History Discussions- do we need a two tier system

R

ravichaudhary

New member
At the outset, allow me to state that I am reluctant to censor or to stop a person or persons from making comments they wish to.

Indeed comments are important and welcome, no matter what the feedback comments are.

Many people have suggested to me that we create two classes of discussions in the Jat History section, on Jatland

1) Serious discussions
2) Discussions where anyone can participate

While I am most reluctant to single people out, I also cannot help but note that the momentum of a serious discussion is destroyed, and the distractions hinder the development of in-depth , strong, foundations.

These in depth discussions are necessary to develop a rational history of our people.

We can, I think, all agree that off the cuff comments, emotional comments , made in the heat of the moments, do not help.

In the Jat history group, we keep to serious discussions. Maybe it is time to have a two tier system here too.

I will, reluctantly, support a two tier system, for discussion of our history;

1) moderated,

2) unmoderated, where everyone can put in their input. Indeed people can comment on the threads in the serious section here. If the comments are of value then they can be transferred to the serious discussion section.

Perhaps that will satisfy everyone


Ravi Chaudhary
 
ravichaudhary said:
I will, reluctantly, support a two tier system, for discussion of our history;

1) moderated,
2) unmoderated, where everyone can put in their input. Indeed people can comment on the threads in the serious section here. If the comments are of value then they can be transferred to the serious discussion section.

Perhaps that will satisfy everyone
Click to expand...

i guess the moderation should come from a person who has the knowledge of JAt history, otherwise the idea would fall flat on its face... my views, i may be wrong.
 
ravichaudhary said:
At the outset, allow me to state that I am reluctant to censor or to stop a person or persons from making comments they wish to.

Indeed comments are important and welcome, no matter what the feedback comments are.

Many people have suggested to me that we create two classes of discussions in the Jat History section, on Jatland

1) Serious discussions
2) Discussions where anyone can participate

While I am most reluctant to single people out, I also cannot help but note that the momentum of a serious discussion is destroyed, and the distractions hinder the development of in-depth , strong, foundations.

These in depth discussions are necessary to develop a rational history of our people.

We can, I think, all agree that off the cuff comments, emotional comments , made in the heat of the moments, do not help.

In the Jat history group, we keep to serious discussions. Maybe it is time to have a two tier system here too.

I will, reluctantly, support a two tier system, for discussion of our history;

1) moderated,

2) unmoderated, where everyone can put in their input. Indeed people can comment on the threads in the serious section here. If the comments are of value then they can be transferred to the serious discussion section.

Perhaps that will satisfy everyone


Ravi Chaudhary
Click to expand...

I agree .This section do need moderation .

Let us make certain guidelines and post strictly according to rules.
 
Respected Ravi uncle,

I wholeheartedly agree with you, I believe Jat History has always been very much neglected and suppressed by so called Indian Historians. I do respect people like you, Burdak uncle, DND Uncle, Kharab Bhaisaab, who are investing their precious time just to put forth and represent True Glorified History of us to the world.

Nothing but Serious and Rational discussions should only be allowed here and all the worthless comments must be eliminated.

Btw, Its indeed a good idea to have two tier system here on this Jat history Section and to appoint a new mod with good Jat history knowledge solely for this section. :)


Rock on
Jit
 
I totally agree with two tier system especially in History section.

History section needs a mind storming discussion and intense data and fact analysis to bring forward a single conclusive statement and that statement becomes reference for the analyzation of another related topic which is further used to conclude some other Historical facts.

I witnessed here so many times that somewhere, inbetween these in-depth discussion and cross-examination of facts and figures, someone lands up with a strange and awakward, totally out of context query or statement which destroys the contiunity and constructive flow of the discussions.

Sometimes members leave the discussion at some stage and call it a day, next day when they came to discuss again get a shock of life by reading some unwanted and stupid comments. And then there are some threads like discussing Gautam Budha, Bush, Obama, Hollywood and Bolywood personalities etc are/were jats or not. I don't see any harm if someone starts a thread to discuss about someone with some evidence or theory but it seems totally ridiculous to start a thread with a single line "Is/was mr/ms X a Jat ?" and people start makeing mockery of the historical facts now and then.

Therefore, Two tier system should be implemented in the History section for construstive and fruitful discussion and hence the net conclusive outcome.
 
Last edited:
kharubji, two clans of jats named as heng-giri and bal giri were attacking roman empire, n they subsequently gave their names to hungary n bulgaria. the names are similar to henga jats of mathura and balyan bal jats of sisauli...
 
even olahs of europe are coming from huns country, like heng giri, the hungry..sinsinwars also were same...at bharatpur..
 
Jat history is a vast subject and only a senior and knowlegable person can do justice to moderatorship .Any one of our senior like Ravi ji ,Dudi Ji or Laxman ji can be asked to take this responciblity which will be good for quality of this section.
 
Though a distraction,I was wondering why Soko Norman ,most knowlegable person regarding Jat History outside India was banned from this site .He is a Romanian Christian Jat and a wonderful person whom I knew personally .
 
he could have been banned for his other activities, but at least his activity for history had no parallel...here ...

i weep often in his name...

where thou has gone out of this blue...
 
n where this thou of romania is bit different from the thou of mathura, the elder brother of krsna...

i truly regret his exit from jat land...
 
we'll wait for the days kharubji, when we jats will be united again irrespective of their religions..

hindu, muslim, sikh, issayee mil ke chalo sub jat bhai...

kash ki chhoturam nahin marta, to ye bantwara hi nahin hota...
 
y in history, y not in every section like reservation of jats dudi ji be made sarpanch? the head of five panches, the panch janya shankh of krsna, the pandav, the panch piara...


he is too great a man...

i loved a few people on jat land....

vijay the sunda, the shinde of marathi, the sunda chief chavunda of maharashtra...who wrote that hastinapur was known due to bhima instead of arjuna... n ujjaiynee was known due to Jats, the gutasya putras...

n kharubji should be welcomed that he said 'point to be noted that oh, even kanishka was Jat!! who started saka era'

n there later even deswalji is still in dilemma regarding huns

chalo huns ka bhi bata dete hain

a discussion is going on in between samrat baladitya the hun

n where he states that just while ago I was the king of this jit country but now I'm captive of urs...

then not only he was freed by hun jats but again he was made the king of jit country

such was the spirit of huns towards jats...

aah... all those mihirgul...n ...tormann kings of huns...

i hope some historian will fill in this gap what I said...???

say for example soka, kharub, burdak, dudee...ravi...
 
Hello Ravi Chaudhary,
For the past few weeks I have been going through the contents of the Jat History and have developed a liking for it. Therefore I decided to devote some more time to scan what is available on this site and have joined the forum.

You are absolutely right that the Jat History needs in depth research supported by references and it should be constructed on the basis of solely original sources because every one knows that 'invented history' has no legs to stand on in view of the explosion of the Information technology. So no one should grudge against moderation of ones views and even findings. you and your forum are doing commendable job in the service of history of India as such because it needs many gaps to be filled in before it could be called history of all Indians. Please keep it up.
sincerely
Dr. Raj Pal Singh
 
Rajpalji you are right - Jat History needs in depth research supported by references . We need a team of researchers here. If we put here some missing links of history here which may initially look odd but will help to find further links.
 
Friends,

I agree with the idea under discussion and would like to add that we must always welcome those scholars of history who possess knowledge of the Jat History and show interest in sharing it with us. But before doing so we should carefully scrutinize what led the pushing the 'gentleman' out from the Jat forum!

Dr. Raj Pal Singh
 
i like this idea.

i have a suggestion, there should be an 'unlike' option along side the 'like' option given under posts, if any post receives a particular count of 'unlikes' then the post ought to be automatically deleted
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top