6

There is a certain user who is blatantly anti-Hindu. Though they may deny it, they are against certain fundamental tenets of Hinduism as propounded by shastra.

They push their agenda relentlessly and it is tiresome. Their brand of Hinduism is rooted in marxist-inspired ideology. Marxism is not Hinduism.

Related: How to handle attacks by propagandist users?

16
  • 5
    Probably Yes... Until they break "Be Nice" policy & remain mostly on-topic.
    – iammilind
    Apr 19 '18 at 2:22
  • 1
    Politics are also off-topic for the site. So, it's no. Apr 19 '18 at 2:37
  • 1
    Wait, what makes you think they deny being anti-Hindu? Apr 19 '18 at 10:09
  • 1
    From when did we start allowing or disallowing users from participating? Anyone can join and participate. Only the posts which are objectionable will be accordingly dealt with not the users neither their agendas. At least this is what i have been told.
    – Rickross
    Apr 19 '18 at 12:17
  • 1
    The most prolific poster asked all participants to surrender to his sectarian god (he might have removed it now - but it was there). You cool with that @moonstar ?
    – S K
    Apr 19 '18 at 12:58
  • I haven't downvoted but this is not a new topic because we already have this: hinduism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1071/…
    – Rickross
    Apr 19 '18 at 13:00
  • @SK you are right. No I am not.
    – user1195
    Apr 19 '18 at 13:00
  • 1
    @Rickross I disagree. Agenda-pushing must stop. HSE is not a platform for building one's political profile (I am referring to both the users that I have posted against).
    – user1195
    Apr 19 '18 at 13:06
  • 2
    Where is the scope of building anything like you have mentioned? Can it be done in posts and simultaneously maintaining the policies and guidelines of this site? I don't think it is. So, we have deal a post at a time. @moonstar If someone, for example, is trying to proselytize in post, then we just need to raise a complaint and it will be gone.
    – Rickross
    Apr 19 '18 at 13:12
  • Any user of the site can say what they damn well please on their profile page regarding their faith. This doesn't excuse consistently posting politically motivated insidious agenda driven questions on the main which is blatantly anti-Hindu. Apr 19 '18 at 13:54
  • @moonstar Are you posting against users or the problem? I wish to hear that you are doing for latter. Posting about users is not healthy for site. The atmosphere becomes heated. Apr 19 '18 at 15:53
  • @Sarvabhouma Unfortunately, the problem and users ( I am referring to both users about whom I made two meta posts) are inseparably entwined in both cases.
    – user1195
    Apr 19 '18 at 16:10
  • 2
    hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/26901/… Since the board is ONLY NOW trying to figure out what HInduism is - "anti-Hindu" and "pro-Hindu" are undefined terms on this borad as of now.
    – S K
    Apr 19 '18 at 17:30
  • 1
    @ SK Untrue. Hindu was defined several times before. I myself shared the definition previously and more than once but limited it to the "Astika" definition.
    – user1195
    Apr 19 '18 at 17:46
  • 2
    @SK This is pure grasping at straws. For starters, anti-Hindu behaviour and systematic attempts to enforce divisiveness over seeking knowledge are easily identified. Let me give you an analogy: It is quite possible to rule out what rocks are not diamonds given their blatant opaqueness (post reasonable cleaning) than it is to pin down a clear crystal that may emerge from that cleaning as diamond indeed. Apr 19 '18 at 22:07

You must log in to answer this question.