Recently, a member posted that he has: 
 
“a right to talk

"condescendingly" to trespassing youngsters.”

Holding in abeyance the questions of ‘trespass’ and ‘youngsters,’ and entirely bracketing any questions about the rectitude of various positions in the debate, does the list and its committee affirm this right?

Does the list committee affirm the right of this or any other scholar to conduct him or herself in such fashion, including belittling name-calling, withering sarcasm, and plainly disparaging ad hominem attacks—and a concomitant obligation on the part of myself and other youngsters to endure such treatment—by  allowing him or her continued membership without censure?

I don't believe such a right exists, or should, but it’s not my place to decide.  On the other hand, rights and obligations are contingent and limited to the domains in which they are granted, and so I’ll quietly show myself out if that’s the way things are going to be.  That’s really not meant as a threat. I am an utterly inconsequential and passive participant in Indology.  However, I suspect that others feel the same way, and are not so free as I am to say so, and that perhaps the management of Indology would benefit from knowing that.

best

cpbh

--

Chris Haskett

Assistant Professor, Religion

Centre College

स्वप्नोपमत्वाद्धर्मणां भवशान्त्योरकल्पना

--स्फुटार्थ ४।६०

Because they are dreamlike, the arising and ceasing of things are inconceivable.  Sphuṭārtha 4.60