Forum laws

rshankar · Post by **rshankar** » 17 Aug 2010, 03:03

carnaticlaw wrote: It is not evidence you need here but a hot cup of tea to relax and contemplate.
will be happy to answer further questions.

Thank you - there will be nothing further from me - I will be busy relaxing and contemplating (and hopefully acquiring some not-so-common common sense), but will do so with a chilled glass of Gerwurztraminer.

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 17 Aug 2010, 03:06

Good. Resveratrol keeps you young.

mankuthimma · Post by **mankuthimma** » 17 Aug 2010, 07:04

mankuthimma, could you please translate the hindi prelude for me?

It is from a series on various types of compositions in CM.There is a brief reference to the romantic aspect - Sringara Rasa .
In the Nayaka - Nayaki context .
Padams and Javalis generally appear at the tail end of the concerts .But the main reference is to the difficulty in singing such slow pieces. Because of the "Chanchal " - Mercurial element .
And hence singing of Padams and Javalis require the highest level of skill / musicianship/ maturity.Then some information about Ksetragna .
The Nayaka - Nayaki relationship can be construed to be analogous to that of Jeevatama - Paramatma by the Guni Jan ( Learned Men ) .
They are generally composed in Rakthi Pradhan Ragas.There is some mention of the talas in which they were composed.
There is a reference to the contributions of Veena Dhanammal and T Brinda who resurrected this type of Music and gave it respectability , as a musical form. Something which reflected in its being used increasingly in Bharata Natyam .As that form too unshackled itself from non-musical burdens.

The last sentence is my impression

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 17 Aug 2010, 23:47

mahakavi wrote: Imagine how the ladies in the audience would react if the musician sings, "kaiyil kAsillAdavan kaDavuL AnAlum kadavaic cAttaDi" (the advice given by a mother dEvadAsi to her daughter to close the door when the person visiting has no money even if he is god).

Think you are being somewhat unduly paternalistic here. "Ladies in the audience" don't need to be protected from ideas and they understand these things much better and earlier than men. And really, the lyrics just conveys the idea that "Money rules" or "Show me the money" which is not all that scandulous in today's world.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 17 Aug 2010, 23:52

carnaticlaw wrote: People were and are voyeuristic and this form of music fed them.

You know how people crane their necks and stand on tippy toes during the deeparadhanai or abhishekam. Isn't that kind of voyeuristic?

carnaticlaw wrote: CM is not all that sacred.

That would depend on your definition of "sacred".

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:01

carnaticlaw wrote:And stop issuing illegitimate threats like "informing ISPs". Rectify these errors before you exercise your power as a moderator. I am not your subordinate.

Where did you read that? I don't see that "threat" anywhere. Hope you were not quoting private email.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:03

carnaticlaw wrote:s*e*x as not in gender, but as in coitus, mating etc

Looks like you have plenty to learn

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:07

sureshvv,

pas de touche!

I know you love getting personal. In any case, don't you usually agree to terms before entering a compact? Or do you exhibit the same behavior while signing a contract ?

(impulsive and offhand). Looks like you have not read the rules of this forum. Don't worry, I am copy-pasting the stuff for you. I have highlighted the relevant section just in case you have ADD or ADHD (I mean, just in case) :

By accessing â€œrasikas.orgâ€ (hereinafter â€œweâ€, â€œusâ€, â€œourâ€, â€œrasikas.orgâ€, â€œhttp://www.rasikas.org/forumâ€), you agree to be legally bound by the following terms. If you do not agree to be legally bound by all of the following terms then please do not access and/or use â€œrasikas.orgâ€. We may change these at any time and weâ€™ll do our utmost in informing you, though it would be prudent to review this regularly yourself as your continued usage of â€œrasikas.orgâ€ after changes mean you agree to be legally bound by these terms as they are updated and/or amended.

Our forums are powered by phpBB (hereinafter â€œtheyâ€, â€œthemâ€, â€œtheirâ€, â€œphpBB softwareâ€, â€œwww.phpbb.comâ€, â€œphpBB Groupâ€, â€œphpBB Teamsâ€) which is a bulletin board solution released under the â€œGeneral Public Licenseâ€ (hereinafter â€œGPLâ€) and can be downloaded from http://www.phpbb.com. The phpBB software only facilitates internet based discussions, the phpBB Group are not responsible for what we allow and/or disallow as permissible content and/or conduct. For further information about phpBB, please see: http://www.phpbb.com/.

You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-orientated or any other material that may violate any laws be it of your country, the country where â€œrasikas.orgâ€ is hosted or International Law. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned, with notification of your Internet Service Provider if deemed required by us. The IP address of all posts are recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that â€œrasikas.orgâ€ have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time should we see fit. As a user you agree to any information you have entered to being stored in a database. While this information will not be disclosed to any third party without your consent, neither â€œrasikas.orgâ€ nor phpBB shall be held responsible for any hacking attempt that may lead to the data being compromised.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:10

carnaticlaw wrote:Why has there been a taboo discussing s*e*x? Did it have an evolutionary advantage?

In India, we are all about action and less of idle talk. Evolutionary advantage? Appears to be so, at this stage of evolution.

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:17

In India, we are all about action and less of idle talk.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:22

carnaticlaw wrote:I know you love getting personal.

I was not aware of that myself. I will start working on rectifying this misperception ASAP.

In any case, don't you usually agree to terms before entering a compact? Or do you exhibit the same behavior while signing a contract ? (impulsive and offhand). Looks like you have not read the rules of this forum. Don't worry, I am copy-pasting the stuff for you. I have highlighted the relevant section just in case you have ADD or ADHD (I mean, just in case) :

I did quickly skim thru' it and should confess being appalled by the draconian language bordering on paranoia - but attributed it to prior bad experience of the webmaster(s). Concluded it was there mainly to frighten some young kid from attempting to post sophomoric junk. Hmm... Looks like their worries were quite legitimate,

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:29

Hmm... Looks like their worries were quite legitimate,

How true? will you still continue posting?

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:33

CL, watch your language.. I edited out some objectionable content. If you have any issues with an admin/mod action, send an email to the admin and do not discuss that here.

And, please let us not get into bashing each other at a personal level, take it to email. Thanks.

If this kind of thing happens, there is a good chance this thread will be closed.

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:36

VK,

well suresvv provoked me by mentioning that I have to learn more on some important aspects of my life. And I responded.

If you have any issues with an admin/mod action, send an email to the admin and do not discuss that here.

I started a thread specifically to discuss admin actions and it has gone past 105 replies and now you ask me to email you in private. The intention of starting this thread was to discuss things in open so that everyone is educated and aware of their rights.

thanks
cl

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:41

If you have any issues with an admin/mod action, send an email to the admin and do not discuss that here.

I prefer things in writing. Please give me the physical address of your organization.

thanks

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:43

CL: I am not the admin.

And you do not need to get provoked and escalate things. We are all adults and can exercise self-restraint. And you do not have to respond to this post of mine.

In any case, what I meant is, use email if you have questions on specific actions of a moderator.

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:48

VK,

I am also tired of futile discussions. I end it here.

thanks

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 18 Aug 2010, 00:59

vk... May I suggest that you delete that entire sentence and not leave any portion of it there?

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 18 Aug 2010, 01:00

sureshvv wrote:

Think you are being somewhat unduly paternalistic here. "Ladies in the audience" don't need to be protected from ideas and they understand these things much better and earlier than men. And really, the lyrics just conveys the idea that "Money rules" or "Show me the money" which is not all that scandulous in today's world.

sureshvv:
If you are a lady and you agree with the admonition in the quote I have no qualms about it and feel free to act per such advice. But talking about some general code of conduct under current circumstances is not paternalistic unless we have a mass protest from a women's union that they welcome such advice as being practical.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 18 Aug 2010, 01:10

mahakavi wrote: sureshvv:
If you are a lady and you agree with the admonition in the quote I have no qualms about it and feel free to act per such advice. But talking about some general code of conduct under current circumstances is not paternalistic unless we have a mass protest from a women's union that they welcome such advice as being practical.

Nope. I am not a lady and haven't played one on TV either

I was trying to say that there is nothing scandulous about the admonition per se; it is common to hear variants of it in all professions. So I felt your worry about how ladies in the audience would feel about hearing these lines to be somewhat over protective and patronising. It does appear that you can be persuaded only by a mass protest from a women's union though.

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 18 Aug 2010, 01:35

sureshvv,

it is not protecting women from such ideas. But, singing jAvalis in front of women with lyrics demeaning their gender is not only grossly s-e-x-i-s-t but extremely chauvinistic. And patriarchy was not a bad social system.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 18 Aug 2010, 01:39

carnaticlaw wrote: singing jAvalis in front of women with lyrics demeaning their gender is not only grossly s-e-x-i-s-t but extremely chauvinistic.

Agree! Every decent individual, irrespective of gender, would feel offended by this. I don't think these specific lyrics "demeaned" anyone's gender.

And patriarchy was not a bad social system.

Bad for who?

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 18 Aug 2010, 01:47

Well, women do not want to be prostitutes. And to patronize the profession through jAvalis is demeaning their gender.

Patriarchy, as a socio-biological phenomenon, WAS a great system. Especially when we were homo erectus. Now, we have become complex animals (to the extent we want prop 8 overturned). So, a gender biased social system might not be applicable today.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 18 Aug 2010, 01:54

carnaticlaw wrote: Especially when we were homo erectus.

Speak only for yourself!

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 18 Aug 2010, 01:54

>>Bad for who?<<

More precisely, "bad for whom?". Actually you should ask "not bad for whom?" It is bad provided it tries to dominate one gender over another. But otherwise there are certain codes of conduct uniformly agreed upon unless one gender feels it is discriminatory. In those instances the situation can be corrected through a gradual process of evolution. When prostitution (implied or expressly stated) goes on, is it good for the female gender? Protective patriarchy is not as bad as oppressive patriarchy (which in the past in India encouraged sati, child marriage etc.,) Let it be decided by those who would be affected by that. Not by one who considers it condescending from the other side of the fence.

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 18 Aug 2010, 02:02

Speak only for yourself!

Evolution 101 - when you discuss things from an evolutionary perspective, you always talk about a species. Well, I belong to Homo Sapiens. I cannot talk for other species.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 18 Aug 2010, 02:06

carnaticlaw wrote:Well, women do not want to be prostitutes. And to patronize the profession through jAvalis is demeaning their gender.

1. Aaah... so you have figured it all out! What do women want?

2. One cannot patronize prostitutes by singing jAvalis.

3. Anyway, looks like your mind is made up. So I will wait for someone else to weigh in and not make this thread our own private "kuzhayadi".

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 18 Aug 2010, 02:19

mahakavi wrote: More precisely, "bad for whom?". Actually you should ask "not bad for whom?"

You are right! Too late for me

It is bad provided it tries to dominate one gender over another. But otherwise there are certain codes of conduct uniformly agreed upon unless one gender feels it is discriminatory. In those instances the situation can be corrected through a gradual process of evolution.

Spoken like a true Patriarch!

When prostitution (implied or expressly stated) goes on, is it good for the female gender?

You must have heard about it being the "oldest" profession. Do you think all forms of it (implied or expressly stated) will be outlawed someday?

I must confess that some of my ideas on this topic originate from Camille Paglia's writing. So if you have not, check it out. She is much more articulate.

Protective patriarchy is not as bad as oppressive patriarchy

Sure! No argument. Not as bad as...

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 18 Aug 2010, 02:24

sureshvv wrote:Speak only for yourself!

Just being one of them is bad enough and you boast about both? And including me with you??

Can't allow that.

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 18 Aug 2010, 02:30

And including me with you??

Thats the worst insult I have ever had

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 18 Aug 2010, 02:58

Quote:
When prostitution (implied or expressly stated) goes on, is it good for the female gender?
You must have heard about it being the "oldest" profession. Do you think all forms of it (implied or expressly stated) will be outlawed someday?
I must confess that some of my ideas on this topic originate from Camille Paglia's writing. So if you have not, check it out. She is much more articulate.<<

Look, who said outlawing something is tantamount to eliminating it? There are scofflaws everywhere. Besides, so long as there is a sponsor every outlawed act will survive till the end of the world.
I cannot and will not prescribe where you get your ideas from. I don't know who Camille Pagila is nor do I care to know. There are tons and tons of such species for which I have no time.
For various reasons, inclduing HIV disease propagation, subjugation, and perennial wallowing in a demeaning job, prostitution is bad. If you consider it is fine go ahead and sponsor it. I cannot and will not try to prevent you from that. The reason why it continues and will continue is "once you are in, you cannot get out". It is third law of life. (The other two are: 1. life is a zero sum game; 2. you cannot win.)
It is like permanent slavery.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 18 Aug 2010, 22:39

I don't think the debate is about the merits/demerits of prostitution. I am sure there is pretty unanimous agreement on the issue. The question is if songs about it should be permitted/encouraged in a decent CM setting or if they should be considered offensive per se. I have seen the subject handled quite sensitively in movies for example. I really don't see why it should be censored in CM.

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 19 Aug 2010, 00:17

This is like closing your eyes and imagining the world does not exist. Sure, if you don't know the language and the meaning of the song it is just another melody and hence it is "innocuous". But in that case why the jAvaLi? Any other lyrics would do well with the same rAgam. If you (the singer, and the audience) know the meaning then it gets awkward. If you don't feel that way you are welcome to listen to such recordings in private (like the instances where people watch p-o-r-n in their private settings). All the talk about delivering a jAvaLi is a delicate and difficult job is bunkum. The rAgam in which it is set may be that--- not the lyrics of the jAvaLi (which are exhilarating to some).

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 19 Aug 2010, 01:03

Rather than addressing the crux of the difference in opinion, you seem to run off on several tangents.

mahakavi wrote: This is like closing your eyes and imagining the world does not exist.

Frankly, I think you are the one doing this.

But in that case why the jAvaLi?

Actually not just jAvalis. Even Andal's poetry has plenty of sensual references.

All the talk about delivering a jAvaLi is a delicate and difficult job is bunkum.

I am sorry but it appears to me that your puritanical streak has interfered with your listening.

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 19 Aug 2010, 01:26

You seem to waste your time and that of others in indulging in devious arguments. I am not going to prolong this. You can say anything you want. I have already stated the crux. If you don't see/understand it I do not have the time to repeat it. I won't be watching your posts anymore. So do what you like.

srkris · Post by **srkris** » 19 Aug 2010, 01:38

Carnaticlaw, nee avanaa? So you registered again to evade your IP block and would like to educate and threaten the admin & moderators so they will feel afraid to block you again? Better luck next time.

Many or most of the registration rules came with the forum software, and the forum will comply with international law to the extent required. If you don't accept it don't participate here.

The author of a post is it's original poster, but the mods and admin have the right to censor objectionable posts by editing to remove objectionable content.

As on all other forums, the poster of a message will be primarily reasonable for it's content, not the moderators or the admin who merely serve as watchmen to prevent the forum from descending into an online pig-sty.

No sir we are not liable for your malafide acts, you are.

srkris · Post by **srkris** » 19 Aug 2010, 02:10

Carnaticlaw, if you want to know more about the forum and where it is hosted etc., you may kindly send an official signed & scanned request by email to the admin disclosing your real name, address, location, and a scanned copy of your passport.

We do not respond to P.O. Boxes.

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 19 Aug 2010, 02:17

It is much easier to do some whois queries, see who owns the IP address, etc. All easily available information. I can tell you without even looking (any further than the "Flagfox" icon on my Firefox Browser), that it is hosted in USA. Any more is for those who want to know to do their own homework!

I

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 19 Aug 2010, 02:30

>>As on all other forums, the poster of a message will be primarily reasonable for it's content, not the moderators or the admin who merely serve as watchmen to prevent the forum from descending into an online pig-sty.<<
srkris:
You should state "responsible not "reasonable" in your post!
I agree the poster is responsible for the content of the post unless the moderator/administrator edits it to appear worse (in terms of libel, obscenity etc.,) than the original. If the mod/admin edits it only to remove obscenity then for the remaining portion the primary poster is still responsible. I strongly advise the original post be preserved in the archives so that if and when a lawsuit is filed the mod/admin will be protected. I do not see how the mod/admin will be held liable if they only edit out the "objectionable" portion. That editing may not be construed as interfering with free speech in a court of law, notwithstanding some recent rulings protecting racial remarks (in the name of first amendment in the US)

srkris · Post by **srkris** » 19 Aug 2010, 02:33

Yeah Nick, my post was half in jest. Don't get riled up over it.

Mahakavi I meant "responsible" but I am using my iPod and it auto-corrects my words as it deems fit.

Also no one knows the law completely as it is ever changing depending on it's jurisdiction and time. That's why the courts and lawyers are there.

I suppose the server logs will contain information about who edited what and when, so moderators are not going to get away if they act maliciously, same as any other member. At the same timetjey also will not be responsible for good faith moderation activities

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 19 Aug 2010, 02:39

Turn off the auto-correct feature. It also corrected the "its" into "it's". The latter word is a contraction for "it is/it has/it does" etc. An English teacher would give an "F" for that.

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 19 Aug 2010, 02:55

As an additional note, I would suggest that the following be inserted into the declaration of the forum rules.
"Membership has its privileges but it also has obligations".
That is a very strong statement to deter most people from indulging in mischievous posts. Of course, the deviant people may not pay attention to it.

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 19 Aug 2010, 10:40

Yeah Nick, my post was half in jest. Don't get riled up over it.

I was just pointing out how foolish it is to be demanding information that is publicly available anyway! Not getting riled

Or not with you, anyway!

All forums, from time to time, seem to attract "lawyers". It can be an educational experience for the team running them, but, in the end, it comes down to what you say: nobody is forced to be here and nobody is forced to stay.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 19 Aug 2010, 15:42

mahakavi wrote:You seem to waste your time and that of others in indulging in devious arguments. I am not going to prolong this. You can say anything you want. I have already stated the crux. If you don't see/understand it I do not have the time to repeat it. I won't be watching your posts anymore. So do what you like.

Aaawww.... you break my heart!

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 27 Aug 2010, 02:00

srkris,

whatever makes you happy

you only go on to show how ignorant you are

srkris · Post by **srkris** » 28 Aug 2010, 02:43

I am happy being as ignorant as I am. You can be happy pretending to be less ignorant than everyone else.

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 28 Aug 2010, 02:45

ok thalaivare