reddy@uts.amdahl.com (T.S. Reddy) (02/07/90)
In article <7787@wpi.wpi.edu>, araja@m2.csc.ti.com (Ali Raja) writes: > > This is a formal call for discussion for the creation of the newsgroup > soc.culture.pakistan. > > Discussions related to Pakistani issues are usually carried out in > soc.culture.indian. However, there are a number of issues that are > relevant to Pakistan that are not relevant to soc.culture.indian. > I feel that the number of articles seems to justify the creation of > this newsgroup. > > I am making a formal call for discussion for the newsgroup. The > discussion period will extend for two weeks until at least, 21st > Feburary 1990. A call for votes, if it is deemed suitable will > them be issued after that point. > > Please post all discussion articles to news.groups, where such discussions > usually take place, and/or soc.culture.indian, which has seen more than > its fair share of such discussions. I vote YES for the creation of soc.culture.pakistan. Considering the heat generated in the last few days in s.c.i by Indians, Pakistanis, quasi Indians and quasi Pakistanis, this move should cool the fervor a bit. And we can go back to discussing all the seasonally important things on s.c.i: dowry deaths, arranged marriages, ABCDs, the X+1 syndrome ... (I digress :-)). -- T.S.Reddy Arpa: reddy@uts.amdahl.com uucp:...!{ames,decwrl,uunet,pyramid,sun}!amdahl!reddy
prabhu@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Dinesh K. Prabhu) (02/07/90)
In article <559t02Lx86wF01@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> reddy@uts.amdahl.com (T.S. Reddy) writes: >>In article <7787@wpi.wpi.edu>, araja@m2.csc.ti.com (Ali Raja) writes: >>> >>> This is a formal call for discussion for the creation of the newsgroup >>> soc.culture.pakistan. >>> >>> Discussions related to Pakistani issues are usually carried out in >>> soc.culture.indian. However, there are a number of issues that are >>> relevant to Pakistan that are not relevant to soc.culture.indian. >>> Interesting idea. Here's my $0.02 worth. The recurring acrimonious exchanges between Indians and Pakistanis on soc.culture.indian probably warrant the creation of a new newsgroup. My opinion is that such exchanges are related to subcontinental politics and have little or nothing to do with the the culture(s) of the Indian subcontinent. Therefore, I would personally prefer the creation of talk.politics.south-asia (a la talk.politics.mideast) and not soc.culture.pakistan(i). Dinesh Prabhu (prabhu@amelia.nas.nasa.gov) Disclaimer: Opinions expressed above are mine. -- Dinesh K. Prabhu, Eloret Institute, M/S 230-2 NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA-94035. Internet: prabhu@amelia.nas.nasa.gov UUCP : {ncar,decwrl,hplabs,uunet}!ames!amelia!prabhu
acsiq@uhvax1.uh.edu (02/07/90)
I think it's a great idea to create soc.culture.pakistan.
Considering the amount of hostility between some netters
in soc.culture.indian it would be for the best. Besides,
a lot of the issues being discussed in SCI are related
to Pakistan, and should be in another newsgroup.
I vote YES for soc.culture.pakistan
--
Faisal.
_______________________________________________
Faisal Usmani, Dept. of Electrical Engineering
University of Houston, Houston, Texas.
_______________________________________________
faisal@crcc.uh.edu, acsiq@uhvax1.uh.edu
_______________________________________________khan@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Iqbal Mustafa Khan) (02/08/90)
>In article <7787@wpi.wpi.edu>, araja@m2.csc.ti.com (Ali Raja) writes: >> >> This is a formal call for discussion for the creation of the newsgroup >> soc.culture.pakistan. I vote YES for the creation of soc.culture.pakistan. Please, at the end of the discussion on this subject, post another note reminding people to send their final votes for this. It is wise of you to give a deadline for this discussion otherwise this topic is never ending, as can be seen from the previous discussion. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Iqbal Mustafa Khan khan@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu 812-857-7725 Computer Science Department Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana 47405 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ia4@cunixd.cc.columbia.edu (Imran Anwar) (02/08/90)
I agree with the creation of soc.culture.pakistan..... Two main reasons..there ARE issues of both India and Pakistan that are of no interest to the other there ARE people who read a group not wanting to read political debates... I am sure there ARE other reasons too :-) that someone else may suggest. Regards Imran Anwar Columbia Business School NY NY
arshad@lfcs.ed.ac.uk (Arshad Mahmood) (02/08/90)
I vote YES for the creation of such a group. A. Mahmood LFCS Edinburgh University
manglik@bgsuvax.UUCP (Pankaj Manglik) (02/09/90)
No, I dont think there should be a seperate newsgroup. The discussions on SCI may have their highs and lows, but there is a forum through which we can communicate with each other ( with special reference to Pakistan). I treasure this dialogue. Maybe we ought to consider renaming soc.culture.indian to a more neutral name so as not to alienate the Pakistanis or others on the subcontinent. Pankaj Manglik
brr@abcom.ATT.COM (Rao) (02/09/90)
For the following (selfish) reasons: 1) I'd like to hear from our Pak friends. 2) Instead of accomodating our Pak subscribers, this newsgroup has alienated them, thus loosing a lot in the bargain. 3) This smack's of ANOTHER PARTITION. 4) Kinda hard for me to subscribe to YET ANOTHER newsgroup. However, if thsi new newsgroup should start, I'd like to wish the subscribers a good time. In the meanwhile, a hearty NO! -brr.
bprasad@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Bal Prasad) (02/10/90)
In article <5412@bgsuvax.UUCP> manglik@bgsuvax.UUCP (Pankaj Manglik) writes: >No, I dont think there should be a seperate newsgroup. I totally disagree. If scp is formed, then there is atleast a hope of getting rid of the Butts and Azhars from scINDIAN, if not for anything else, but to reduce the flow of diatribes. >consider renaming soc.culture.indian to a more neutral name so as not ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I think that is a rather ridiculous idea. I am fairly certain that I speak for the majority of Indians that this is a group for exchange of Indian ideas/rel and the vast majority of readers are Indians and would like to keep the group name the same. Whose purpose do you think renaming will serve? Not that of the majority. Butt proudly likened scI to garbage. But he also proclaimed his aspiration for the like. In view of 'helping' Pakistanis by renaming, you will in effect kill his ambitions and achieve just the opposite. Prasad. ******************************************************************************** | **** | ********
amjad@shazia.dell.com (amjad) (02/13/90)
I vote YES for the creation of soc.culture.pakistan --------------------------------------------------- AMJAD QURESHI Email: amjad!shazia.dell.com
sjang%monterey@Sun.COM (Saqib Jang - Networks Product Marketing) (02/14/90)
I'd like to vote YES for a soc.culture.pakistan newsgroup, too.
APS104@psuvm.psu.edu (02/14/90)
I vote yes for "soc.culture.pakistan"
Frankly I find the reasoning of many Indians that we will alienate the Pakistan
i "brothers" quite thin. I am not sure many Indians would be interested in
much of the local pakistani news. Besides, Pakistan is indeed a different natio
n and it is only natural that they should want a forum. If you are deeply
interested in their discussions, no one is stopping you from participating.
Finally, this will probably eliminate any repeats of the "Wajeeh Butt"
type incidents.
- Ajaysadeghi@oxy.edu (Behnam Sadeghi) (02/20/90)
I will vote YES for soc.culture.pakistan. Behnam Sadeghi
parmar@ntmtv.UUCP (Amrik Parmar) (02/21/90)
In article <5467@dell.dell.com>, amjad@shazia.dell.com (amjad) writes: > > > > > > I vote YES for the creation of soc.culture.pakistan > --------------------------------------------------- > > > AMJAD QURESHI > Email: amjad!shazia.dell.com I Vote NO for the creation of soc.culture.pakistan since CULTURE is the ONE thing that we do have common as opposed to politics. Amrik S. Parmar
avr@romeo.cs.duke.edu (A. V. Ramesh) (02/22/90)
In article <810@ntmtv.UUCP>, parmar@ntmtv.UUCP (Amrik Parmar) writes: > In article <5467@dell.dell.com>, amjad@shazia.dell.com (amjad) writes: > > > > I vote YES for the creation of soc.culture.pakistan > > AMJAD QURESHI > > I Vote NO for the creation of soc.culture.pakistan since CULTURE > is the ONE thing that we do have common as opposed to politics. > > Amrik S. Parmar This controversy over should there be a soc.culture.pakistan is really ridiculous. The net resources do not belong to any one group of people and indians trying to prevent pakistanis from having their own discussion group is like fighting against the formation of something that can't hurt us and it is going to be created out of resources that do not belong to us. I see no harm in pakistanis owning a newsgroup if they want to. So my vote regarding scp : I really don't care.
abdenour@mist.cs.orst.edu (Abdennour A. MOUSSAOUI) (02/22/90)
I Vote NO for the creation of soc.culture.pakistan since CULTURE
is the ONE thing that we do have common as opposed to politics.
Amrik S. Parmar
Which culture are you reffering to soc.culture.arabic or soc.culture.indian
or both?? if the cultures are common why not the politics?
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ /\ ! ~~~~Hayaa Ala-falaah
Abdennour Moussaoui || _~_~_ Allahu Akbar Allahu Akbar
Oregon State University ||(_____) Laa Illaha Ila Allah~~~~
email=abdenour@mist.cs.orst.edu |||_|_|_|