Celebrity Courts and Kangaroo Justice
Farzana Versey April 18, 2006
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#98 Posted by FarzanaVersey on April 22, 2006 6:25:24 am
Forget about deserving a response from you, I do not care. You are trying to be far too smart....when you have nothing to say you suddenly remember a post and twist it to fit into your little Red Riding Hood act.
[I find it extraordinary that professional editors call critical readership ``filth`` and ``that they should go back to where they belong``, for disagreeing with them.]
WRONG...and here is the evidence.
#84 by Saminasha
Re: # 83
Editor in Chief,
Kindly remind your lapdogs Zeena and Chuhan to ``stick to the subject``.
In response to that:
#85 by FarzanaVersey
Re: # 84:
1. Leave your filthy ideas and language to where they and you belong.
Now, learn to see the wood for the wood and the trees for the trees. But if you try and muck up the board anymore, it will not be tolerated. You are incapable of a dialogue, whereas my responses to others here and elsewhere prove that I am.
[I find it extraordinary that professional editors call critical readership ``filth`` and ``that they should go back to where they belong``, for disagreeing with them.]
WRONG...and here is the evidence.
#84 by Saminasha
Re: # 83
Editor in Chief,
Kindly remind your lapdogs Zeena and Chuhan to ``stick to the subject``.
In response to that:
#85 by FarzanaVersey
Re: # 84:
1. Leave your filthy ideas and language to where they and you belong.
Now, learn to see the wood for the wood and the trees for the trees. But if you try and muck up the board anymore, it will not be tolerated. You are incapable of a dialogue, whereas my responses to others here and elsewhere prove that I am.
#97 Posted by FarzanaVersey on April 22, 2006 6:09:20 am
#93 by zeemax:
[Yes it does seem that the Indian justice sytem has been unusually harsh on Salman Khan. I don`t see any Hindu/Muslim thing here since they did the same to Sanjay Dutt. I think setting an `example` of celebrity `guinea pigs` from time to time is the correct analysis of the mindset to claim the fairness of the system, whether it actually is or not.]
I would not support Salman for murder (an accident does not qualify and has different standards. Puru, the late actor Raaj Kumar`s son ran his car over six people and he was let off on a bail of Rs. 500); but in this particular case I think the idea of guinea pig is being given a new twist, because the `heroes` are poor tribals.
Tiger Watch, an NGO, has made a film where it has got the version from the poachers for the killing of 25 tigers (on last count there were 26) in the Ranthamboe National Park.
Who are these poachers? Not the rich and famous. They belong to the Mogya nomadic tribe; they have been classified by the police as criminals, although they are in charge of driving away crop-destroying animals.
Does this become a topic of discussion? No.
[I also think the Indian beurocracy has a latent and deep seated hatred of the wealthy and priviliged. I sensed it many times while there. Is that correct or am I imagining things?]
I am afraid, it is true and it applies to most government servants even at the lowest level of the hierarchy.e.g. at airports, if you try to send a speed-post, the man will look you up and try and place you; at an empty counter I had to wait for ten minutes for the man to accept my letter and then another 10 minutes to weigh it, stamp it and give me a receipt.
Peons at government offices treat you like scum and are extremely rude; even if a bribe is expected, it is seen as a right.
An acquaintance who had moved to India to set up a factory (he was among the richest Indians) finally gave up after a few years due to the high-handedness of the bureaucracy.
I assume this goes for most of the subcontinent.
[Yes it does seem that the Indian justice sytem has been unusually harsh on Salman Khan. I don`t see any Hindu/Muslim thing here since they did the same to Sanjay Dutt. I think setting an `example` of celebrity `guinea pigs` from time to time is the correct analysis of the mindset to claim the fairness of the system, whether it actually is or not.]
I would not support Salman for murder (an accident does not qualify and has different standards. Puru, the late actor Raaj Kumar`s son ran his car over six people and he was let off on a bail of Rs. 500); but in this particular case I think the idea of guinea pig is being given a new twist, because the `heroes` are poor tribals.
Tiger Watch, an NGO, has made a film where it has got the version from the poachers for the killing of 25 tigers (on last count there were 26) in the Ranthamboe National Park.
Who are these poachers? Not the rich and famous. They belong to the Mogya nomadic tribe; they have been classified by the police as criminals, although they are in charge of driving away crop-destroying animals.
Does this become a topic of discussion? No.
[I also think the Indian beurocracy has a latent and deep seated hatred of the wealthy and priviliged. I sensed it many times while there. Is that correct or am I imagining things?]
I am afraid, it is true and it applies to most government servants even at the lowest level of the hierarchy.e.g. at airports, if you try to send a speed-post, the man will look you up and try and place you; at an empty counter I had to wait for ten minutes for the man to accept my letter and then another 10 minutes to weigh it, stamp it and give me a receipt.
Peons at government offices treat you like scum and are extremely rude; even if a bribe is expected, it is seen as a right.
An acquaintance who had moved to India to set up a factory (he was among the richest Indians) finally gave up after a few years due to the high-handedness of the bureaucracy.
I assume this goes for most of the subcontinent.
#96 Posted by Saminasha on April 22, 2006 5:55:20 am
Miss Versey,
I find it extraordinary that professional editors call critical readership ``filth`` and ``that they should go back to where they belong``, for disagreeing with them. It is so extraordinary to me, that in my opinion, you dont deserve a response until an apology is in the offing.
I find it extraordinary that professional editors call critical readership ``filth`` and ``that they should go back to where they belong``, for disagreeing with them. It is so extraordinary to me, that in my opinion, you dont deserve a response until an apology is in the offing.
#95 Posted by FarzanaVersey on April 22, 2006 5:14:31 am
Re: # 86:
[1. My usage of ``lapdog`` was not meant in a derogatory manner; it is an American phrase that denotes slavish devotion. Nothing more. I have never referred to you in a sexually derogatory manner, nor will I ever have to. I am actually offended that you would think that I would stoop to such a level.]
I find it interesting that while the tone of the post here is tempered, this `lapdog` business is being milked for all it is supposedly worth elsewhere.
I happen to know what the word means and connotes, having used it several times in my articles. Even if one were to accept that there were no sexual overtones (which I anyway did not imagine), it is still an extremely childish way of interacting. This is not the first time such an `accusation` has been made. This has been a constant, not surprisingly after I became editor.
For someone who has written over a 100 pieces here and been at the receiving end of the vilest abuse -- without provocation -- I know better than to need or invite slavish devotion. You would not dare to say this to some of the other few interactors who have openly supported me, my writing and my new role only because a)they are too well-respected here; b)they do not have a history of fights with you elsewhere.
[2. Out of respect to you and your board, I have tried to keep my comments limited to the construction of this featured piece. I have purposefully refused to engage with Zeena, Arjun and Chuhan for those reasons.]
No. You have 17 posts thus far; in eight you have engaged with these individuals; three replies could qualify as being on the subject. The rest have been irrelevant or the current arguments.
[4. Of course I am not the moderator of this board...but I am not your whipping girl either. So why am I always singled out for your focus is extraordinary.]
I know some people would call others whiners for saying something similar. You are ignored most of the time; this time round you have been singled out because you took it upon yourself to silence those who were saying something that was not even abusive towards you. You are the one who tends to behave in this unbecoming fashion on every board.
[5. I could only respond to the construction of the piece. To me, that was where I could offer constructive feedback that hadn`t been covered before. The content of this piece has some potential.]
The first one was #12: ````Very negatively written piece- the tone and language (i.e. crap, etc) does little to improve the thesis.`` The next one on the subject was # 59. These were two of the `constructive criticism` posts; of which one was to inform that since another interactor had dealt with content, there is no point repeating it.
All the posts here were to do with such repetitions and mostly unflattering; they were not wiped clean.
[6. Zeena and Chuhan agree with you no matter what you write. If their opinions are more useful and instructive to you than mine, by all means, I will abstain from visiting your boards.]
I would appreciate it if you used the names/nics people use on Chowk in your FP interacts and not the twisted versions you have for one another elsewhere; this applies to everyone.
If indeed they do agree with me, then why do you have a problem with that? Don’t you have your favourites? Don’t I have mine? Every opinion that deals with the subject is important enough for some reason or the other. I find it extremely juvenile that there has got to be an either/or. I do not have a choice as to who responds and I do not want that choice. As always, I do not reply to posts that are abusive or unnecessarily baiting. And I do not rubbish people only due to their not-so-savvy manner of expression.
Furthermore, wrt appreciation/agreement, do you become Arundhati Roy’s lapdog? Would I call # 92 your lapdog for what he has said (ah, and there was a time you had even accused him of being my `friend`, only because he got published on FP!)? There are some typical desi males here who like to play this woman vs. woman game.
I don’t find this amusing or elevating in any way. Unlike you who have earlier responded to threads titled `catfight`, I treat this sort of voyeurism with the disdain it deserves.
This is my last post on this argument.
Best wishes...
- - -
Zeena:
I retained one of your posts on the subject because, as you reminded me, I gave someone else (and myself) that opportunity. That post should be clear enough; it is pointless repeating.
- - -
I understand that the last leg of the discussion has completely gone against Chowk guidelines and accept my part in it, but the only reason was that I had to finally confront the matter head-on.
Should anyone find this a misuse of privilege, do let me know. The posts (including mine) will be removed.
[1. My usage of ``lapdog`` was not meant in a derogatory manner; it is an American phrase that denotes slavish devotion. Nothing more. I have never referred to you in a sexually derogatory manner, nor will I ever have to. I am actually offended that you would think that I would stoop to such a level.]
I find it interesting that while the tone of the post here is tempered, this `lapdog` business is being milked for all it is supposedly worth elsewhere.
I happen to know what the word means and connotes, having used it several times in my articles. Even if one were to accept that there were no sexual overtones (which I anyway did not imagine), it is still an extremely childish way of interacting. This is not the first time such an `accusation` has been made. This has been a constant, not surprisingly after I became editor.
For someone who has written over a 100 pieces here and been at the receiving end of the vilest abuse -- without provocation -- I know better than to need or invite slavish devotion. You would not dare to say this to some of the other few interactors who have openly supported me, my writing and my new role only because a)they are too well-respected here; b)they do not have a history of fights with you elsewhere.
[2. Out of respect to you and your board, I have tried to keep my comments limited to the construction of this featured piece. I have purposefully refused to engage with Zeena, Arjun and Chuhan for those reasons.]
No. You have 17 posts thus far; in eight you have engaged with these individuals; three replies could qualify as being on the subject. The rest have been irrelevant or the current arguments.
[4. Of course I am not the moderator of this board...but I am not your whipping girl either. So why am I always singled out for your focus is extraordinary.]
I know some people would call others whiners for saying something similar. You are ignored most of the time; this time round you have been singled out because you took it upon yourself to silence those who were saying something that was not even abusive towards you. You are the one who tends to behave in this unbecoming fashion on every board.
[5. I could only respond to the construction of the piece. To me, that was where I could offer constructive feedback that hadn`t been covered before. The content of this piece has some potential.]
The first one was #12: ````Very negatively written piece- the tone and language (i.e. crap, etc) does little to improve the thesis.`` The next one on the subject was # 59. These were two of the `constructive criticism` posts; of which one was to inform that since another interactor had dealt with content, there is no point repeating it.
All the posts here were to do with such repetitions and mostly unflattering; they were not wiped clean.
[6. Zeena and Chuhan agree with you no matter what you write. If their opinions are more useful and instructive to you than mine, by all means, I will abstain from visiting your boards.]
I would appreciate it if you used the names/nics people use on Chowk in your FP interacts and not the twisted versions you have for one another elsewhere; this applies to everyone.
If indeed they do agree with me, then why do you have a problem with that? Don’t you have your favourites? Don’t I have mine? Every opinion that deals with the subject is important enough for some reason or the other. I find it extremely juvenile that there has got to be an either/or. I do not have a choice as to who responds and I do not want that choice. As always, I do not reply to posts that are abusive or unnecessarily baiting. And I do not rubbish people only due to their not-so-savvy manner of expression.
Furthermore, wrt appreciation/agreement, do you become Arundhati Roy’s lapdog? Would I call # 92 your lapdog for what he has said (ah, and there was a time you had even accused him of being my `friend`, only because he got published on FP!)? There are some typical desi males here who like to play this woman vs. woman game.
I don’t find this amusing or elevating in any way. Unlike you who have earlier responded to threads titled `catfight`, I treat this sort of voyeurism with the disdain it deserves.
This is my last post on this argument.
Best wishes...
- - -
Zeena:
I retained one of your posts on the subject because, as you reminded me, I gave someone else (and myself) that opportunity. That post should be clear enough; it is pointless repeating.
- - -
I understand that the last leg of the discussion has completely gone against Chowk guidelines and accept my part in it, but the only reason was that I had to finally confront the matter head-on.
Should anyone find this a misuse of privilege, do let me know. The posts (including mine) will be removed.
#94 Posted by zeemax on April 22, 2006 4:04:02 am
#89 by Zeena
Zeena Bhabi .. yaar you complain too much. I`m sorry but I have to say this. So what if saminasha is acerbic from time to time? That is her, and we can respect that. She`s a fellow chowkie and we all have our little quirks, don`t we?
Thanks
Zeena Bhabi .. yaar you complain too much. I`m sorry but I have to say this. So what if saminasha is acerbic from time to time? That is her, and we can respect that. She`s a fellow chowkie and we all have our little quirks, don`t we?
Thanks
#93 Posted by zeemax on April 22, 2006 3:49:30 am
FV,
The celebrity as prey ... The problem is the high moral ground being adopted. It will set an example,” they say. Are guinea pigs the solution? If the System has the nerve, then it ought to flex its muscles on a regular basis.
Yes it does seem that the Indian justice sytem has been unusually harsh on Salman Khan. I don`t see any Hindu/Muslim thing here since they did the same to Sanjay Dutt. I think setting an `example` of celebrity `guinea pigs` from time to time is the correct analysis of the mindset to claim the fairness of the system, whether it actually is or not.
I also think the Indian beurocracy has a latent and deep seated hatred of the wealthy and priviliged. I sensed it many times while there. Is that correct or am I imagining things?
P.S. I really regret the squabble on this board. FV wrote a perfectly fine and honest piece worthy of meaningful discussion. Why did saminasha derail it? When someone says ``Tread carefully, for they have left the ground slippery…``, why do images of someone urinating on the floor appear as the first thought? Perhaps saminasha should be invited back to explain.
The celebrity as prey ... The problem is the high moral ground being adopted. It will set an example,” they say. Are guinea pigs the solution? If the System has the nerve, then it ought to flex its muscles on a regular basis.
Yes it does seem that the Indian justice sytem has been unusually harsh on Salman Khan. I don`t see any Hindu/Muslim thing here since they did the same to Sanjay Dutt. I think setting an `example` of celebrity `guinea pigs` from time to time is the correct analysis of the mindset to claim the fairness of the system, whether it actually is or not.
I also think the Indian beurocracy has a latent and deep seated hatred of the wealthy and priviliged. I sensed it many times while there. Is that correct or am I imagining things?
P.S. I really regret the squabble on this board. FV wrote a perfectly fine and honest piece worthy of meaningful discussion. Why did saminasha derail it? When someone says ``Tread carefully, for they have left the ground slippery…``, why do images of someone urinating on the floor appear as the first thought? Perhaps saminasha should be invited back to explain.
#92 Posted by hamzaad on April 22, 2006 12:17:07 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#91 Posted by Zeena on April 21, 2006 11:17:34 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#90 Posted by Zeena on April 21, 2006 10:49:16 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#89 Posted by Zeena on April 21, 2006 10:36:41 pm
Dear Chief Editor
With all due respect, I have been very relevant and disciplined interactor on front page. This interactor, Saminasha is abusing me by personally attacking me with abusive and lowlying street slangs and trying her best to destroy this thread and all the front page threads . I apologize for being tangential here . But, some shameless interactors need some dose to make them realise who they are and what their slangs depict.
Please, I request you not to delete this thread. As you have not deleted Saminasha`s abusive threads towards me, where she clearly personally attacked me .
Saminasha
Show me one IRRELEVANT post by me on front page`s any article , if you do . I PROMISE you I will quit CHOWK with shame and leave the battle field for you to fight your battles.I am serious................................
If you will fail to show me any irrelevant post , then you owe me an APOLOGY for 2 things.
1:- For calling me lapdog( which is a lowlying street slang to humiliate anyone to hurt their feelings).........
2:- For Not speaking the truth that I post irrelevant posts on front page.
Yes, I do admit this post is irrelevant but, I already apologize to FV for posting this irrelevant post.
{{{{{#84 by Saminasha on April 21, 2006 12:54pm PT
Re: # 83
Editor in Chief,
Kindly remind your lapdogs Zeena and Chuhan to ``stick to the subject``. The discussion of feminism as a whole is not relevant to the weak analogy comparing media outlets to ``nautch girls``. Also, as moderator of the board, please note that I have SEVERAL times reminded interactors like arjun, dilli and zeena to take their tangents elsewhere. Why you have chosen to ignore this and try to scold me is apparent to all. }}}
Saminasha
1:-Kindly refrain from using lowlying street slangs on front page. I will not disrespect this thread, front page and chief editor , no matter what your twisted mind tries to twist this thread in to. B/c my brought up is absolutely different than your`s. These street slangs depict your personality and this is more transparency where you come from.
If you love to be lapdog or lap (whatever) of anyone be my guest. Actually, street slangs like this suit your shameless personality more than anyone else. So, keep them for you , exclusively.
2:- Prove it right now, where did I use irrelevant post on any thread on front page?
You are lying with NO reason, no logic...............I am being gentle with you and you are taking advantage of my politeness. Which of my post was IRRELEVANT?
3:- Kindly, do not put me in the same line as Salim, Dilli or arjun. I am a different person. I don`t fight my battles on someone else`s backs.
4:- Your jealousy for not being editor in chief is getting out of control.....please, control that.It will kill you.
Thank you
With all due respect, I have been very relevant and disciplined interactor on front page. This interactor, Saminasha is abusing me by personally attacking me with abusive and lowlying street slangs and trying her best to destroy this thread and all the front page threads . I apologize for being tangential here . But, some shameless interactors need some dose to make them realise who they are and what their slangs depict.
Please, I request you not to delete this thread. As you have not deleted Saminasha`s abusive threads towards me, where she clearly personally attacked me .
Saminasha
Show me one IRRELEVANT post by me on front page`s any article , if you do . I PROMISE you I will quit CHOWK with shame and leave the battle field for you to fight your battles.I am serious................................
If you will fail to show me any irrelevant post , then you owe me an APOLOGY for 2 things.
1:- For calling me lapdog( which is a lowlying street slang to humiliate anyone to hurt their feelings).........
2:- For Not speaking the truth that I post irrelevant posts on front page.
Yes, I do admit this post is irrelevant but, I already apologize to FV for posting this irrelevant post.
{{{{{#84 by Saminasha on April 21, 2006 12:54pm PT
Re: # 83
Editor in Chief,
Kindly remind your lapdogs Zeena and Chuhan to ``stick to the subject``. The discussion of feminism as a whole is not relevant to the weak analogy comparing media outlets to ``nautch girls``. Also, as moderator of the board, please note that I have SEVERAL times reminded interactors like arjun, dilli and zeena to take their tangents elsewhere. Why you have chosen to ignore this and try to scold me is apparent to all. }}}
Saminasha
1:-Kindly refrain from using lowlying street slangs on front page. I will not disrespect this thread, front page and chief editor , no matter what your twisted mind tries to twist this thread in to. B/c my brought up is absolutely different than your`s. These street slangs depict your personality and this is more transparency where you come from.
If you love to be lapdog or lap (whatever) of anyone be my guest. Actually, street slangs like this suit your shameless personality more than anyone else. So, keep them for you , exclusively.
2:- Prove it right now, where did I use irrelevant post on any thread on front page?
You are lying with NO reason, no logic...............I am being gentle with you and you are taking advantage of my politeness. Which of my post was IRRELEVANT?
3:- Kindly, do not put me in the same line as Salim, Dilli or arjun. I am a different person. I don`t fight my battles on someone else`s backs.
4:- Your jealousy for not being editor in chief is getting out of control.....please, control that.It will kill you.
Thank you
#88 Posted by khamkhwa. on April 21, 2006 9:03:57 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#87 Posted by Saminasha on April 21, 2006 1:46:32 pm
Main Entry: lap·dog
Pronunciation: -``dog
Function: noun
1 : a small dog that may be held in the lap
2 : a servile dependent or follower
-Merriam Online Dictionary
Pronunciation: -``dog
Function: noun
1 : a small dog that may be held in the lap
2 : a servile dependent or follower
-Merriam Online Dictionary
#86 Posted by Saminasha on April 21, 2006 1:44:10 pm
Re: # 85
Editor in Chief,
1. My usage of ``lapdog`` was not meant in a derogatory manner; it is an American phrase that denotes slavish devotion. Nothing more. I have never referred to you in a sexually derogatory manner, nor will I ever have to. I am actually offended that you would think that I would stoop to such a level.
2. Out of respect to you and your board, I have tried to keep my comments limited to the construction of this featured piece. I have purposefully refused to engage with Zeena, Arjun and Chuhan for those reasons.
4. Of course I am not the moderator of this board...but I am not your whipping girl either. So why I am always singled out for your focus is extraordinary.
5. I could only respond to the construction of the piece. To me, that was where I could offer constructive feedback that hadnt been covered before. The content of this piece has some potential.
6. Zeena and Chuhan agree with you no matter what you write. If their opinions are more useful and instructive to you than mine, by all means, I will abstain from visiting your boards.
Editor in Chief,
1. My usage of ``lapdog`` was not meant in a derogatory manner; it is an American phrase that denotes slavish devotion. Nothing more. I have never referred to you in a sexually derogatory manner, nor will I ever have to. I am actually offended that you would think that I would stoop to such a level.
2. Out of respect to you and your board, I have tried to keep my comments limited to the construction of this featured piece. I have purposefully refused to engage with Zeena, Arjun and Chuhan for those reasons.
4. Of course I am not the moderator of this board...but I am not your whipping girl either. So why I am always singled out for your focus is extraordinary.
5. I could only respond to the construction of the piece. To me, that was where I could offer constructive feedback that hadnt been covered before. The content of this piece has some potential.
6. Zeena and Chuhan agree with you no matter what you write. If their opinions are more useful and instructive to you than mine, by all means, I will abstain from visiting your boards.
#85 Posted by FarzanaVersey on April 21, 2006 1:22:48 pm
Re: # 84:
1. Leave your filthy ideas and language to where they and you belong.
2. You started the nautch girl analogy discussion; you wer not stopped.
3. Re. the weak analogy, if you have an opinion do submit it as an article in the online form, i.e. if you have an opinion and not just a reaction. And of course If you have the time!
4. You are NOT the moderator of this or any board.
5. You asking others to take tangential topics elsewhere is precious irony, since you have left no board untouched by your puerile attempts. On this board itself your first post was a one-liner and you left content to others...
6. What is apparent to all except you is that it is possible to have differing points of view and there is no need to get into a tizzy over the few times someone does agree with me.
7. There has been no abuse by these posters on this board.
1. Leave your filthy ideas and language to where they and you belong.
2. You started the nautch girl analogy discussion; you wer not stopped.
3. Re. the weak analogy, if you have an opinion do submit it as an article in the online form, i.e. if you have an opinion and not just a reaction. And of course If you have the time!
4. You are NOT the moderator of this or any board.
5. You asking others to take tangential topics elsewhere is precious irony, since you have left no board untouched by your puerile attempts. On this board itself your first post was a one-liner and you left content to others...
6. What is apparent to all except you is that it is possible to have differing points of view and there is no need to get into a tizzy over the few times someone does agree with me.
7. There has been no abuse by these posters on this board.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- ibaunited: a very famous marlboro... Spare Us The Smoke,
- MatloobZaman: Re: # 5 I am... Honor Killings in Babakot
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 64 I... US Commando Strike in
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 64 I... US Commando Strike in
- nkg: Re: # 62 Ahmed... You should... US Commando Strike in
- nkg: Re: # 59 ahmed... Yes sir,... US Commando Strike in
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 61 Major... US Commando Strike in
- MatloobZaman: Re: # 39 by... There is no ‘honour’
