Re: [Diversity] Value and respect

S Moonesamy <> Sun, 12 June 2016 20:45 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1412812D0DB for <>; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 13:45:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.216
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.216 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.b=wEADaPVs; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.b=oW+haMI6
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id syQssGOyz2QF for <>; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 13:45:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1041512D0CB for <>; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 13:45:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5CKjB6L020312 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 12 Jun 2016 13:45:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail2010; t=1465764323; x=1465850723; bh=Kbh3ITIu3Vn2yRVs3cOeUq6oAICnSVmM83TGvEI24Bc=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=wEADaPVsZ5W3r/tDTlZqVY02U8b/AEkXcgGhwpwVk8UwvTbkbr9GBoSlQs2VNNEH3 8vQn18t9Q0DMmK49976y4oKCdjpvomavtrwG2yFzZeX2LGiEUneIjsclpRPGX/dj+5 a5i3eKCBIhiMjtrt/8XC4uR3ngX0hO/JkJkE086U=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail; t=1465764323; x=1465850723;; bh=Kbh3ITIu3Vn2yRVs3cOeUq6oAICnSVmM83TGvEI24Bc=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=oW+haMI6B92ZssU+xlzg11jH1I0aa+piTHu7yr/ixf9IfbwExO8xGPk0aj6ucI01A Lm+4O94jT2AJwdm2vpaKolDzy3EIWELyXrhjRFu+Pah6tz9pNtIG+Famxns4yTI4Bd r/6B/sWiCO/ZGSpN45VBXPZcdmPybAOXL5duaeNs=
Message-Id: <>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 13:08:37 -0700
To: John Leslie <>,
From: S Moonesamy <>
In-Reply-To: <20160611235942.GA39331@verdi>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <20160611235942.GA39331@verdi>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Value and respect
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diversity open mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 20:45:25 -0000

Hi John,

[changed to]

At 16:59 11-06-2016, John Leslie wrote:
>    Keep in mind that for many, English isn't their first language.
>    "Discussion" being "completely OK" doesn't adequately hint that
>particular expressions of a personal opinion are NOT OK.

A person who can read a message in English without difficulty does 
not necessarily understand everything which has been written the same 
way as a person from the same country as the author of the message would.

The second point of the text quoted above could be classified under 
freedom of speech.  Is it okay to make an argument if that argument 
would be viewed as offensive?  If a person  provides a hint about 
what not to say, it may happen that a person who does not usually 
speak English  will not understand the hint.  If a person clearly 
explains what should not be said, it will be described as censorship.

Sometimes, it is useful to have a discussion to identify the 
issues.  Having a lengthy open-ended discussion on 
about sensitive topics is not a good idea.

S. Moonesamy