Comments & Suggestions by active members

For site notices, guidelines and technical support.
= PLEASE KEEP THE FORUMS ON TOPIC =
sita
Posts: 1300
Joined: 18 May 2011
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I would like to take part in healthy discussion on topics of knowledge, sharing with fellow souls, for common benefit.

Re: Comments & Suggestions by active members

Post by sita » 21 Aug 2015

but if one tries to APPRECIATE the exact intent behind the usage, one may be motivated to adjust accordingly to a definite advantage. One always has the option to copy and paste same in a 'word file' and change the appearance to suit their personal temperament, if they still desire to peruse same; OR one ALSO HAS THE COMPLETE FREEDOM TO IGNORE SAME TOTALLY!!!
Hence the question of FORCING anyone DOES NOT ARISE AT ALL!!! However, an innocent individual who feels COMPELLED to peruse same, owing to one's INHERENT proclivities ('sanskars'), and then finds the contents to be UNCOMFORTABLE, UNAPPEALING, DISTASTEFUL or even OFFENSIVE, may sometimes be INCLINED to BLAME the communicator for being COMPULSIVE, rather than trying to COMPREHEND the intricacies of one's OWN COMPULSIVE energy within, which inadvertently DRIVES the individual into such controversy UNNECESSARILY & WASTEFULLY!
I agree that the admin has the right to freely express himself as he wishes, but I don't think when the reader feels uncomfortable, it is the reader's choice. The intent can sometimes be to make others uncomfortable, like to me also sometimes it seems as if the intent is to "teach them a lesson". OK, I may see that, because I have that in myself, but it will be the case only if the admin was a perfect mirror and not a person with one's own independent challenges. In such case it is good to voice our feelings, because it was said by Avyakt BapDada that the proof of our love will be that we don't tolerate the shortcomings in the ones we love. So, I think if someone tries to force his shortcomings to others, to protest is good. Maybe in cases where it is not clear where the problem lies, more members could be invited to share their views and if many of them share the same opinion, the concerned party will have to think about it.

The remark about the points that will help us increase our purity is also not about ignoring, but that the agenda does not seem to be as the stated one.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11513
Joined: 01 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: to exchange views with past and present members of BKWSU and its splinter groups
Location: India

Re: Sakar Murli & Avyakt Vani points for churning

Post by arjun » 24 Sep 2015

Dear Admin (alias golden heart),

The churning that you present along with the Murli points are clearly biased in favour of the BKs and heavily loaded against the PBKs. This does not befit the Admin. Admin of any forum should be unbiased and also appear to be so. But the views expressed above are clearly the views of golden heart and using the account of Admin to present the views of golden heart is a clear breach of trust that members have in the Admin.

If golden heart is the only or dominating member of the Admin (SAT), then he/she could as well use the account of golden heart to present such biased views instead of using the account of Admin.

It would be better if golden heart uses his/her own account, instead of hijacking the accounts of other members (like mbbhat) and Admins to present his/her one-sided views.

On Godly Service,
Arjun

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11513
Joined: 01 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: to exchange views with past and present members of BKWSU and its splinter groups
Location: India

Re: SAT guidelines to forum members

Post by arjun » 25 Sep 2015

SAT wrote:No forum member is obliged to reply to any post made by any other member, in response to own post, since such response is ENTIRELY at the discretion of the member making the original post; and no other member should coerce or intimidate any member to respond to own post at any time. Any member has the full right to completely ignore any post made by any other member, without being unduly pestered, (as has been the case in the past).
Dear SAT,

Ever since mbbhat has been allowed to operate his own account once again, he has been making provocative remarks against the PBKs, Baba Virendra Dev Dixit and AVV in almost every post. In order to minimize unnecessary confrontation I had minimized responding to his posts. But he has not refrained from making such posts repeatedly, and despite your clear directions that no member is obliged to reply to any post, mbbhat continues to force PBKs to reply to his provocative posts by asserting that PBKs don't have reply and many other such defamatory remarks.

Therefore, it is requested to restrain mbbhat from making such provocative posts and advise him not to expect replies from PBKs.

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3195
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: SAT guidelines to forum members

Post by mbbhat » 25 Sep 2015

arjun wrote:Ever since mbbhat has been allowed to operate his own account once again, he has been making provocative remarks against the PBKs, Baba Veerendra Dev Dixit and AVV in almost every post.
Again a lie. You only tried to come in between me and Sita, when the discussion was between us. You only tried to reply with illogical replies in other topics, and, then got hit by your own words, just as a rebound from me. If you feel offended, please do not reply in those topics, where I reply most.
Therefore, it is requested to restrain mbbhat from making such provocative posts and advise him not to expect replies from PBKs.
Again a lie.I have never expected any reply from you*. If you feel I should not respond to your posts, you better mention it, preferably in the beginning of the topic, (or anywhere else, as required). I will then not respond to your posts in those topics.

* - This is why many times I say your comments are "silly".

Thanks to ShivBaba and Drama which clearly shows the mental (st)ability of PBKs. Many believe that PBKs have a great energy of being carefree; and usually it is/was BKs who get upset** when questions are put to them by PBKs and PBKs do not get adversely affected by any replies from BK side. But, when PBKs are clearly sensing their own failures, they are feeling even worse.

Dear sweet soul,

Just consider how you are feeling just by your interaction with some BK at this time. How would you or any PBK feel when 'too late' board comes, and ...

**Obviously just a few BKs only interact with PBKs, and the duration of interaction would be smaller, so that the winners and losers do not get decided there.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11513
Joined: 01 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: to exchange views with past and present members of BKWSU and its splinter groups
Location: India

Re: SAT guidelines to forum members

Post by arjun » 25 Sep 2015

mbbhat Bhai, your reply is on expected lines. Nothing better can be expected from you. So, it is better to be silent than to argue with you. I am not at all disturbed by your writings. And I don't have time to quote your words to prove your lies stated above. You can continue to vitiate the atmosphere on the forum as long as you are allowed to do so by the Admin and as long as you continue to mortgage your freedom of speech to the likes of golden heart (whom you have allowed to edit your posts as he/she wishes).

OGS,
Arjun

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 790
Joined: 01 Jan 1970
Affinity to the BKWSU: Academic
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: General forum administration account
Contact:

Re: SAT guidelines to forum members

Post by admin » 26 Sep 2015

Dear 'arjun' and 'mbbhat',

Your attention is drawn to the directive in the topic 'SAT guidelines to forum members', in the
Admin sub-forum, as follows:

"This topic would be dedicated to providing guidelines by SAT to all forum members.
Individual members should not post in this topic."

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2600#p49243
arjun wrote:Therefore, it is requested to restrain mbbhat from making such provocative posts and advise him not to expect replies from PBKs.
Dear 'mbbhat',

You are advised to exercise due maturity and wisdom, and abide by above valid request of 'arjun' from his perspective, as best as feasible, in order to maintain a more universally acceptable decorum on the forum.

We thank you both for your very kind understanding and co-operation in this matter.

With best wishes and kind regards,

SAT

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 790
Joined: 01 Jan 1970
Affinity to the BKWSU: Academic
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: General forum administration account
Contact:

Re: Comments & Suggestions by active members

Post by admin » 26 Sep 2015

Dear 'arjun',

With reference to your post below -
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2597&start=30#p50196

You are requested to kindly review following forum directives & guidelines from earlier posts,
indicated below -

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2624#p49988
... the topic "Sakar Murli & Avyakt Vani points for churning" in the "Ex-BKs & Common Room" sub-forum is to be treated as VIRTUALLY LOCKED, and no other forum member should post therein ...

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2600#p49243
The topic 'SAT guidelines to forum members', in the Admin sub-forum, is ALSO VIRTUALLY LOCKED, since same is dedicated to providing guidelines by SAT to all forum members, and individual members should not post therein.

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2597&start=15#p49888
Point 3: The expression of any personal views and opinion by any member of the SAT or even one of the Admins, is a TOTALLY DIFFERENT MATTER, as compared to their administrative functions of the forum ...

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2600#p49535
= SAT guidelines to forum members =
... Whenever any forum member VIRTUALLY LOCKS individual topic, by so indicating at the beginning of the topic, (or at intervals thereafter in appropriate locations), other members are not allowed to post in that particular topic ...

... The post or posts of members who do not comply with above guidelines are liable to be deleted, which in itself, would serve as a warning or warnings to the concerned member, after which the concerned member may be prevented from posting for a certain period, at the discretion of SAT ...

... If any member disapproves of the manner in which the affairs of this forum are conducted by the SAT, they are ever free to disassociate themselves from the forum at any time ...

You are requested to kindly take due note of above and abide by same during your voluntary association with this forum.

You are also requested to kindly refrain from casting undue personal aspersions and making unnecessary personal insinuations about the SAT and other forum members, past or present, as you have been observed to be doing recently; and avoid personal confrontations and conflicts with other members of the forum, as best as feasible. You are advised to restrict your posts to appropriately addressing the relevant points of the SMs and AVs being highlighted in the various posts by other members - if you so desire - by presenting your own viewpoint about the same, specifically referring to those particular points of SMs and AVs in question, rather than diluting your energies by indulging or engaging in unwarranted personal 'holy' sarcasm and personal instigative comments, which do not benefit, either PRIMARILY your own self, or any others on the forum. You are afforded the complete and full freedom to post your personal views in the appropriate topics in appropriate sub-forums, and criticize any organization or organizations, group or groups, and/or their leader or leaders, WITHOUT pestering other forum members on a PERSONAL LEVEL, in due reconciliation of which any other forum member is expected NOT to unduly pester you either - all concerned having been ALREADY duly apprised accordingly in the said 'SAT guidelines to forum members'.

Dear 'mbbhat',

You are also requested to kindly give due regard to above request, and extend your co-operation, as best as feasible.

Dear 'fluffy bunny',

You are also requested to kindly give due regard to above, and extend your co-operation, as best as feasible.
Your forum account is hereby being re-activated, as of today, and we trust we would not be constrained to de-activate same again, (much against our intentions).

We thank you all for your kindest attention and consideration in duly complying with above with due maturity and wisdom, for the benefit of all forum members.

With best wishes and kind regards to everyone on the forum,

SAT

mbbhat
BK
Posts: 3195
Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Affinity to the BKWSU: BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: I am a Bk and a writer. I have been benefited a lot by the knowledge given in BK institution. I also have materials written totally on logic without BK knowledge. Anyone can get them as attachments for free by email.

Re: Comments & Suggestions by active members

Post by mbbhat » 26 Sep 2015

Thank you dear admin.

User avatar
arjun
PBK
Posts: 11513
Joined: 01 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: to exchange views with past and present members of BKWSU and its splinter groups
Location: India

Re: Comments & Suggestions by active members

Post by arjun » 26 Sep 2015

SAT wrote: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2624#p49988
... the topic "Sakar Murli & Avyakt Vani points for churning" in the "Ex-BKs & Common Room" sub-forum is to be treated as VIRTUALLY LOCKED, and no other forum member should post therein ...

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2600#p49243
The topic 'SAT guidelines to forum members', in the Admin sub-forum, is ALSO VIRTUALLY LOCKED, since same is dedicated to providing guidelines by SAT to all forum members, and individual members should not post therein.
I am sorry for posting in the wrong topic. But if the topic is virtually locked, then it should also be actually locked so that other members do not post their comments in that topic, even if it is inadvertent.
Point 3: The expression of any personal views and opinion by any member of the SAT or even one of the Admins, is a TOTALLY DIFFERENT MATTER, as compared to their administrative functions of the forum ...
In order to maintain better transparency and trust, I would request that the personal views or opinions of any member of SAT or Admins should be expressed by them using their individual or personal accounts and not that of the SAT or Admins.
You are also requested to kindly refrain from casting undue personal aspersions and making unnecessary personal insinuations about the SAT and other forum members, past or present, as you have been observed to be doing recently; and avoid personal confrontations and conflicts with other members of the forum, as best as feasible. You are advised to restrict your posts to appropriately addressing the relevant points of the SMs and AVs being highlighted in the various posts by other members - if you so desire - by presenting your own viewpoint about the same, specifically referring to those particular points of SMs and AVs in question, rather than diluting your energies by indulging or engaging in unwarranted personal 'holy' sarcasm and personal instigative comments, which do not benefit, either PRIMARILY your own self, or any others on the forum. You are afforded the complete and full freedom to post your personal views in the appropriate topics in appropriate sub-forums, and criticize any organization or organizations, group or groups, and/or their leader or leaders, WITHOUT pestering other forum members on a PERSONAL LEVEL, in due reconciliation of which any other forum member is expected NOT to unduly pester you either - all concerned having been ALREADY duly apprised accordingly in the said 'SAT guidelines to forum members'.
I have already clarified about my statements made regarding members of SAT. My statements would not have appeared if the SAT or Admin account had not been used for making defamatory remarks against PBKs or AVV or Baba Virendra Dev Dixit. As regards my statements regarding mbbhat, it was he who has been provoking the PBKs by making defamatory statements even if there was no need or no provocation. If he stops making such statements, then the discussions can proceed as per the norms fixed by the Admins.

It is surprising that when I was silent for many weeks and he was making defamatory and provocative statements and posting against the norms, nobody felt the need to advise or caution him. But only when I raised the issue, I am being cautioned along with mbbhat. This only shows that the Admins had given a free hand to mbbhat to deal with the PBKs in any manner that he deems fit.

Note: My above replies are only meant for the Admins and I hope mbbhat will not interfere in our discussion.

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 790
Joined: 01 Jan 1970
Affinity to the BKWSU: Academic
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: General forum administration account
Contact:

Re: Comments & Suggestions by active members

Post by admin » 15 Jan 2016

arjun - PM 14 Jan 16 wrote: Dear Admin,
I think all your energy is focussed on finding fault only with the PBKs and you have turned a blind eye to mbbhat's posts. It is he who makes personal accusations and makes indiscriminate remarks against the PBKs and provokes them. And it is through his posts that golden heart is trying to pour venom on PBKs. And since the Admin themselves are involved in manipulating mbbhat's posts, they are simply unaware of the poison that they are mixing in his posts. And when I speak the truth, they think I am getting personal with mbbhat.

It is extremely disgusting to note that while mbbhat and golden heart (through mbbhat) have been given a free hand, I have been handed out a warning as soon as I started replying to mbbhat's posts after a long gap.

If you think that speaking the truth is against the policies and rules of this forum then you can very well ban me.

On Godly Service,
Arjun
SAT have taken due cognizance of above private message from 'arjun'.
"And when I speak the truth, they think I am getting personal."
It is about time you realized that the very same 'truth' applies to the other party as well, from their point of view!

SAT would like to clarify their position in brief.
SAT is comprised of each of the five major elements of this forum, viz., ex-BK, BK, PBK, ex-PBK & Vishnu Party.
SAT does not have any affiliation to one singular element in isolation, but endeavour to provide equal opportunity to members of any element to present their views freely, with the understanding that no active member should indulge in making any personal comments of any nature against any other particular active member or any particular member of SAT, but each one is free to present their views regarding any other element, as a group.
SAT endeavour to promote the views of any member of any element where considered appropriate and relevant, as also to improve the clarity of posts for enhancing the comprehensiveness for effective communicative transmission.

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2597&start=30#p50213
In spite of above clear directives to concerned members, it is observed that some active members continue to violate the directives blatantly.
As such, henceforth, any posts containing any personal accusations or comments would be clubbed in the topic, 'PERSONAL ACCUSATIONS', in this sub-forum.
arjun wrote:My further replies would depend on whether the Admin allows my above post to stay. If they think that deleting my posts is the only solution then why waste my time by allowing me to reply?
The permission to delete any post of any active member was not delegated to any moderator, but the permission to edit posts was so delegated, but a moderator has been completely removing the existing text of other active posters and replacing same with own comments, which amounts to a deletion of the post. To prevent recurrence, the permission to edit posts has now been temporarily withdrawn.

It is the ultimate intention of SAT to delegate such permissions to suitable active members in respective sub-forums in the future.

SAT

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests