to the user.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:34 pm

Looks like a whole new subspecialty in psychology is evolving Rashmunology

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:35 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:Looks like a whole new subspecialty in psychology is evolving Rashmunology

--> Uppili, the figure for negative votes you have cast stands at only 30. This morning it was 10. Why not go all out and make the figure 50 in the next few hours?

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:44 pm

'process that request' was a mockery I used. I was merely asking him how to.

Besides we all together have been trying to make this forumotion experience a simple one, where he has the least interference. And to automate functonalities that way. Hence my intention was to know if he could facilitate something. And if not, then state it clearly that way.

He has reset the passwords of users earlier. Please search for the relevant post yourself.

'admin turning hostile to a user?' LOL....You fudged the facts right there in that sentence. Just because he is charvaka, and just because he disagrees with your political views doesn't mean he is hostile towards you. It's not like he is the speaker of the assembly and hence should be nuetral.

You also spent the whole day in saying he could not give + or - posts as an admin. Even though he said all that was during testing. But you would not listen, you will keep repeating that.

And btw, even though he has stated he won't moderate the posts, a moderator has full rights to express his/her opinions. As far as I know that's the case in pretty much every forum.

Anyway, since you brought up my post as an example, let me tell you. he is not hostile towards me. And hopefully this is the last time that I am opening this thread.

Besides, if you so strongly believe in the rights of users, you have a stronger case against sulekha. Can you tell what all you have done about that?

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:46 pm

Tracy Whitney wrote:'process that request' was a mockery I used. I was merely asking him how to.

Besides we all together have been trying to make this forumotion experience a simple one, where he has the least interference. And to automate functonalities that way. Hence my intention was to know if he could facilitate something. And if not, then state it clearly that way.

He has reset the passwords of users earlier. Please search for the relevant post yourself.

'admin turning hostile to a user?' LOL....You fudged the facts right there in that sentence. Just because he is charvaka, and just because he disagrees with your political views doesn't mean he is hostile towards you. It's not like he is the speaker of the assembly and hence should be nuetral.

You also spent the whole day in saying he could not give + or - posts as an admin. Even though he said all that was during testing. But you would not listen, you will keep repeating that.

And btw, even though he has stated he won't moderate the posts, a moderator has full rights to express his/her opinions. As far as I know that's the case in pretty much every forum.

Anyway, since you brought up my post as an example, let me tell you. he is not hostile towards me. And hopefully this is the last time that I am opening this thread.

Besides, if you so strongly believe in the rights of users, you have a stronger case against sulekha. Can you tell what all you have done about that?

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:34 pm

unrelaed to wat tracy's request was I just wana add I found the line I'll see if that's something I want to do, a little odd too.

Now i will give carvaka benefit of doubt and not take him the wrong way but at first it might sound like he decides what shud/shud not be done on this forum.

It just shows the attitude towards admin role. Had he said something like send me the same note here and let me see if its something that can be done I'll login this wknd, it would ve been more appropriate.

by artood2 Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:54 pm

Hey guys please lay off the admin. This forum is fairly well run and the only issues seem to be finding relevant posts for yourself Very Happy

So far no user has been banned and no user should be banned by downvoting unless he/she is abusive.

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 7:01 pm

artood2 wrote:Hey guys please lay off the admin. This forum is fairly well run and the only issues seem to be finding relevant posts for yourself

So far no user has been banned and no user should be banned by downvoting unless he/she is abusive.

new here or something? abusing it totally cool. thats how ppl talk here when they are bored (or sth). nobody wants to ban abusing handles. thats why they loved sulekha. no admin there to watch the board.

yeah searching is difficult here I agree.

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 7:28 pm

Thanks Seven. I am not crazy over the + and - status.

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 7:32 pm

you're welcome krips.

by charvaka Sun Jul 31, 2011 8:36 pm

Tracy Whitney wrote:lol... well will let caru answer himself here.

Don't know if there's anything that needs clarification any more. Rashmun is clearly upset and worried, although as you point out, he has no reason to be. If being admin means I need to refrain from political debates, that's not an acceptable limitation to me. I am going to be forceful in expressing my point of view. Admin has no day-to-day management role on this forum, so the identity of admin has nothing to do with the debates we are having.

Tracy Whitney wrote:Just a clarification of my post. I had asked him to let me know how to do it. And not to delete it for me.

Yeah, I need to look into whether it is possible for a user to delete their account. Will let you know.

Tracy Whitney wrote:Rashmun, it's your habit to take a fact and add god knows what all masala to it, and then expect the other person to say whether it's true or not. case in point, you would say 'didn't [whoever] do that to you'. that part would be somewhat right. Then you would say, 'because blah blah blah', and in this 'because' part of the sentence you would put your entire imaginary bullshit.... and you will make all that a part of the same sentence, which would be in a form of a question. And then you would keep asking if that's true or not. Now unless the other person has half a day and will to strip those sentences apart, they won't reply, or just mock you back. And you would get a false sense of victory.

Yep, that's Rashmun Method all right.

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 8:43 pm

charvaka wrote:
Tracy Whitney wrote:lol... well will let caru answer himself here.
Don't know if there's anything that needs clarification any more. Rashmun is clearly upset and worried, although as you point out, he has no reason to be. If being admin means I need to refrain from political debates, that's not an acceptable limitation to me. I am going to be forceful in expressing my point of view. Admin has no day-to-day management role on this forum, so the identity of admin has nothing to do with the debates we are having.

Tracy Whitney wrote:Just a clarification of my post. I had asked him to let me know how to do it. And not to delete it for me.
Yeah, I need to look into whether it is possible for a user to delete their account. Will let you know.

Tracy Whitney wrote:Rashmun, it's your habit to take a fact and add god knows what all masala to it, and then expect the other person to say whether it's true or not. case in point, you would say 'didn't [whoever] do that to you'. that part would be somewhat right. Then you would say, 'because blah blah blah', and in this 'because' part of the sentence you would put your entire imaginary bullshit.... and you will make all that a part of the same sentence, which would be in a form of a question. And then you would keep asking if that's true or not. Now unless the other person has half a day and will to strip those sentences apart, they won't reply, or just mock you back. And you would get a false sense of victory.
Yep, that's Rashmun Method all right.

--> In this thread, Charvaka defends the Rashmun Method:

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/philosophy/a-rationalist-view-on-the-veda.htm#114249

Some extracts from Charvaka's posts:
Today you call Rashmun a moron because he quoted someone
who believes the Vedas were written by men, and acquired "eternal"
status later on? I see more similarities between your views and those of
Mr. Sastri, than between your views and those who believe that the Veda
is word of god. What is your problem with the quotes Rashmun provided?..........The only way what you said yesterday is OK, and what
Rashmun said today is garbage, will be if you can establish the
differences between your views and those Rashmun quoted. Without doing
that, any words like "moron" and "garbage" that you use are
intellectually dishonest name-calling, that's all.

--> Btw, Charvaka, i am not worried in the least at the fact that you are so worked up as to give me multiple negative votes even though you are Admin of this forum. The fact that you have cast 30 negative votes to others on this forum, despite being Admin, is sheer poor judgement in my opinion.

--> The very fact that Uppili was able to take his tally of negative votes cast from 10 in the morning to 30 by this afternoon shows how ridiculous the notion of using negative votes cast against a poster to evaluate that poster is. And yet you seem to be ok with this foolish notion as per your recent posts. After all, you share the honors with Uppili with having cast 30 negative votes in total (28 in your Charvaka handle, 2 in your Admin handle)--the highest by any user on this forum.

by charvaka Sun Jul 31, 2011 8:44 pm

artood2 wrote:So far no user has been banned and no user should be banned by downvoting unless he/she is abusive.

Thanks. The +/- voting has nothing do with moderation at the post level or user level. There is no automatic action like banning a user when (s)he gets a certain number of down votes.

by charvaka Sun Jul 31, 2011 8:49 pm

Rashmun wrote:In this thread, Charvaka defends the Rashmun Method:

He does not; careful readers will notice that he opposes the same method being used against Rashmun by Seva.

Rashmun wrote:The fact that you have cast 30 negative votes to others on this forum, despite being Admin, is sheer poor judgement in my opinion.

Thanks for your opinion regarding my judgement. I will take it more seriously when you stop chronically lying.

Being admin does not mean I need to restrict myself from things that non-admin users do.

Rashmun wrote:how ridiculous the notion of using negative votes cast against a poster to evaluate that poster is.

It is quite natural for the recipient of the largest number of negative votes to feel that the voting system is ridiculous. One of the rules of Bangladeshi politics is that the party that loses an election alleges widespread rigging, and stays away from Parliament for months calling for a nation-wide general strike.

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 8:59 pm

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:In this thread, Charvaka defends the Rashmun Method:
He does not; careful readers will notice that he opposes the same method being used against Rashmun by Seva.

--> in fact, Charvaka is defending me from Seva's name calling in that thread. The same kind of name calling which Charvaka recently indulged in, in a recent thread, by calling me "shameless liar" and other such words.

Charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:The fact that you have cast 30 negative votes to others on this forum, despite being Admin, is sheer poor judgement in my opinion.
Thanks for your opinion regarding my judgement. I will take it more seriously when you stop chronically lying.

Being admin does not mean I need to restrict myself from things that non-admin users do.

--> Being admin means you need to hold yourself to a higher standard than other posters. By giving 30 negative votes to other posters(28 in your Charvaka handle, 2 in your Admin handle) you have undermined your credibility. This number of 30 is the highest as of today--just goes to tell us how petty you are.

Charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:how ridiculous the notion of using negative votes cast against a poster to evaluate that poster is.
It is quite natural for the recipient of the largest number of negative votes to feel that the voting system is ridiculous. One of the rules of Bangladeshi politics is that the party that loses an election alleges widespread rigging, and stays away from Parliament for months calling for a nation-wide general strike.

--> its funny that the person who has given the maximum number of negative votes to others on this forum (28 in his Charvaka handle, 2 in his Admin handle) and who has openly admitted to giving me multiple negative votes should now brag that i should feel bad at being the recipient of the largest number of negative votes.

--> it is not too difficult for me to create multiple handles and start giving multiple negative votes to you, Uppili, and Hellsangel using an anonymous IP address. But i refuse to stoop to your cheap and petty level.

by charvaka Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:08 pm

Rashmun wrote:you have undermined your credibility.

I will worry about your views regarding any person's credibility the moment you stop lying and using the Rashmun Method.

Rashmun wrote:it is not too difficult for me to create multiple handles and start giving multiple negative votes to you, Uppili, and Hellsangel using an anonymous IP address. But i refuse to stoop to your cheap and petty level.

Please go ahead and do that. Empty threats tend to make me laugh, mostly.

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:09 pm

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:you have undermined your credibility.
I will worry about your views regarding any person's credibility the moment you stop lying and using the Rashmun Method.

--> Continue on making a fool of yourself using the method of Charvaka Spin. Your credibility is in the mud and your reputation lies in tatters.

by charvaka Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:15 pm

Rashmun wrote:Continue on making a fool of yourself using the method of Charvaka Spin. Your credibility is in the mud and your reputation lies in tatters.

Ok.

by Guest Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:17 pm

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Continue on making a fool of yourself using the method of Charvaka Spin. Your credibility is in the mud and your reputation lies in tatters.
Ok.

--> OK

by Sponsored content

Attention Admin Charvaka

Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka

Re: Attention Admin Charvaka