Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl01370)

Rudy:

Let me but in. There are several things that can be done.

1. Put certain names in your program filter which will direct any
messages from the individual(s) directly to trash and you will never even
see it.

2. Stop responding to any message that you think is not worth continued
discussion.

(2) will be very effective if more posters as more people join in and do
not give opportunity to continue a message chain.

There may be other techniques that work. I would like to hear of any more
creative ideas.

	....doss

PS: Unsubscribeing is not the best answer, IMHO.


On Sun, 28 Apr 1996, Rodolfo Don wrote:

> Alan,
>
> Can something be done here on theos-l, *without taking sides* on the latest
> out of control discussions?
>
> I had some expectations when I joined theos-l, being a discussion list, but
> nothing like this.
>
> I refuse to take sides on these discussions, but if the quality and
> civility of the discussions don't improve, I will have to sign-off.
>
> Rodolfo Don
>
> >alexis dolgorukii wrote:
> >>
> >> At 03:05 AM 4/28/96 -0400, you wrote:
> >> >>>>>cut for continuity's sake<<<<<<<
> >> >       You need not ask what the Three Objects have to do with this
> >> >list, as I did not assert that anyone needed to agree with my
> >> >perspective. your question should more properly, I think, be addressed to
> >> >Eldon ... what does acceptance of a "body of doctrines" have to do with
> >> >being on this list? It is Rich and Eldon who are trying to define
> >> >parameters of discussion, not myself. Frankly, I like the list just as it
> >> >is.
> >> >                                               Regards, -JRC
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Good for you JRC. I really think it's time to stand up to bullies. I'm
> >> doing so. No one can tell anyone what "Basic Theosophy" is. I have, however,
> >> filtered RichTay as he's as useless to talk to as Pat Robertson. The kind of
> >> theosophy that RichTay, Eldon, and Daniel Caldwell represent is exactly the
> >> kind of mindless pharaseeism that Blavatsky IMO would have loathed. She,
> >> like me, was "quick to loathe". This is a good list for it's probably the
> >> only semi-Theosophical venues upon which any kind of actual "Free
> >> Discussion" is encouraged. All the "Regulation" theosophical societies are
> >> bound up in dogmatism and are not for the likes of us.
> >>
> >> alexis
> >
> >So there we have it. You have set yourself up as judge and jury on what this
> >list should be. Theosophy according to H.S.H. Alexis etc. You accuse Daniel,
> >for example, of bullying yet you have been doing just that in a much more
> >subtle and insidious way. Systematically making remarks like above on people
> >who like a view of Theosophy that you do not subscribe to. This list will be
> >for the 'gang of five' very soon and you can all have your sort of "Free
> >Discussion" by yourselves. This list has become a major focus for your
> >philosophical views and woe be tide anyone who has the temerity to question
> >your right to impose yourself on discussions that are really irrelevant to
> >your point of view.
> >I had my little falling out previously and had to distance myself and have a
> >look at myself. I realised that I did resent being given lessons in royal
> >protocol and extracts from Who's Who. I was disappointed that someone with
> >your wit and standing had to respond in such a manner. I had been very
> >interested in your input when you first came on this list as you had such an
> >unusual background and were obviously a very intelligent and well read
> >person. I am also well aware that you are quite different from the rest of us
> >because of you background but that should have enriched this list not turned
> >it into the battleground it seems to have become. I have had to come to a way
> >of dealing with your responses that do not push my buttons so I do not take
> >you seriously anymore and I am rather sorry about that.
> >The way you hammer at the establishment will only serve to make them more
> >entrenched and I hope Adyar does not get on e-mail because I can just see
> >them receiving the benefit of your advise and so getting more convinced that
> >theos-l is a danger to them. It is better to woo the opposition and lull them
> >into a sense of security and then change their minds when they aren't
> >looking. That does not seem to be your way of operating. I am trying to make
> >things happen in my neck of the wood and already Theosophy on the Internet is
> >being spoken off in negative tones because the rumours of what goes on here
> >has reached the ears of quite a few who are not computer oriented. Some of us
> >had planned to set up computers at our next Convention and have theos-l
> >running for the participants to read but it won't be this list if it remains
> >as it is. I am used to it by now but to the ordinary person it would not
> >endear them to the idea of TI that we are trying to promote among non
> >computer people. I am trying to put my money where my mouth is and it isn't
> >easy when I have to overcome the hurdles from here first.
> >I will not waste anymore time on this matter as I know it won't make the
> >least difference what I think. I am just thankful that another list is in the
> >making and I shall transfer myself to that so you won't have to put up with
> >naive provincials who can't seem to get the curtsy right.
> >RIP Theos-l  :-(
> >--
> >
> >
> >
> >   Bee Brown
> >   Member TSNZ,Wanganui Branch.
> >   Theos Int & L
>
>
>