Shetubondhon - Who will moderate the moderators?
dear Moderators:
My attention has been drawn to the sentence below, and in all fairness, I guess this censure has been singled out as a conseqeunce to my re-axe to Mr. Ezajur Rahman on my piece, 'Legitmizing Illegitmacy : The Save ETV Petition'.
Readers of Shetubondhon who had seen my first post, will have noticed that nothing in the content was 'rhetorical' enough to receive the kind of response that came out of Mr. Ezajur Rahman. There were implied threats and hints of a 'thundering response' (in other forums "thundering FIGHTs") which was totally uncalled for. His comments are all more vulnerable to misunderstanding because Mr. Rahman is a family member of the ETV CEO, and others might think that there is a 'family business' to protect and Shetubondhon was among the forums being used toward that end.
It would have been nice and 'fair' to see a similar 'cautionary warning' preceding Mr. Ezajur Rahman's article - but unfortunately that was not the case. If there was anybody to be blamed for this rhetorical outburst it was Mr. Rahman and not me.
This reveals a chink in Shetubondhon's Moderating Policy, which unfortunately I do not agree with and needs improvement. I for one believe in the philosophy of using rhetorics against rhetorics, threats against threats, and civility with civility. This might not be acceptable to all - but again this is reasonable defense - and every human being has a right to exercise the same.
Therefore the sentence that 'We release this message in fairness to the author due to some of the messages released earlier' - is one I find extremely patronizing. It confirms my original contention that Shetubondhon 'releases' some message without proper moderation and subjects yet others with 'cautionary notes' - some kind of soccer yellow card, without caring for a person's integrity, and the esteem with which other members might be evaluating
others on the forum.
Any patronizing approach would be detrimental to free speech and expression, and one that allows a leeway to some, and restricts others opinion. I don't think 'bridges' can be built with faulty contractors or implements!
I hope that this message would be circulated amongst fellow Shetubondhon subscribers, for those header comments from the Moderation Desk compromised my talents and ethics as an avid debater. I have complied with all previous request of Shetubondhon and allowed moderation - but this time around, I guess I am not keen on being construction material for another bridge.
I wish to thank members of Shetubondhon for all their support and understanding over the year - and that I have profited through all the pleasant/unpleasant exchanges. I apologise to anybody in the forum that might have found my pieces or debates not to their liking or discernible taste.
I hope that this message would be duly taken into consideration by Shetubondhon Moderation.
My attention has been drawn to the sentence below, and in all fairness, I guess this censure has been singled out as a conseqeunce to my re-axe to Mr. Ezajur Rahman on my piece, 'Legitmizing Illegitmacy : The Save ETV Petition'.
Readers of Shetubondhon who had seen my first post, will have noticed that nothing in the content was 'rhetorical' enough to receive the kind of response that came out of Mr. Ezajur Rahman. There were implied threats and hints of a 'thundering response' (in other forums "thundering FIGHTs") which was totally uncalled for. His comments are all more vulnerable to misunderstanding because Mr. Rahman is a family member of the ETV CEO, and others might think that there is a 'family business' to protect and Shetubondhon was among the forums being used toward that end.
It would have been nice and 'fair' to see a similar 'cautionary warning' preceding Mr. Ezajur Rahman's article - but unfortunately that was not the case. If there was anybody to be blamed for this rhetorical outburst it was Mr. Rahman and not me.
This reveals a chink in Shetubondhon's Moderating Policy, which unfortunately I do not agree with and needs improvement. I for one believe in the philosophy of using rhetorics against rhetorics, threats against threats, and civility with civility. This might not be acceptable to all - but again this is reasonable defense - and every human being has a right to exercise the same.
Therefore the sentence that 'We release this message in fairness to the author due to some of the messages released earlier' - is one I find extremely patronizing. It confirms my original contention that Shetubondhon 'releases' some message without proper moderation and subjects yet others with 'cautionary notes' - some kind of soccer yellow card, without caring for a person's integrity, and the esteem with which other members might be evaluating
others on the forum.
Any patronizing approach would be detrimental to free speech and expression, and one that allows a leeway to some, and restricts others opinion. I don't think 'bridges' can be built with faulty contractors or implements!
I hope that this message would be circulated amongst fellow Shetubondhon subscribers, for those header comments from the Moderation Desk compromised my talents and ethics as an avid debater. I have complied with all previous request of Shetubondhon and allowed moderation - but this time around, I guess I am not keen on being construction material for another bridge.
I wish to thank members of Shetubondhon for all their support and understanding over the year - and that I have profited through all the pleasant/unpleasant exchanges. I apologise to anybody in the forum that might have found my pieces or debates not to their liking or discernible taste.
I hope that this message would be duly taken into consideration by Shetubondhon Moderation.
posted by Mac Haque at 10:48 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home