Posted by Lou Pilder on November 5, 2004, at 11:03:50
In reply to Acceptability of posts, posted by coral on November 5, 2004, at 10:46:33
Thw aspect of this thread is strted with something like,[... no post is acceptable untill Dr. Hsiung has said that it is acceptable. That is not what {I} am saying.
I am saying that if a statement that has been requested to Dr. Hsiung for a determination as to its acceptability, or not, in relation to the guidlines of the forum reaims undertermineduntill Dr. Hsiung writes that it is acceptable or not acceptable. Dr. Hsing wrote to one of my requests that the statement that he had on the faith board by Jean Rouessaeu, wsa rightfully objected by me and he modified the faith board as a response to my request for a determination. Dr. Hsiung has also replied that a post , in his thinking, is acceptable. Either way, there havebeen determinations as to both posts being acceptable or not.
Now posts that do not have a request for a determination are different, and those are not the posts that are the subject of this discussion by me, but if one was to ask me if the posts that have no reuqests for a determionations are automaticcaly acceptable, I would answere that it is my opinion that those type of posts are {undetermined}and not necesarrily to be accepted to be acceptable. There could be IMO other reasons why people do not request that a post be determined to be acceptable or not.One reason, IMO, may be that they want the post to stay unaddressed because they want what the post says to be incorperated in the guidlines of the forum. Another reason, IMO, could be a political reason or, IMO, a reason not to request a determination as to fear, of some sort, if they request the determination.
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:412090
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041027/msgs/412105.html