RE: [Goanet]Betting odds?
Dear Tim, Ron and Mario, Point taken. A few responses preceded by ***. Quoting Tim de Mello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > (Copying this to Herman & Fred as some of my posting to Goa-Net mysteriously > "disappear".) *** It's not fair to say that your posts "mysteriously disappear" as if we discard them underhandedly. We have nothing to gain by doing that. If an email is rejected from the forum an email automatically sent to you automatically by the mailing list program. We add comments informing you why it was rejected. If this is indeed happening, please send us an email and we'll look into it. Quoting Tim de Mello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Most of the exchange of e-mails on the political stance of the US in Iraq, > etc has been put forth by by some right wing leaning members. The have been > well ariticulated and for the most part these discussions have been carried > out in a civilized manner. > > The counter arguments have been put forward by many of our members who are > very well regarded by the general membership. They have articulated and > presented well balanced counter arguments. This debate, as far as content > goes, IMHO, surpasses many other discussions that have taken place on this > forum. > > These discussions have taken place between Goans who consider these > arguments important. To take such arguments offline, as some of them did, > deprives others of the discussion taking place. *** We, too, thought that the debate was being carried out in a civilized manner, which is why we let it go on as long as it did. However, we demand a certain etiquette in participating in debates because we need to be considerate to all our members. Sending 10 posts in an hour arguing every minute point is unacceptable. You and I might find the email load acceptable, but many of our members who do not have good internet connections do not. They simply unsubscribe depriving themselves of this and other discussions. I don't think that is fair. We repeatedly asked the participant involved to argue in a more concise manner, which he did not do. Furthermore, not all the members on the list were welcomed the debate. One well-regarded member asked "Is this Goanet or Iraq-Net?" We, therefore, decided to put and end to the debate. Quoting Tim de Mello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > There are many posts that keep popping up with fair regularity that I > consider annoying and of little merit either to Goa or to the general > membership. Consider, for example, the self promoting posts of Rene > regarding Goa Day. > > Is it the opinion of the GoaNet Admin team that as long as the post contains > the word Goa in it, any such drivel is acceptable? > > The decision to stop the debate is nothing more than small minded thinking > by the Admin Team. And ridiculous! *** We have a difficult task of moderating posts. The decisions we make will never please everyone. But, all of you know full well that we do have debates that are of general interest but not related to Goa. One has only to browse the archives to be convinced. I think it's important for members to send us some feedback so that we can accommodate suggestions to improve the forum. Perhaps it's better to send us a discrete email rather than to single out people publicly. -- Herman Carneiro Goanet Admin
RE: [Goanet]Betting odds? (fwd)
We on Goanet Admin are tuned in to the diverse feedback on this subject, and would like to hear viewpoints of others too. The question here is: should there be the possibility of calling to an end a discussion which goes on for a fairly lengthy period of time, and which seems to be turning into a volumnious debate between a very small number of posters? Most mailing lists, once they touch a certain size, allow for this mechanism to ensure that list-readability is maintained. Mario Goveia's posts, as anyone else's, are welcome -- regardless of which side of the political spectrum they come from. As a moderator, however, I frankly find it vexatious to read through some nine or ten posts on a single thread, sent in the course of one hour, debating a number of finer points that come up in the discussion. Our feeling was that most readers would feel a similar overload. Wouldn't it make sense to get a wider range of voices and issues come up on Goanet, rather than get caught up in I-am-more-right-than-you debates? After all, there's no end to scoring ideological points over well-entrenched positions, specially on global issues which have already been debated threadbare from so many perspectives. There's another aspect: the number of postings growing. We are under two days into the new year, and we have 62 posts on Goanet already. It's hard to see many readers keeping up with such a load. In line with what I've argued above, will avoid making this into a my-arguments-are-better-than-yours debate... that's all from my side on this debate. We'll do our best to take care of the interest of Goanet readers and participants. -FN (Frederick Noronha) PS: The "censorship" allegations that come up from certain quarters regularly, to me, seem to be a ed herring, meant to bamboozle in posts which are clearly violative of Goanet's rules. We really do not keep out any posts unless we have good reason. Some issues (like Ribandar) have been giving us a hard time, because of the need to avoid a trial-by-the-media and at the same time letting readers keep abrest of the developments. In quite a few other cases, a lot more name-calling and one-on-one score settling has gone through than should have
Re: [Goanet]Betting odds and beyond.
Fred, As you will have surmised, I agree with Tim entirely on the matter of the unnecessary closure of an exciting theme. We may need to wait a long time to come across something equally invigorating. I also want to reiterate what I had said earlier, that, I disagree profoundly with Mario re his position on Iraq but not on at least two other Goan related positions I know he holds and which I intend to pursue on Goanet soon. I would therefore defend him to the hilt to hear any, repeat any, of his points of view, albeit perhaps with a degree of presentational moderation, and non repetition, which I am sure that he himself would probably come to accept! Goanet, after all, does have an implicit educative function for all and should go well beyond the mindboggling repetitive reportage of items referred to by Tim. But making Goa and Goan political, social and cultural affairs, fairly central, become very important too and should not be marginalised or minimised. Within the kind of debate as raised now, re the closure of one theme etc, healthy intellectual schisms take place periodically in any organisational setting. This can result in paradigmatic shifts and I think we have, in a small way, come close to one in this instance. Cornel >From: Mario Goveia Fred, We may just have to agree to disagree. However, your specific comments cry out for some rebuttals: Far be it for me to defend Mario on his political views but on this e-mail I have to agree with him. Most of the exchange of e-mails on the political stance of the US in Iraq, etc has been put forth by by some right wing leaning members. The have been well ariticulated and for the most part these discussions have been carried out in a civilized manner. The counter arguments have been put forward by many of our members who are very well regarded by the general membership. They have articulated and presented well balanced counter arguments. This debate, as far as content goes, IMHO, surpasses many other discussions that have taken place on this forum. These discussions have taken place between Goans who consider these arguments important. To take such arguments offline, as some of them did, deprives others of the discussion taking place. I would also remind Fred that on Aug 11 2004 he said: (ii) That "discourse" is idle. IMHO, sharing of information has a critical role to play in the life of any society. Our goals, our action, our plans, our future... all depends on our ideas and what we know. Hence, while some people get impatient with discourse (and what is dismissed as "mere talk"), this too has an important role to play There are many posts that keep popping up with fair regularity that I consider annoying and of little merit either to Goa or to the general membership. Consider, for example, the self promoting posts of Rene regarding Goa Day. Is it the opinion of the GoaNet Admin team that as long as the post contains the word Goa in it, any such drivel is acceptable? The decision to stop the debate is nothing more than small minded thinking by the Admin Team. And ridiculous!
RE: [Goanet]Betting odds?
From: Mario Goveia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fred, We may just have to agree to disagree. However, your specific comments cry out for some rebuttals: Far be it for me to defend Mario on his political views but on this e-mail I have to agree with him. Most of the exchange of e-mails on the political stance of the US in Iraq, etc has been put forth by by some right wing leaning members. The have been well ariticulated and for the most part these discussions have been carried out in a civilized manner. The counter arguments have been put forward by many of our members who are very well regarded by the general membership. They have articulated and presented well balanced counter arguments. This debate, as far as content goes, IMHO, surpasses many other discussions that have taken place on this forum. These discussions have taken place between Goans who consider these arguments important. To take such arguments offline, as some of them did, deprives others of the discussion taking place. I would also remind Fred that on Aug 11 2004 he said: (ii) That "discourse" is idle. IMHO, sharing of information has a critical role to play in the life of any society. Our goals, our action, our plans, our future... all depends on our ideas and what we know. Hence, while some people get impatient with discourse (and what is dismissed as "mere talk"), this too has an important role to play. === There are many posts that keep popping up with fair regularity that I consider annoying and of little merit either to Goa or to the general membership. Consider, for example, the self promoting posts of Rene regarding Goa Day. Is it the opinion of the GoaNet Admin team that as long as the post contains the word Goa in it, any such drivel is acceptable? The decision to stop the debate is nothing more than small minded thinking by the Admin Team. And ridiculous! Tim de Mello [EMAIL PROTECTED] CANADA
RE: [Goanet]Betting odds?
TO: "Frederick Noronha(FN)" Fred, We may just have to agree to disagree. However, your specific comments cry out for some rebuttals: Fred writes: (i) Free speech doesn't mean saying what we want, whenever we want, in disproportionate amounts, and impose it on others who are then told to use the delete key. Mario replies: In a free society "free speech" on an open forum like Goanet mens exactly what you say it doesn't. The issue is, "Who gets to decide what is inappropriate?" Fred writes: (ii) Online fora are like any real-life meeting halls in some ways. In the online world, many people can 'speak' simultaneously. This does not mean we should clog the communications with a whole lot of postings which simply overwhelm the debate by sheer quantum. This would tantamount to blocking the free speech of others. Mario replies: Claiming that one's free speech is tantamount to blocking the free speech of others is an old circular argument that sounds far more logical than it actually is. The question is, in a free society, who gets to decide who is blocking whom? Fred writes; (iii) Free speech does mean that a wide range of opinions should be allowed to go through (whether the admin agrees with them or not). It does not, to me at least, mean that incessant debate should be continued even when others in the group are complaining of topic-fatigue. Mario replies: We obviously disagree on who should get precedence, the "others" or the posters. Who decides who exactly the "others" are, and whether their claims are valid, when there are hundreds if not thousands of Goanetters, all around the world. Fred writes: (iv) When you post a message, we are indeed *forcing* every Goanetter to download the same, whether (s)he wants it or not. There is no way a Goanet subscriber can read only some posts and not read others. This is particularly true of Goanet-Digest subscribers, who have to download the entire digests and can't delete posts of just one or two posters by reading only the subject-line. Many readers get the Digest version. Besides, the fact that every reader has to *necessarily* download every message put out on this list, also means tat they're being compelled in a way to read something they might rather not want to. If you want the freedom to post anything, go to Usenet newsgroups (http://groups.google.com). You have the freedom to post 9, 90 or 900 messages in an hour -- that's because the posts do not go as email to anyone, but only get downloaded if someone asks for them! Result: Usenet newsgroups are full of spam, junk and other irritating posts. Including hate posts set up by bigots of virtually every religion ... and secular bigots too ;-) A few groups are run on moderated lines, but these will accept every post on Goa within the 'charter' under which it was set up, simply because no one has to then download such posts without a choice! Mario replies: a) There is an alternative for those who don't want to be "forced" to receive posts, isn't there? b) It is the bane of every "elite" person or group in a free society that they have to listen to ideas and opinions that they consider "irritating", "hateful" or generally objectionable. The problem becomes, who gets to decide what is such, when there are hundreds or thousands of members around the world with potentially as many opinions. c) Regarding day-to-day usage I have no idea what you are talking about Goanetters being "forced" to do anything - other than receive the messages on their computers. I do not read a single message that I choose not to. Whether receiving individual posts or digests the subject line is a dead giveaway as to the contents. Everyday, I make judgements based on the subject and the poster as to whether I want to read, scan or ignore, respond or move on. Fred writes: (v) Try telling the NYT, the IHT or the Washington Post in the "land of the free" that they have to carry everything you write -- after all, readers who don't like it can just skip the item on reading the title -- and see if they agree. Mario replies: The NYT, IHT and the Washinton Post are privately owned organizations. If Goanet is "owned" by anyone I will agree that they get to decide whatever is published on this site, and the posters will continue to participate or leave, just as in the "land of the free" I am free to buy the NYT and the Washington Post, or not. I choose not to buy these specific papers because of my perception of what and how they choose to report and how they choose to opine in their editorials. Natural selection prevails. Fred writes: (vi) IMHO, there will be anarchy if everyone insists that they have the *right* to post whatever they please, whenever they please, on whatever topic, and however many times they wish with no regard to the rules that any mailing-list works under and with complete contempt for feedback from the readers. Mario replies: We are back to the circular argument of whose rights are being trampl
[Goanet]Betting odds
Gabe, Mea culpa a thousand times if I had unknowingly stolen your thunder on a topic which may now not bear its name on Goanet! You know what I mean? A happy new year. Cornel
RE: [Goanet]Betting odds?
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004, Mario Goveia wrote: However, with all due respect, I find it patently offensive that some Goanetters "irritation" with certain subjects and continuing debates should trample on the free speech rights of others who may disagree. If such ideas prevail we have anarchy, sometimes the anarchy of a majority, often of a small minority, sometimes just a couple of fastidious "elites". This is like complaining of the content in any media in a free society. No one is forcing any individual Goanetter to read every post or follow every debate. The subject line tells what the contents are likely to be, and one can choose to delete or read, comment or ignore. Just some comments: (i) Free speech doesn't mean saying what we want, whenever we want, in disproportionate amounts, and impose it on others who are then told to use the delete key. (ii) Online fora are like any real-life meeting halls in some ways. In the online world, many people can 'speak' simultaneously. This does not mean we should clog the communications with a whole lot of postings which simply overwhelm the debate by sheer quantum. This would tantamount to blocking the free speech of others. (iii) Free speech does mean that a wide range of opinions should be allowed to go through (whether the admin agrees with them or not). It does not, to me at least, mean that incessant debate should be continued even when others in the group are complaining of topic-fatigue. (iv) When you post a message, we are indeed *forcing* every Goanetter to download the same, whether (s)he wants it or not. There is no way a Goanet subscriber can read only some posts and not read others. This is particularly true of Goanet-Digest subscribers, who have to download the entire digests and can't delete posts of just one or two posters by reading only the subject-line. Many readers get the Digest version. Besides, the fact that every reader has to *necessarily* download every message put out on this list, also means that they're being compelled in a way to read something they might rather not want to. If you want the freedom to post anything, go to Usenet newsgroups (http://groups.google.com). You have the freedom to post 9, 90 or 900 messages in an hour -- that's because the posts do not go as email to anyone, but only get downloaded if someone asks for them! Result: Usenet newsgroups are full of spam, junk and other irritating posts. Including hate posts set up by bigots of virtually every religion ... and secular bigots too ;-) A few groups like SCIG (soc.culture.india.goa) are run on moderated lines, but these will accept every post on Goa within the 'charter' under which it was set up, simply because no one has to then download such posts without a choice! (v) Try telling the NYT, the IHT or the Washington Post in the "land of the free" that they have to carry everything you write -- after all, readers who don't like it can just skip the item on reading the title -- and see if they agree. (vi) IMHO, there will be anarchy if everyone insists that they have the *right* to post whatever they please, whenever they please, on whatever topic, and however many times they wish with no regard to the rules that any mailing-list works under and with complete contempt for feedback from the readers. On the other hand, it would make more sense to tailor our posts to issues and entry-points which would interest a number of others in the group. After all, isn't communication all about that -- getting others interested, rather than saying you're-free-to-use-the-delete-key ? FN Frederick Noronha (FN)Nr Convent Saligao 403511 GoaIndia Freelance Journalist P: 832-2409490 M: 9822122436 http://www.livejournal.com/users/goalinks http://fn.swiki.net http://fredericknoronha.stumbleupon.com http://fn-floss.notlong.com
[Goanet]Betting odds?
[Goanet]Betting odds? Mario Goveia goanet@goanet.org I previously said in a post: Who quit and made Herman the "Dada"? Who is Herman anyway? Never heard of him before now. I have since learned: I now know who Herman is and that he started Goanet, and so he is legitimately its "Dada". Herman, I salute you for your initiative in starting Goanet. However, with all due respect, I find it patently offensive that some Goanetters "irritation" with certain subjects and continuing debates should trample on the free speech rights of others who may disagree. If such ideas prevail we have anarchy, sometimes the anarchy of a majority, often of a small minority, sometimes just a couple of fastidious "elites". This is like complaining of the content in any media in a free society. No one is forcing any individual Goanetter to read every post or follow every debate. The subject line tells what the contents are likely to be, and one can choose to delete or read, comment or ignore. My comments: I am fully supportive of the strong position you have taken. Keep up the fight Mario. AlmeidaG(ji) __ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
RE: [Goanet]Betting odds?
I previously said in a post: Who quit and made Herman the "Dada"? Who is Herman anyway? Never heard of him before now. I have since learned: I now know who Herman is and that he started Goanet, and so he is legitimately its "Dada". Herman, I salute you for your initiative in starting Goanet. However, with all due respect, I find it patently offensive that some Goanetters "irritation" with certain subjects and continuing debates should trample on the free speech rights of others who may disagree. If such ideas prevail we have anarchy, sometimes the anarchy of a majority, often of a small minority, sometimes just a couple of fastidious "elites". This is like complaining of the content in any media in a free society. No one is forcing any individual Goanetter to read every post or follow every debate. The subject line tells what the contents are likely to be, and one can choose to delete or read, comment or ignore.
RE: [Goanet]Betting odds?
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004, Mario Goveia wrote: Who quit and made Herman the "Dada"? Who is Herman anyway? Never heard of him before now. Old jungle saying: If you don't know the facts, it's best not to shoot your mouth ;-) FN
RE: [Goanet]Betting odds?
TO: "Tim de Mello" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Who quit and made Herman the "Dada"? Who is Herman anyway? Never heard of him before now. === I agree with Cornel re: closing debate. If I am not mistaken, Herman does not own GoaNet. I thought we had agreed that debates should carry on until they die a natural death. Appeals may be made for the participants to end debates but, by no means, should it be dictated by anyone. I take very strong objection to Herman's dictate.
ADMINTEAM MEMBER'S REPLY: RE: [Goanet]Betting odds?
Tim, I think you're posing the wrong question and therefore risk suggesting a misleading answer. Also, two issues are getting mixed-up here -- the structure of Goanet, and the advisability of closing discussions. On Thu, 30 Dec 2004, Tim de Mello wrote: I agree with Cornel re: closing debate. If I am not mistaken, Herman does not own GoaNet. Herman is the founder and chair of Goanet. The term 'list owner' (often used by Yahoogroups) can throw up misleading connotations, about the ownership structure of a widely participated-in online network. My personal view is that even any private media organisation, which depends on large public participation, though it can be 'owned' technically, in reality is just a Trust. It is a Trust acting on behalf of what it perceives to be the common-good of the large group of its readership. If the trust is lost, so is the raison d'etre. The decision to close discussions on this particular topic was taken, after due consideration, by the Admin Team. Herman merely communicated the decision to the list. (Goanet is run through its admin team, every reader's suggestions and inputs are welcome and duly considered, and volunteers are needed all the time to help with the running of various aspects of this list.) Closing of threads which go on for many weeks is a routine procedure on quite a few mailing lists. Specially on larger lists which need to ensure that the signal-to-noise ratio is maintained high amidst divergent interests about what makes most sense for the news. I thought we had agreed that debates should carry on until they die a natural death. Appeals may be made for the participants to end debates but, by no means, should it be dictated by anyone. Had we? It is possible that members have voiced their views. But I do not know of any mechanism that allows the overall members of a mailing list such as this to "agree" and take a decision on any point. In any case, the majority of the members are silent members, and at best we can only guess what their preferences are. On the Admin Team, we do work to understand what interests people, and what puts them off. Ours may not be the most accurate reading, but we are always open to feedback. How does one prevent a mailing-list (meant for many-to-many discussions) from degenerating into a forum for one-to-one communication? If a discussion goes on for six to eight weeks, largely involving six to eight posters, no one seems to be getting convinced by the other side, and the right to the last word is hotly contested... then it seems to be time to call an end-to-the-thread. More so, when those outside the small discussion circle start unsubscribing and point to the difficulty in coping with the load, substantially increased by one thread that has been going on and on and on. If you think otherwise, do send in your feedback to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I take very strong objection to Herman's dictate. It is not a dictate, and it is not Herman's. It was a decision taken by the admin team. You bet we will not take a decision which is unpopular among the bulk of Goanetters. If many feel strongly about this, we could go on with the 'Chickens coming home to roost/roast' debate for the next decade of Goanet's timeline ;-) We on Goanet do believe in free speech and the need to reflect all points of view. We do not believe in slander and defamation. We also believe in having a high signal-to-noise ratio on the list, to keep it readable, but aren't going to block any points of view using this as an excuse. (Provided, of course, you stay within the framework of the Goanet rules, which have been framed without being skewed in one direction or the other, but largely in the interest of promoting logical debate.) -- Frederick Noronha (FN), Goanet Admin Team Member [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Goanet] Betting odds on bogus identities
For the record, the stated identity of this poster is bogus, which is made all the more obvious since this phony poster is also severly spelling challenged with respect to last names. From: "marlon menezes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Goanet] Betting odds? X-Originating-Ip: 213.132.254.2 > I for one would surely hope that the Ribandar case > be chopped off until the exact picture is given by > the court or the church authority, not by a guy who > has just passed off his degree course. Also it > appears that the case is being quarelled off by two > neighbours. Not many know the fact that the lawyer > and the neighbourhood resident (foreigner) both live > side by side in the same locality. > > God bless everyone to be united in India. > > Marlon A quick check of this person's IP address indicates that it originated from Kuwait, which interestingly is an exact match to the IP address of Gasper Almeida who has a well established reputation for trying to impersonate others on the net! Received: from [213.132.254.2] From: "www.goa-world.com/goa/" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Goanet]Blogs become eyes and ears of disaster Blogs become eyes and ears of disaster By LISA PRIEST >From Wednesday's Globe and Mail The Internet has quickly become the eyes and ears of the tsunami disaster.
RE: [Goanet]Betting odds?
I agree with Cornel re: closing debate. If I am not mistaken, Herman does not own GoaNet. I thought we had agreed that debates should carry on until they die a natural death. Appeals may be made for the participants to end debates but, by no means, should it be dictated by anyone. I take very strong objection to Herman's dictate. Tim de Mello [EMAIL PROTECTED] CANADA From: "cornel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Goanetters, I have only just seen, the 24 hour notice, that today is the last day when material re Iraq, and the last American elections are permissible on Goanet. Even if I am the only one to say this, I feel that this is an instance of a tragic dictatorial mistake by a small administrative group, and also, with absolutely minimal notice. It is also tragic, in my view, to trigger the mechanism of censorship just when contributors to this debate had been sensing and expressing the view that there was no more mileage and were ready to stop in the now banned case. Thus, through censorship, Goanet may indeed have snatched defeat from the jaws of (desired) victory!
Re: [Goanet] Betting odds?
Cornel writes: >Goanetters, >I have only just seen, the 24 hour notice, that today is the last >day when >material re Iraq, and the last American elections are >permissible on Goanet. >Even if I am the only one to say this, I feel >that this is an instance of a >tragic dictatorial mistake by a small ?>administrative group, and also, with >absolutely minimal notice. It is >also tragic, in my view, to trigger the >mechanism of censorship just >when contributors to this debate had been >sensing and expressing the >view that there was no more mileage and were ready >to stop in the now >banned case. Thus, through censorship, Goanet may indeed >have >snatched defeat from the jaws of (desired) victory! >Do I now take it that the Ribander case, albeit set in Goa, which >has been >on Goanet much longer than the USA issue, is next for the >chop? After all a >precedent has now been set. Cornel, my full support to your suggestion. I for one would surely hope that the Ribandar case be chopped off until the exact picture is given by the court or the church authority, not by a guy who has just passed off his degree course. Also it appears that the case is being quarelled off by two neighbours. Not many know the fact that the lawyer and the neighbourhood resident (foreigner) both live side by side in the same locality. God bless everyone to be united in India. Marlon -- ___ Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10
[Goanet]Betting odds?
From: "cornel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wrote To: Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 10:47 AM Subject: [Goanet]Betting odds? Do I now take it that the Ribander case, albeit set in Goa, which has been on Goanet much longer than the USA issue, is next for the chop? After all a precedent has now been set. I agree that the Ribandar case has gone past it's sell by date. Still I would propose that we give it one more chance; after the next Court date, which I believe is in the first week of January 2005 - if nothing of importance arises, the powers that be, should chop it ( ala Bobbit) Finally, even though no room for manoeuvre is left for further responses I did wonder if there were any betting odds that the Americans will cut and run, following the forthcoming Iraqi election? The parallels with the situation in Vietnam, including growing internal American dissension, seem uncanny in this illegal, unprovoked, and unwinable war. Cornel Dear Cornel, Please do not attempt to steal my thunder! I did, after all say it first - Mario Goveia is my witness - I asked simply what his stance would be if the Yanks called it a day and washed their hands! Every one - a happy peaceful New Year to you and yours. Cheers, Gabe.
[Goanet]Betting odds?
Goanetters, I have only just seen, the 24 hour notice, that today is the last day when material re Iraq, and the last American elections are permissible on Goanet. Even if I am the only one to say this, I feel that this is an instance of a tragic dictatorial mistake by a small administrative group, and also, with absolutely minimal notice. It is also tragic, in my view, to trigger the mechanism of censorship just when contributors to this debate had been sensing and expressing the view that there was no more mileage and were ready to stop in the now banned case. Thus, through censorship, Goanet may indeed have snatched defeat from the jaws of (desired) victory! Do I now take it that the Ribander case, albeit set in Goa, which has been on Goanet much longer than the USA issue, is next for the chop? After all a precedent has now been set. Finally, even though no room for manoeuvre is left for further responses I did wonder if there were any betting odds that the Americans will cut and run, following the forthcoming Iraqi election? The parallels with the situation in Vietnam, including growing internal American dissension, seem uncanny in this illegal, unprovoked, and unwinable war. Cornel
