A thought. FN, In this one instance I wonder what would have happened if you had only given your responses, but had not posted the following. I understand that in general highly complex debating approaches are du jour on Goanet.
FN concluded: But then, what's a few facts when it comes to Rajan-style campaigning? Of course, my goal isn't to waste too much time in the bitterness flowing out of "campaigning". FN Respectfully, venantius j pinto > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 12:29:40 +0530 > From: Frederick Noronha <[email protected]> > To: "Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994!" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Goanet] Today we visited Sant Simao Church at Batim > Hillock and the huge deep wells > On 7 February 2010 09:42, Rajan P. Parrikar <[email protected]> wrote: > >> When I posted this on Goanet, the alleged journo Frederick >> Noronha rushed to Sharma-ji's and Architect-bab's defence (I >> am sure Sharmaji will figure in his list of "101 Great CyberBhaile"). >> Admin. Frederick Noronha claimed that it was my 300mm lens >> that was to blame (* see below for links to the Goanet archive). >> Joe, I think it is your lens that is lying. Or maybe you have >> photoshopped your image to make the tiny farmhouse look >> like a mansion. Check with Admin. Noronha. >> * The entire thread about Admin. Noronha's 300mm lens fantasy >> is at the following link - >> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg30023.html > > The point I made is here, and I stand by it: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg30015.html > > Quote: > > While Rajan Prabhu Parrikar is doing a good job in pointing to the > concretisation of Goa, questions need to, and have already, been > raised about the selective manner in which issues are being > highlighted. > > Unquote > > Secondly, it was architect Nachinolkar who raised questions about Rajan's > lens: > > Quote > > Architect Ketak S Nachinolkar, a professional who worked on the > farm-house in Batim, has asked questions about the impact of a 300mm > zoom lens and the resultant images these throw up. See: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/goaheritage/message/700 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/goaheritage/message/690 > > Unquote > > Incidentally, Rajan Parrikar was also claiming that the house belonged > to Kiran Dhingra (the former Chief Secretary of Goa): > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg23099.html > > But then, what's a few facts when it comes to Rajan-style campaigning? > Of course, my goal isn't to waste too much time in the bitterness > flowing out of "campaigning". FN > > > ------------------------------
