REACTION (shared for the ‘common good’): Without being obliged to say for or against the others’ posted comments, impudently so, it is said that display of the comment posted earlier has been deleted, influenced by another ordinary (seemingly a non-expert) common user’s adverse comment on the contextual relevance of that comment. Website is a website, with nothing more or beyond; and, its Admn./ The Team is, in a manner of plain speak, always in hiding and not within reach , with no body visible to be kicked or soul to be condemned. On the inherently confusing concept of ‘contextual relevance’- coupled with the unholy self-assumed power to ‘moderate’,- it is to be noted that, even in the legal regime , to be precise in the realm of administration of ‘justice’, one will find , on an intelligent search, any number of instances/ life experiences to cite, so as to fortify and support the proposition that the concept, by itself, has messed up the whole system beyond recognition . Lawyers or jurists, eminent ones among them, may wish to testify the correctness / acceptability, or otherwise, of the stated proposition. As viewed independently with all sincerity, none , if not wish to offend own intellect / nature -given power to think, brush aside the contextual relevance of the not-so-apparent message pressed forth in the published write-up @ Cattle class October 30 Hope wisdom prevails in such matters of pure exchange of independent thoughts of anyone, well-meaning and -intended to simply provoke more common sense ideas, for the ultimate benefit of the end users; without being bogged down by a in-box , narrow approach. Enough is enough !
more