Xref: utzoo soc.culture.indian:23985 news.groups:17846
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!umich!yale!husc6!m2c!wpi!bmaruti
From: bmaruti@wpi.wpi.edu (B Maruti)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian,news.groups
Subject: Re: soc.culture.pakistan
Message-ID: <8378@wpi.wpi.edu>
Date: 15 Feb 90 22:42:54 GMT
References: <35260@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> <36050248@hpindda.HP.COM> <110294@ti-csl.csc.ti.com> <cZprnnu00WB9AhMWMe@andrew.cmu.edu> <4890@amelia.nas.nasa.gov>
Reply-To: bmaruti@wpi.wpi.edu (B Maruti)
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester ,MA
Lines: 26

In article <4890@amelia.nas.nasa.gov> prabhu@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Dinesh K. Prabhu) writes:
>
>  My belief is that when s.c.indian was formed, the word indian referred to
>  the entire South-Asian subcontinent. I wholeheartedly support the move to
>  rename s.c.indian to s.c.south-asia. We can use this forum to discuss
>  cultural matters pertaining to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, and
>  Bhutan. I would also like to see talk.politics.south-asia created so that
>  all the sensitive political issues can be moved out of s.c.south-asia.
>
>  Any takers?
>
>  Dinesh Prabhu


  I feel that it is better to rewrite the charter and reserve s.c.i 
  for discussions related excusively to India.  There is a fairly good 
  traffic on "Indian" topics.  By renaming s.c.i to s.c.south-asia, 
  Indians will technically lose out (by not having their own group).  
  So I, being Indian, will vote against that.

  Let us welcome those who feel part of the Indian subcontinent in s.c.i,
  and help those who want to have a separate group (e.g., soc.culture.
  pakistani).  There is already a soc.culture.srilankan (?); I think
  a move to create soc.culture.pakistani is a good one.

  -Maruti     bmaruti@wpi.wpi.edu