changes to BurmaNet (r)

[mnyunt@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Dear all,

Well done and good comments. Thanks for your time.

With faith 

Thun Thun

>From khtut@xxxxxxxx Sat Oct 24 11:24:46 1998
>Received: from default (oit-ts2-24.iusb.edu [149.161.7.234]) by 
mail.iusb.edu (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA14171; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 
13:24:28 -0500
>Message-ID: <001001bdff7a$c9b642e0$ea07a195@default>
>From: "Kyaw K. Htut" <khtut@xxxxxxxx>
>To: "Kyaw Z Ya" <kzy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Soe Than" 
<c04061998@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Cc: "Ko Thi Ha" <NAINGLUU@xxxxxxx>, "Burmanet-L" 
<burmanet-l@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
>        <strider@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Than Soe" <tsoe@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
>        <shway-ba@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Daw Khin Ni Ni Thein" <nin@xxxxxx>,
>        "Ko Aye Min" <absdf102@xxxxxxxxx>,
>        "Ko Richard Aung Myint" <RAMyint@xxxxxxx>,
>        "Ko Soe Lwin" <eyar@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>        "Ma Aye Aye Soe Win" <ShweZthar@xxxxxxx>,
>        "Ma. Yuzana Khin" <yuzana@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <hag2@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: changes to BurmaNet
>Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:18:58 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>	charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Priority: 3
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
>
>Dear Ko Kyaw Zay Ya,
>
>These people own this revolutionary means,which might be funded by 
private
>organizations or a government.
>They have the right to make this decision.
>I, for one, oppose Burmanet's new policy.
>It repesents an evil capitalist attitude.  (I delcare here firmly that 
I am
>not a communist.)
>I will remember this action throughout my life.
>I will fight it in Burma, not here.
>The war has begun.
>I am not a quiter but I have aleady I unsubscribed Burmanet for I can't
>stand the
>editor's tone which carries the ideas that are against my beliefs.  I 
think
>Burmanet group feels that we(=all open-minded people using rude 
languages)
>"hijacked" their INFO-BUS WHICH CARRIES THEM TO THEIR POLITICAL 
DESTINATIONS
>UNDER THEIR OWN CONTROL.  Down with this evil attitude!
>I subscribed to Burmanet not for news and info but for views and 
opinions of
>all people.  Now opposing views and opinions are subject to censorship.  
We
>have our own means and access to real news and information and need not 
to
>fill our mailboxes with "copy and paste news" carried by Burmanet.  So 
the
>story ends here.  Let Okkar lead the Burmanet.  Without Okkar, it seems 
to
>me that Burmanet is a dead body.  Burmanet, that's why, kicked others 
but
>keeps Okkar who makes Burmanet appear as an active media.  We know what
>kinds of respones people write to Okkar.  All empty ones that can't be
>pursued by anyone.
>Some people brought up the real stuffs which hurt some sponsors of this
>Burmanet.  Now they got to 'really act.'  Simple analysis from me.  I 
must
>stop here because I can go on and on and on...
>
>Let them manipulate the information as they want because this means of
>communication is in their hand and they have
>$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
>But truth is our weapon.
>Don't waste your time.
>It is not worth talking TO these hypocrites.
>We are of a new generation.  We have time to handle this in our own 
way.
>Let them do it.
>It is both a challenge and an insult to our ideologies.
>Down with everyone who participated in making this new decision.
>
>With revolutionary faith,
>
>
>Kyaw Kyaw Htut
>Indiana
>
>**************************************
>Doing what you like is freedom.
>Liking what you do is happiness.
>***********Read Somewhere  in India***********
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kyaw Z Ya <kzy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: Soe Than <c04061998@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Cc: Burmanet-L <burmanet-l@xxxxxxxxxxx>; strider@xxxxxxxxxxx
><strider@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Kyaw Kyaw Htut <khtut@xxxxxxxx>; Than Soe
><tsoe@xxxxxxxxxxx>; shway-ba@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <shway-ba@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
Daw
>Khin Ni Ni Thein <nin@xxxxxx>; Ko Aye Min <absdf102@xxxxxxxxx>; Ko 
Richard
>Aung Myint <RAMyint@xxxxxxx>; Ko Soe Lwin <eyar@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Ma Aye 
Aye
>Soe Win <ShweZthar@xxxxxxx>; Ma. Yuzana Khin <yuzana@xxxxxxxxxxxx>;
>hag2@xxxxxxxxxxx <hag2@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Date: Saturday, October 24, 1998 6:20 AM
>Subject: Re: changes to BurmaNet
>
>
>>Dear Burmanet editor,
>> I am not criticizing you but your policy.  How will you specify
>>the personal attacks and how will you censor or monitor the e-mails
>>specifically?  You should specify the detail definition of personal
>>attacks and post it before applying censorship. That will make sense 
if
>>you apply these specifications to all people including democracy 
groups
>>messages against Ne Win, Khin Nyunt, and SPDC members, SPDC or Ko 
Okkar's
>>messages against Daw Aung Sun Suu Kyi, and our messages about Ko Naing
>>Aung or NCGUB or FTUB.  You should reveal your censorship regulation's
>>specification and you should stick to all groups and all.  But, 
without
>>describing the specification, it will never be fair and it is the 
thing
>>SPDC does under the vague censorship regulation.  It would be greatful 
if
>>you specify the definition of personal attacks and details of 
regulation
>>and the method in detail of how will you fairly monitor or censor.  In
>>addition, it should really and carefully apply equally to all.  I mean 
to
>>stick it.  From now on, I will read all message carefully and see how 
your
>>policy works.  Remind you that you should give the detail 
specifications.
>>In addition, please let all know who decide to impose this policy and 
it
>>is very important to take responsibility on the policy making 
decision.
>>Unless it, the decision maker can be Ko Naing Aung alone or FTUB or 
NCGUB
>>alone.
>> I am so careful of not sending personal attacks
>>but I point only on facts and situation and policy.  Once you wrote me 
an
>>e-mail which I am still keeping, warning me of not to send personal
>>attacks.  I requested you for specification and explanation of why you
>>think personal attacks and which you think personal attacks, but I 
never
>>ever received any answer.
>> I would love to know the specification and the method of how will
>>you imply and who will do it.  SPDC has very vague censorship 
regulation
>>and using it, SPDC censors everything it doesn't like no matter 
whether or
>>not fair.  I don't want Burmanet to impose censorship with very vague 
and
>>unclear status.   When specified, it should apply to all equally.
>>
>>Yours sincerely,
>>Kyaw Zay Ya
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com