From: fayegh@cs.ubc.ca (David Fayegh)
Subject: Lets start yet once again (was: Re: For Babak wuz Re:...) 
Keywords: scitiquette :-) 
Organization: Computer Science, University of B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 12:04:40 GMT

sehari@iastate.edu (Babak Sehari) writes:

This is going to be so difficult for me to do ... but hey the long weekend
is coming and I have only a few hundred lines of code to churn out :-)

First, I would like to say that this article is not meant as a flame of any
sort to anybody involved in the old subject line which, bA ejAzeh, I 
have changed to perhaps reduce some of the tension.  Anyway, if you are
expecting to be humoured by obsanities, ridicule, or absurdities, then
I recommend that you stop reading now and quickly press the (n) or (j) or
even better, (k) key (i.e., if you are using "rn" to read news) :-).

...
>       Where were you, when I was getting flamed right and left because
>I had the courage to break the norm in SCI and attack this group last year.

I was right here ... To be honest with you bAbak, the reason that you got 
flamed was *not* due to the "courage" you displayed in `attacking' this
newsgroup as you write above. In my view, it was mostly (not always) 
due to the fact that when you and others
(independent of who they may have been or what their attitued, tone, etc.) you
often resorted to _very_ rude remarks,  which often lead to drawn-out
ascii fist-fights to put it mildly.  Often times, you dealt a _much_ 
heavier blow than was dealt to you. Not just an "eye-for-an-eye", it was,
in my view, "an eye-for-a-slap-on-the-face" or whatever. 

I want to be your friend.  In some ways, I really like you. I want to help
you with this communication problem that you seem to be having with many
in the past and at the present (including one episode with myself if you
recall :-)) Of course, this is not a fault-finding or self-justifying
mission; for the semi-flame war that me and you personally had, I am 
to be blamed to a certain extent as well, perhaps more than you perhaps
less ... who knows ... the past is past and no point in re-hashing old 
flames. The only positive aspect of that episode was that we never resorted
to name-calling. I give us both equal credit for that.

>As I recall, you were one of these who flaming me because I have dared to
>oppose mojaheadine last year!  You and your Bahhie's group back in the
>California.  Let me tell you something, I wrote my observations and experience
>on, what your bahhie gang are doing with normal Iranians, like me,  back in the
>California.  The psychological tortures, the negative campaigns, your
>conspiracy against normal people's, jobs, school, and social life. It is being
>published.

BAbak, would you please elaborate on the above, point by point, (and even
better, could you re-produce some of the "obeservations and experineces"
that you wrote) as I am at a _complete_ loss here. Having read most of your 
posts, I simply can not make any connection between what you have written 
in the past and what you have stated above. I am really sorry ... but I 
am honestly trying to understand you and I sadly can not with the 
exception of the last sentences: "It is being published." 
What is being published? Please help ... remember, I want to be your friend.
I want to understand you and help you understand. 
  
>No, you can not silence me with any of the methods mentioned above.

(a) Who is trying to silence you? I personally want you to continue to
participate in this forum  in an open-minded and non-hostile manner.
I greatly appreciate your Headline News posts (although, I wish you
would clean them up a bit please i.e., editing out the repeating Headlines)

(b) Which methods?

>I write not because I would like to run for an office, or become a political
>leader. 

What is the relevance of the above in the context of what you have written
so far? Unfortunately, I am at a loss again.

>If I would have liked to do any of that I should have wrote more
>conservatively.  

Independent of whether you are going to "become a political leader", you
may want to consider writting a lot less conservatively than you write
now and a bit more _politely_ and coherently. 

>My writing is to inform people, to express my views even
>if it anger many people.  

Its not necessarily your views that angers people, but rather, 
your hostile tone and extremely rude `vaselin' obsanities that are 
at the root of the problem.  Why do you consistently resort
to that none-sense in response to relatively mild (although perhaps 
prolonged and extremely sarcastic) insults? Why not use _at most_ as
much sarcasm and insult? Considering that many may not have seen their
mAdars and khAhars for many many years, I am sure that you can imagine
how they must feel about your vaselin insults can't you?

>After all, the one who dares to tell a mother your
>son is an alcoholic, should not expect that the mother to prize him, if not
>being insulted himself.   

Why not? My mother would, seriously, she would reward you if you
informed her that one of her children is an alcoholic. 
So would most other mothers that I have known.

>Yes, the one who tells his friends his faults, should
>not expect to be praised for it.  

Now this is different than the above case. Consider me your friend for
pointing out your faults ... I don't mean to hurt you in any way shape
or form and I don not expect to be praised for it either. I just want
to see you use kinder words  and expressions and be perhaps a bit more 
thorough and clear in making your points without `attacking' individuals
or groups of individuals for no apparent reason.

>Never the less, It would be stupid, if I do
>not defend myself.  

If you don't "attack" people, then you won't have to "defend" yourself
as often. If you are attacked by others, then be at least as polite or
simply ignore them.

Please refrain from posting provocative and obscene articles.
I am certain that you have very good intentions, but the way you expressed
your ideas, leaves one the impression of an "attack" which often leads to
a superficial and fruitless exchange.

Lets share ideas ... sure ... but also lets learn how to agree to disagree
and just leave it at that  ... no need for jars of vaselin or ridicule of
any kind. 

>Even in this country, which is free, history shows that
>journalists who dare to take on the government or the society have gone through
>huge pain.  

First, I do not consider the U.S. a "free" country. I can say that in 
certain respects the people in the U.S. are relatively more `free' than,
say, the people in Iraq. Second, one's freedom ends when some other's freedom
starts (remember ta'lymAt-e ejtemA'ee?)

>Ed Morrow is a classical example.  

I don't know anything about him. What are his accomplishments?

>Yes, I have been ridiculed,
>flamed, insulted on this net by people of your gang for my writing. 

I don't understnd the "people of your gang" consipiracy theory of yours. 
But I do agree that you have often been
ridiculed, flamed, and insulted on the net, sometimes without any
direct provocation. Its partly due to the bad impression that you have made 
with your vaselin insults involving other's mothers and sisters. 

Aref took the initiative and even apologized to you on the net ...
I have not yet read you post an apology note. How about it? Its long
overdue in my view.

>I still
>have the articles in which I have been insulted on this net because
>I oppose hemosextuality, because I tried to protect entire Iran from breaking
>apart, because I oppose that Iranian women to be deceived and being taken
>advantage of.  Yes, I use harsh words; However, harsh words are called for to
>express the extend of damage which might be caused by this ill deeds.  Like a
>bitter drag, which is needed to cure a patient. 

How did you try to "protect entire Iran from breaking apart"? By posting
a few articles to soc.culture.iranian from Iowa?  Based on my analysis of 
the opinions of those who post articles to this newsgroup, most don't
want to see Iran break apart. But then again, thats my analysis and is
necessarily biased since I don't want to see Iran break apart.

The main problem with your style of writing is due to your 
use of _extremely_ rude remarks irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

Hamvatan-e geramee va arjomand, khAheshmandam ke-h molAyemtar va moaddabAneh 
tar bA hamvatnAn-e khod mokAtebeh befarm'eed.

So, lets forgive and forget and start all over again :-)

>      With highest regards for all protectors of Iran.
>                    Babak   Sehari.

Regards, --df