Theos-Talk Archives (July 1997 Message tl00238)

At 12:56 AM 7/18/97 -0400, kymsmith@micron.net wrote:
>Apparently, I've missed several postings since other posts, such as the
>one below, are showing up with people responding to messages I've never
>seen.  This is the second one I've come across.  I'd like to respond to
>this one, but please be aware I've not seen the original - so my answer
>might end up being unrelated.
>
>
>>From ramadoss@eden.com response to Liesel's post:
>
>> >Dear Kym,
>> >
>> >They actually delete material from a post, like flaming and bickering, and
>> >maligning other Theosophists ... stupidities of that sort. Any objections?
>
>Yes, I loathe censored material.  I want to hear all of what a person
>wants to say - whether I disagree or not.  What someone considers worthy
>of deleting may, to another person, be valuable insight.
>
>
>> >I don't know whether Joan, the ts-l moderator, ever refused anyone's
>> >writing, because the whole thing is only 2 or 3 weeks old. If you have any
>> >common decency, and a few spare brains in your head, you'll know what to
>> >write and what not to. It doesn't take any more than that. But you seem to
>> >be wanting to continually revolt against you don't know yourself what.
>
>I'm sorry, Liesel, but I do know, this time for sure, what I am
>revolting against - a child molester (CWL) and, most importantly, the
>sheltering of this child molester.  And if CWL actually slept with any
>of his students (which evidence does point to) - who was not yet an
>adult - then, he is, by penal and moral law, a rapist.  But could he
>still have been a genuine clairvoyant?  Yes.  Did pen geniune words of
>wisdom and worth? Yes.  But the more one knows, the more responsible
>they are - hence, the actions of CWL and the inactions of the TS are
>even more grievous.     
>
>
>> >I'd
>> >rather discuss things of interest to Theosophists, and I'm hoping ts-l will
>> >be a vehicle for that.
>
>What is of interest to one Theosophist is may not be of interest to
>another.  I hope you do find happiness on ts-l, but I would never be
>fulfilled on a list where what I could read was chosen for me.
>
>Thank you for addressing my questions anyway.
>
>
>Kym
>

Kym: It is quite possible that some may not have seen all the msg. This
morning I found out that due to some software problem some subscribers were
deleted from theos-l. I hope this has not affected you.

...........doss