araja@m2.csc.ti.com (Ali Raja) (02/13/90)
In article <36050248@hpindda.HP.COM> ananth@hpindda.HP.COM (AP Anantharaman) writes: >Coming to think of it, maybe we do not need soc.culture.indian or soc.culture. >pakistan, but rather as somebody suggested, soc.culture.<neutral_name>.news >and soc.culture.<neutral_name>.debate/tirade and whatever else which goes on >in this net. I for one, think that this might be a good idea. My original purpose in calling for the creation of soc.culture.pakistan was to provide a place where Pakistanis could not be told to stay our because the newsgroup name was soc.culture.INDIAN. I am willing to stand and flame with the best of them, assuming that there is at least SOME good humour in the flaming. But I have seen far too many anti-Pakistani tirades on soc.culture.indian in the past few days to want to stay within this newsgroup. That is why I officially called for the creation of soc.culture.pakistan. It may succeed, or quite likely, it might fail, but at least the Pakistanis in soc.culture.indian will have made a statement. On the other hand, if you, or anyone else, is willing to make an official call for discussion on the creation of soc.culture.<neutral_name>.news and soc.culture.<neutral_name>.debate/tirade, I will extend my wholehearted support to this proposal, and withdraw my current one. It is quite definitely a preferable option to a Partition of soc.culture.indian. Also - to anyone wanting to vote for soc.culture.pakistan - please don't send me your votes; the voting period has not started. Not only that, but please DO NOT post your votes.
siddarth@cs.utexas.edu (Siddarth Subramanian) (02/13/90)
I think the solution to all our problems would be to abandon s.c.i. as it stands now and create instead the two groups: 1) soc.culture.southasia and 2) talk.politics.southasia The first would be confined to postings on cultural matters while the second would be a free-for-all forum for deshi-bashing and paki-bashing plus an occasional reasoned article on Indo-Pak-S. Lankan-...etc. relations and politics. How does that sound ? -- SIDDARTH SUBRAMANIAN siddarth@cs.utexas.edu
sa1z+@andrew.cmu.edu (Sudheer Apte) (02/13/90)
araja@m2.csc.ti.com (Ali Raja) writes: > [...] if [...] anyone [...] is willing to make an official call > for discussion on the creation of soc.culture.<neutral_name>.news > and soc.culture.<neutral_name>.debate/tirade, I will extend my > wholehearted support to this proposal, and withdraw my current one. > It is quite definitely a preferable option to a Partition of > soc.culture.indian. This is a reasonable proposal. There is much merit to having a separate "news" group anyway---we're all sick of wading through the usual flamefest searching for news from back home. About the neutral name, what suggestions do people have? I notice that soc.culture.indian is unlike the other soc.culture groups named after nations, in that the word "indian," not "india," has been used. Is this only an adjectival form (a la the non-nation groups like soc.culture.jewish), or is it supposed to refer to the Subcontinent? I suspect it's the latter, but then I wasn't around when the group was named. Any old hands remember? Isn't "indian" neutral enough then, if we write up a monthly posting making this clear, or something? One minor problem with the name "indian" is that non-desis tend to think it's about native American culture :-) I still like it, though, if only because I can't think of another name that can keep us together. Sudheer. ------------------------ P.S.: Strictly speaking this whole discussion should remain in news.groups, but I understand the original call "allowed" people to use s.c.i. as well, so I'm not changing the Followups-To: field. -- ...{harvard, uunet}!andrew.cmu.edu!sa1z sa1z%andrew@CMCCVB.BITNET
prabhu@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Dinesh K. Prabhu) (02/13/90)
My belief is that when s.c.indian was formed, the word indian referred to
the entire South-Asian subcontinent. I wholeheartedly support the move to
rename s.c.indian to s.c.south-asia. We can use this forum to discuss
cultural matters pertaining to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, and
Bhutan. I would also like to see talk.politics.south-asia created so that
all the sensitive political issues can be moved out of s.c.south-asia.
Any takers?
Dinesh Prabhu
--
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!prabhuacsiq@uhvax1.uh.edu (02/13/90)
In article <4890@amelia.nas.nasa.gov>, prabhu@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Dinesh K. Prabhu) writes: > My belief is that when s.c.indian was formed, the word indian referred to > the entire South-Asian subcontinent. I wholeheartedly support the move to > rename s.c.indian to s.c.south-asia. We can use this forum to discuss > cultural matters pertaining to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, and > Bhutan. I would also like to see talk.politics.south-asia created so that > all the sensitive political issues can be moved out of s.c.south-asia. > > Any takers? > > Dinesh Prabhu > > -- > 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 Why not soc.culture.asia or .europe or even social.culture.world? Then every body can discuss their *common* interests. What you have to realize is that although Pakistan and India have the same cultural heritage, their present day societies are becoming more and more different. And as long as people continue to ignore this fact, there is no hope of an understanding between the two countries. So allow us our own identity and soc.culture.pakistan and then maybe we can talk. Faisal. _______________________________________________ Faisal Usmani, Dept. of Electrical Engineering University of Houston, Houston, Texas. _______________________________________________ faisal@crcc.uh.edu, acsiq@uhvax1.uh.edu _______________________________________________
manglik@bgsuvax.UUCP (Pankaj Manglik) (02/14/90)
In article <5547.25d7d822@uhvax1.uh.edu> acsiq@uhvax1.uh.edu writes: > > have to realize is that although Pakistan and India have the same > cultural heritage, their present day societies are becoming more > and more different. And as long as people continue to ignore this > fact, there is no hope of an understanding between the two countries. > So allow us our own identity and soc.culture.pakistan and then maybe > we can talk. > Faisal. I agree. Though I was initially strongly in favour of s.c.neutral, I have to agree that there are some things that are strictly Indian. For example, where would you post the following: The 3 degrees of egoism - I, Iyer, Iyengar In rec.humor or s.c.asia ? What is probably required is not to rename s.c.i but to create s.c.pak as well as s.c.neutralname.debate/news Pankaj Manglik
ziag@ez.ardent.com (02/14/90)
In article <cZprnnu00WB9AhMWMe@andrew.cmu.edu> sa1z+@andrew.cmu.edu (Sudheer Apte) writes: }araja@m2.csc.ti.com (Ali Raja) writes: }> [...] if [...] anyone [...] is willing to make an official call }> for discussion on the creation of soc.culture.<neutral_name>.news }> and soc.culture.<neutral_name>.debate/tirade, I will extend my }> wholehearted support to this proposal, and withdraw my current one. }> It is quite definitely a preferable option to a Partition of }> soc.culture.indian. } }About the neutral name, what suggestions do people have? I notice }.... I would like to suggest s.c.southasia or s.c.subcont I think these names are neutral enough as not to alienate or polarize any one group. This is only my opinion. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ /\ ! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ || _~_~_ ||(_____) A. Zaigham Ahsan |||_|_|_|
mantha@cs.utah.edu (Surya M Mantha) (02/14/90)
In article <4890@amelia.nas.nasa.gov> prabhu@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Dinesh K. Prabhu) writes: > My belief is that when s.c.indian was formed, the word indian referred to > the entire South-Asian subcontinent. I wholeheartedly support the move to > rename s.c.indian to s.c.south-asia. We can use this forum to discuss > cultural matters pertaining to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, and > Bhutan. I would also like to see talk.politics.south-asia created so that > all the sensitive political issues can be moved out of s.c.south-asia. > Any takers? I couldn't agree more. As experience clearly indicates, the "indian" in soc.culture.indian does not adequately and fairly represent the nations of the Indian subcontinent. Even though our Pakistani friends were considerate and willing enough to participate as equal members in s.c.i., time and again they have been asked to leave the forum because of their opinions. Such an ("s.c.i. love it or leave it") attitude smacks of mccarthyism. I hate to imagine what "Hinduness" would do to our country! > Dinesh Prabhu cheers Surya Mantha
raj@mimsy.umd.edu (Raj Bhatnagar) (02/14/90)
In article <5547.25d7d822@uhvax1.uh.edu> acsiq@uhvax1.uh.edu writes: > . . . . What you > have to realize is that although Pakistan and India have the same > cultural heritage, their present day societies are becoming more > and more different. Yes that is true about WHAT THE SITUATION IS. > And as long as people continue to ignore this > fact, there is no hope of an understanding between the two countries. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And most of us agree that a better understanding is WHAT WE WANT THE SITUATION TO BE. > So allow us our own identity and soc.culture.pakistan and then maybe > we can talk. Now, wouldn't you agree that it is better to have a common and shared discussion/news group for better understanding? By creating a separate newsgroup you would be reducing the chances of people from both countries getting a glimpse of each other's views. I think the solution suggested by many to rename sci to sc_south-asia should be preferrable as it would remove that occasional (frequent?) voice which makes Pakistanis feel they don't belong to this culture group meant for the entire sub-continent. Anyways, I would vote yes for the change of name for sci but would vote no for sc_Pakistan for the above-mentioned reason. > Faisal. ---raj -- raj bhatnagar raj@mimsy.umd.edu
jeffd@ficc.uu.net (Jeff Daiell) (02/15/90)
Forgive me if this has been covered before, but would the group
cover both parts of the original Pakistan, or would there need to
be a separate group for Bangladesh if Bengalis wish to discuss
their culture?
Jeff
--
"Come to me, bend to me, kiss me good day;
Give me your lips and don't take them away."
From Lerner's and Loewe's BRIGADOON
and quite appropriate for February 14th!inde4jo@uhvax1.uh.edu (A JETSON News User) (02/15/90)
------------------------------------------------------------ I vote YES for the creation of soc.culture.pakistan. ------------------------------------------------------------ Imran Vehra University of Houston.
inde4nt@uhvax1.uh.edu (A JETSON News User) (02/15/90)
I think soc.culture.pakistan is a great idea. My vote is Yes. Ilyas Mianoor.
sa1z+@andrew.cmu.edu (Sudheer Apte) (02/16/90)
jeffd@ficc.uu.net (Jeff Daiell) asks in news.groups: > but would [soc.culture.pakistan] cover both parts of the original > Pakistan, or would there need to be a separate group for Bangladesh > if Bengalis wish to discuss their culture? Shh, please don't say "Bengalis" instead of "Bangladeshis"---we've got several million in West Bengal, India, too; they'd start getting ideas... and pretty soon you'd get about 20 different nationalities---oops, cultural/linguistic groups---clamouring for a separate newsgroup! Before you know it, the subcontinent will become a hodge-podge like Europe, all because of one innocent question :-). Sudheer. ----------------------- ...{harvard, uunet}!andrew.cmu.edu!sa1z sa1z%andrew@CMCCVB.BITNET
bmaruti@wpi.wpi.edu (B Maruti) (02/16/90)
In article <4890@amelia.nas.nasa.gov> prabhu@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Dinesh K. Prabhu) writes: > > My belief is that when s.c.indian was formed, the word indian referred to > the entire South-Asian subcontinent. I wholeheartedly support the move to > rename s.c.indian to s.c.south-asia. We can use this forum to discuss > cultural matters pertaining to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, and > Bhutan. I would also like to see talk.politics.south-asia created so that > all the sensitive political issues can be moved out of s.c.south-asia. > > Any takers? > > Dinesh Prabhu I feel that it is better to rewrite the charter and reserve s.c.i for discussions related excusively to India. There is a fairly good traffic on "Indian" topics. By renaming s.c.i to s.c.south-asia, Indians will technically lose out (by not having their own group). So I, being Indian, will vote against that. Let us welcome those who feel part of the Indian subcontinent in s.c.i, and help those who want to have a separate group (e.g., soc.culture. pakistani). There is already a soc.culture.srilankan (?); I think a move to create soc.culture.pakistani is a good one. -Maruti bmaruti@wpi.wpi.edu
sa1z+@andrew.cmu.edu (Sudheer Apte) (02/17/90)
I think what we need is talk.politics.southasia, so that political
postings (and, since it'll be a talk group, Pak/India bashing) can be
done to our hearts' content, leaving s.c.i. relatively sane. I heard
many sites don't get the talk hierarchy, though. Is this true?
Sudheer.
----------------------
...{harvard, uunet}!andrew.cmu.edu!sa1z
sa1z%andrew@CMCCVB.BITNETzmhasan@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Masum Hasan) (02/17/90)
In article <kZqkNai00WB_EGAFB9@andrew.cmu.edu> sa1z+@andrew.cmu.edu (Sudheer Apte) writes: >jeffd@ficc.uu.net (Jeff Daiell) asks in news.groups: >> but would [soc.culture.pakistan] cover both parts of the original >> Pakistan, or would there need to be a separate group for Bangladesh >> if Bengalis wish to discuss their culture? > In the same spirit you could replace "original Pakistan" with "original India". Why should s.c.p cover Bangladesh? Gegraphically, politically, economically Bangladesh is a separate entity on this earth, you must be knowing that. So I propose for creating soc.culture.bangladesh. >Shh, please don't say "Bengalis" instead of "Bangladeshis"---we've got you are right......Chakma and others residing in Bangladesh are Bangladeshis, not Bengalis. > > Sudheer. -Masum ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ziaul Masum Hasan ------------------------------------------------------- zmhasan@watdragon.waterloo.edu ------------------------------------------ University of Waterloo, Computer Science -------------------------------- Office Automation Lab --------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------