-5

It is a common maxim that Caesar's wife must be above suspicion.

Unfair "moderation" by a coterie of people here who have a common belief is leaving no room for freedom of expression on this website. This is reflected again and again in the acts of editing answers to fit their own beliefs.

Now the comments will be that this is a rant :) What might again is that the coterie will vote to close this answer!

But here is recorded proof of this bias. The coterie is exposed in the "Guidelines for new users answering questions" See point 5. where the coterie has as the yardstick of "Prasthana" to measure the "correctness" of the answer.

Why should all the user be measured on the yardstick of Prasthana? This is a million-dollar question!

This is recorded evidence of the way the coterie groups together to judge an answer, downvote it, close the question and many other acts that point to the rigged practices on this website.

So now we have an excess of users who believe in Prasthana and anything that does not fit their yardstick is incorrect. Then these users group to downvote the answers, close the question by casting their votes and so on.

Such practices are an infringement of principles of Anti-Trust laws, principles of natural justice.

Use your intellectual faculty and debate!

So let us make this discussion concrete one.

The written rules of this website do not support such biased moderation as is currently carried out by the moderators.

Some might feel rude and offended with a certain answer. But such a subjective perception cannot be a cause for suiting the answers to personal biases.

Since the only fair basis for discussion under this question can be the written rules of this website. Therefore, the moderators should present the written rules of this website to defend their "moderation" activism in defending Vedanta or Brahmins or any other group.

Personal harassment is different from criticizing Yajnik, Ritualist, Purva Mimamsa, Vedanta or Brahmins, Kshatriyas or new cult groups. But groups like these are subject to criticism.

Nowhere does the written rules of this website prohibit such criticism.

The Code of Conduct says,

No bigotry. We don’t tolerate any language likely to offend or alienate people based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion — and those are just a few examples. Use stated pronouns (when known). When in doubt, don't use language that might offend or alienate.

No harassment. This includes, but isn’t limited to bullying, intimidation, vulgar language, direct or indirect threats, sexually suggestive remarks, patterns of inappropriate social contact, and sustained disruptions of discussion.

Criticizing Vedanta is not bigotry. Like any other philosophy, it is subjected to criticism.

Criticising Brahmins is also not bigotry according to definition above. According to the definition above Brahminism is neither a race, nor gender, nor sexual orientation, and nor a religion (that being Hinduism).

All these words are an example of personal characterizations which can be delineated.

On the other hand, Brahmin is a characterization that cannot be delineated as it does not has any external behavioural or physical or religious distinguishing features.

Therefore, the word Brahmin is not a personal characterization.

EDIT 1

My question is different from the question, "The tone of language does matter to the health of our site"

There is ample evidence that many Vedantic moderators and users have used "irrelevant" passages in their questions and answers. Such moderators have been never been "corrected" for the tone of their language. Then why a different yardstick for non-vedantic users!

The question here is not about the tone of the answers but the bias of the moderators who edit well-researched answers and without any personal insinuation against any other user of this website. Such editing is primarily done with an intention to portray Vedanta in good light! This is bias.

  • 1
    Could you present some examples of unfair moderation? – user16581 Nov 30 '19 at 8:25
  • 1
    @Iwillcloseyourquestion Moderators are editing my answer here hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/29751/… as they find it "rude" against Vedanta or Brahmins – user965167 Nov 30 '19 at 8:26
  • 1
    Which rules of this website are moderators not following and which rule did they cross? Which rules of the website are you following? It will be helpful if the question is clear. – Sarvabhouma Nov 30 '19 at 8:34
  • @Sarvabhouma Question is very clear. – user965167 Nov 30 '19 at 8:36
  • 1
    Ok, can we ask the moderator @Pandya to explain why the post was edited? – user16581 Nov 30 '19 at 8:39
  • You are mixing many things here. Criticizing Yagniks, Brahmanism etc., Is not the Motto of the site. Meta is not a place for religious discussions. We are not a discussion forum. That's also made clear in the site's rules. When the question is about menstruation, you are talking about Rama, Krishna and some more irrelevant topics. Just write answers to the point and then we can talk about unfair moderation and bias.. You are inviting religious debates on meta and passing statements to use intellect. Who said we entertain debates here? – Sarvabhouma Nov 30 '19 at 8:43
  • @Iwillcloseyourquestion According to him it is rude against Vedantins and Brahmins. But this is a subjective and personal perception. It reminds me of some people protesting against the depiction of Mohammed and create a ruckus and even using violence! No one on the civilized world accepted such bemoaning. – user965167 Nov 30 '19 at 8:45
  • @Sarvabhouma Cite the rule! – user965167 Nov 30 '19 at 8:45
  • Look what is meta and then post comment. Hinduism Meta is for discussion on Hinduism Stack Exchange and it's policies. Not to criticize a religion. Without knowing this, you posted a debate?! – Sarvabhouma Nov 30 '19 at 8:48
  • Let us wait for his explanation. @Pandya could you explain the reason for your action? – user16581 Nov 30 '19 at 8:49
  • @Sarvabhouma I am discussing the policies of the moderation on Hinduism Stack Exchange. Thus, the question is completely relevant. – user965167 Nov 30 '19 at 8:50
  • I am talking about the other question you posted about Vedanta literature. Was it not a religious debate? Which policy was it discussing? Even in this question, you are making the statement " What might again is that the coterie will vote to close this answer!". Your question was closed before because you were not asking about any policies. It's not bias of any kind. Don't peep into users profile and form an opinion whether they belong to Vedanta, Purva Mimansa or any other kind. Their faith has no business. – Sarvabhouma Nov 30 '19 at 8:54
  • @Sarvabhouma Post the comments to the other question on that other question. I will reply there! Yes, the bias has to be stated. You guys put on hold as off-topic to that question. It is a work of coterie. That question was a fair question. – user965167 Nov 30 '19 at 8:59
  • I am talking about this question only. I am replying to the accusation in this question. I don't engage in religious debates on meta. Read what is on-topic on meta in the help centre. Then we can decide whether it's a fair question or not. – Sarvabhouma Nov 30 '19 at 9:06
  • 1
    Possible duplicate of The tone of language does matter to the health of our site. This site is not the place for pushing your own view and criticizing other sectarians. – Andrew T. Nov 30 '19 at 20:09
5

I would say your answer is deviated from the point of question.

The question is talking about curse and sin. You could simply have answered that According to Vedas, there is no such curse and sin, with citing sources from Vedas. That's all.

Why to start a debate by talking about history and morality of related practices when question is not asking about it? "This is an evil practice", "This is invention of Vedanta", "Priest class and Brahmins corrupted concepts"...... These all points are irrelevant here and lead to debates only. Since the question is not asking how moral or correct the practice is, these discussion is off-topic. Besides, it does look like you're more interested in criticizing rather than answering and when you criticize without any reason, it may be rude or offensive to particular belief-system or philosophy.

You don't believe in Purana or other texts and want to emphasize Vedic concepts to approach the true concepts. This is fine but no need to criticize texts or beliefs especially when question is not asking about it.

  • 1
    Well, if something is an evil practice. It has to be said evil. And is something is not Veda, it has to be told from where does it come. Also, the historical background as to how such evil practices got established has to be given. Every writer has his artistic freedom to craft the answer. I have the right to criticise what I consider is wrong. Harassment is directed against. Criticism of philosophy is well-established concepts in dialectical debates. Your attitude has a stark resemblance with the people who take offence even taking the name of Mohammad! – user965167 Nov 30 '19 at 13:13
  • This reply seems fine. Since I dont know what happened, I have a question - was editing the answer the only option you had, or did you try something else before editing? What does the rule book say about handling such replies? – user16581 Nov 30 '19 at 13:14
  • 1
    I have raised this issue on the main forum as well. Free speech is the most sacred element. I am not going to let it go. meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/391760/… – user965167 Nov 30 '19 at 13:19
  • 1
    meta.stackexchange.com/questions/339427/… Also moderation abuses of Pandya has been reported. – user965167 Nov 30 '19 at 14:13
  • @user965167 I dont think constructive criticism of any god should be suppressed. However, in my opinion, any answer that one gives to a question, must also be a relevant answer. If the constructive criticism is part of a relevant answer, then it should be fine, I guess. So IMO, you only need to show the relevance of your criticism of Rama and Krishna (and vedAnta) in your answer. If that is done, the answer should be fine. – user16581 Nov 30 '19 at 14:41
  • @Iwillcloseyourquestion This is a fair point. In my answer about menstruating women, I have shown that Vedas accord respectable position to women. It is a well-known fact that menstruating women prejudice in South Asia. I showed through my answer that this attitude of prejudice by objectifying women can even be observed in Puranic protagonists like Krishna or Rama. And such practices are not Vedic! – user965167 Nov 30 '19 at 14:44
  • 1
    @user965167 Having said that, I would not edit the answer, without discussing with the member who gave the answer. So I request Pandya to explain if other such options were tried out before editing the answer. Or if the rulebook says differently, I would like to know what is there in it. IMO, editing the answer should be the last option. – user16581 Nov 30 '19 at 14:47
  • 1
    @Iwillcloseyourquestion Editing is only required when the answer specifically targets some other user which is harassment and should be avoided. I am also against such harassment. Beliefs and Gods are subject of dialectical criticism. This is not some fanatic country where we need religious police. – user965167 Nov 30 '19 at 14:51
  • @Iwillcloseyourquestion Check the comments under the answer which was edited. The same answer was copy pasted by this user. It was deleted. Even though it was pointed out, the OP didn't change their answer. Then another user Srimannarayana KV also asked multiple times to remove irrelevant passages from the answer. No response. There was no need to talk about Rama, Krishna and say they went against Veda while talking about menstruation. Much happened before the answer was edited and ample time was given. Then again user rolled back. – Sarvabhouma Dec 1 '19 at 3:48
  • @Sarvabhouma If editing is the last resort, deleting is even more so, given that a significant part of the answer provides references from the Shruti. If an answer is thoroughly irrelevant it can be reported for low quality. If part of it is irrelevant, it can be down voted, if your focus is on the irrelevant portions. – user16581 Dec 1 '19 at 7:07
  • @Iwillcloseyourquestion Downvote is not to be used if there are irrelevant passages. It is to be used when the info given is wrong. Editing should be done if the passages are irrelevant. – Sarvabhouma Dec 1 '19 at 8:06
  • @Sarvabhouma I disagree with you. Down-voting is perfectly fine if there are irrelevant passages. – user16581 Dec 1 '19 at 8:07
  • @Iwillcloseyourquestion I just said according to SE moderation. Not my personal view and what you have to do. Take a tour to know how answer should be. "It's not a discussion forum. No chit-chat". If you want to disagree, then feel free to do so. – Sarvabhouma Dec 1 '19 at 8:11
  • @Sarvabhouma The tour is not comprehensive. I already asked the moderator what the rule book says in cases like this. No response so far. – user16581 Dec 1 '19 at 8:15
  • 4
    The moderator also says the same. That's why he has edited out. It's not like me and you have one rule in this regard and moderator has one. It's a quick guide. If there are portions in the answer which are totally irrelevant to the question, not only moderators, anyone with the privilege can remove them citing the reason. – Sarvabhouma Dec 1 '19 at 8:19
5

This is reflected again and again in the acts of editing answers to fit their own beliefs.

Pandya has explained reason in his answer. Don't deviate from question.

But here is recorded proof of this bias. The coterie is exposed in the "Guidelines for new users answering questions" See point 5. where the coterie has as the yardstick of "Prasthana" to measure the "correctness" of the answer.

Point 5 says "Generally the prasthanatryai (Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita, and Brahma Sutra / Bhagavatam) are used to draw conclusions for questions related soul, life, God, etc." This doesn't mean only Prasthanatrayi should be used for all cases. One needs to quote Samhitas, Brahmanas for Yajna related questions and it is obvious.

Moreover, they are guidelines not rules. This site has users who follow different philosophies, sects and even atheists. There's nothing like "correctness" of an answer. There are only perspectives. Users here should quote a reliable source in their answers. Users are free to agree or disagree with perspective of an answer. Personal opinions are not allowed.

Criticizing Vedanta is not bigotry. Like any other philosophy, it is subjected to criticism.

Criticising Brahmins is also not bigotry according to definition above.

The purpose of site is not just to criticize philosophies. This is Q&A site not a forum to discuss or debate. Comments are used to ask for clarification on, suggest corrections to, and provide meta-information about posts. Debates are not encouraged in comments. All important points in answer should be cited with sources. Mods may remove opinionated, unsourced and irrelevant content in answers.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .