|
|
|
Chris, This is a very good question so why don't you jump in and start doing something there? 24.69.14.159 er, I mean, Jim
|
|
|
|
In fact I have!  - just call me revera (="in fact" in Latin)
Modified by cq at Fri, Mar 10, 2006, 01:27:41
|
|
|
|
My question (see link below) is this:If Jossi was Prem Rawat's webmaster, isn't there a conflict of interest? Jossi has stated that he's of the opinion that "anyone can edit any article in Wikipedia as long as he/she does it within the content policies of the project"
Well, here's a short excerpt from the guidelines given at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vanity_page:
QUOTE "These vanity guidelines are intended to assist Wikipedia users in determining exactly what is and what is not to be considered vanity information within Wikipedia, which is not suitable copy material for Wikipedia article pages. Vanity information is considered to be any information that was placed in any Wikipedia article that might create an apparent conflict of interest, meaning any material that presents the appearance of being intended to in any way promote the personal notoriety of the author, or one of the close family members or associates ..." (my emphasis)"... of the author. ENDQUOTE
Jossi isn't just a "student" of Prem Rawat's with a vested interest in his promotion, (which is a peculiar qualification for authoring a supposedly NPOV article) but he's also the former webmaster of some of Rawat's sites.
Therefore an associate of his.
I think that represents a conflict of interest. What say others? Revera 17:29, 10 March 2006 (UTC) revera _____________________________ Unfortunately we all have personal interests, and most of us tend to contribute to articles on Wiki that tend to address whatever these personal interests might be. For myself, the beauty of Wiki is that it teaches us all to better see one another's viewpoints. Whenever I post anything on Wiki that is challenged, I try to take the challenge in the best spirit of the challenger, not taking it personally, but rather making every attempt to respect the challenger's efforts and desire to ultimately arrive at a greater truth. Sometimes I have been found to be mistaken in what I've posted, at other times others have been found to be mistaken. The point is that everyone wins when the truth is finally uncovered. I feel that anyone's contributions to Wiki ought to be respected, for however so long as the author displays a greater willingness to discover the ultimate truth about whatever he or she may be posting, than a desire to prove any given point without proper documentation. In the dialogue above about the interview, I sense that willingnes, and I respect it.
It seems to me that the Vanity page guidelines were written more due to concerns that articles and information might be posted on Wiki that was not truly "noteworthy", than with any kind of an aim to censor out potential contributors who may have any kinds of vested personal interests in the articles that they contribute to. Certainly Rawat is noteworthy, and I think that so long as contributions to the article are fair, reasonable, and follow Wiki guidelines, that they should be welcomed.
-Scott P. 17:48, 10 March 2006 (UTC) _____________________________ I agree with Scott that Revera misinterprets the vanity guidelines. Andries 18:17, 10 March 2006 (UTC) _____________________________ "Slanting an article" (better known as POV pushing) is contrary to the WP:NPOV policy regardless if an editor is an associate, a detractor, or a supporter of a certain political affiliation, religion, church, company, organization, etc. Declaration of bias/interest is seen as good manners, but not a requirement for editing Wikipedia (I have clearly disclosed my bias in my talk page). Note that many people use aliases for their usernames or edit anonymously (we have a strong privacy policy in place to protect editors from others disclosing their personal details to prevent harassment), but I and others have chosen to use their names. I would argue that WP:NPOV and WP:V provide a very strong foundation to protect it from POV pushers, and have served Wikipedia admirably well so far. As Scott said, note that WP:VAIN is a guideline (a suggested approach), and not a policy (that are non-negotiable) and it describes some suggestions about "associates" as it pertains to "little known" companies or subjects. ? jossi ? t • @ 18:59, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Related link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Prem_Rawat#If_Jossi_was_Prem_Rawat.27s_webmaster.2C_isn.27t_there_a_conflict_of_interest.3F
Modified by cq at Fri, Mar 10, 2006, 15:22:34
|
|
|
|
I was startled to stumble on Scott Perry's input, this legendary beast from the EPO mists of time - wow - and welcomed his defence of the Mishler tape earlier in the discussion. But I can't agree with him here, or with Andries. Their comments would be fair enough if everybody were allowed their NPOV (ha-ha!) and editing rights without being reverted or blocked at every attempt to tell the truth about Rawat as they know it. And yes, of course Jossi is being paid, or otherwise rewarded for his efforts. I would love to see the content of the hundreds of entries he has blocked over the last few months. If not vanity publishing as such, it sure looks like vanity editing. Is there no-one we can complain to?
|
|
|
|
Well I stuck my head over the parapet, only to have it slapped about by Jossi with a wet, rolled-up Divine Times (or that's how it felt). Jeez, how much Wiki-format-admin-rules stuff do I need to learn to express my simple outrage at this jumped-up bullying clown with his patronising, revisionist shite? I think I'll leave it to those in the know...
Modified by NIgel at Sat, Mar 11, 2006, 17:31:34
|
|
|
|
... it is only necessary for good men to do nothing.
But then I can't be arsed with Wiki either. 
John.
|
|
|
|
...I'm voting for evil. I think I'm fair-to-middling good and, on the whole, who doesn't prefer doing nothing rather than something until South Park comes on? Evil might even be the way forward, hmm.. You've got me all philosophically tangled up, John. Aha - worked it out now. You're trying to net me into your EPO Hate Cult where you do evil by doing nothing. And by becoming evil, become successful. That's cool. Where do I sign?
Modified by NIgel at Sat, Mar 11, 2006, 17:55:55
|
|
|
|
would you believe that Jossi is now trying to claim that it's wrong to describe "Knowledge" as having anything to do with meditation?give me strength ...!
|
|
|
|
For at least 10 years Rawat has stopped using the word meditation in regards to how he describes the process he demonstrates for achieving a peaceful personal experience. From what I understand he has done this to make a distinction between what he is offering and the plethora of meditation methods widely available. This is also part of his overall strategy of removing "Eastern" and religious associations from what he is offering.
|
|
|
|
So that's why the Wiki article of "Techniques of Knoweldge" doesn't mention the word "meditation" - not even once! (other than a general link at the foot of the page to the topic, alongside "yoga").I think what Jossi and other apologists/revisionists need to realise is that the article on their beloved 'Master' should not just be about his current methods of propagation. The history of how it used to be done needs to be recorded as well. Trouble is that - from recent personal experience at least - trying to edit that article on Rawat when it's being constantly updated by premies with a lot more time on their hands than I do, isn't the best use I'd like to make of my own time. But I guess there's no particular hurry to get the article to reflect the facts, as opposed to the spin. Imagine, if you will, trying to edit an article on "The Emperor's New Clothes" - when the majority of your fellow editors are the self-same sodding tailors of the tale!
Related link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Techniques_of_Knowledge
|
|
|
|
The other thing about removing the reference to "meditation" is the suggestion that Rawat is not a mere meditation teacher. Having flipped through Andries' and others edits and having read the justifications for the reverts I have to admit that the Wiki rules seems to favour propaganda over criticism and attempts to correct the public record in the hands of determined defenders of the faith. Similar difficulties abound throughout Wiki with respect to spiritual teachers, NRMs, politicians, historical figures, controversial theorists, etc. But very few sites have been safeguarded and edited with the tenacity as our dear ol' Prem Rawat; it's as if he's the Lord or something. What is particularly disturbing is the credibility given to revisionist claims - or the fact that Wiki has become a primary tool of revisionists and that these Wiki articles are spammed throughout the internet, with whole Wiki articles appearing as fact on other sites. The false labelling of critics as hate speechers is an Orwellian method of stifling the legitimacy and credibility of criticism.
Modified by Dr.wow at Sun, Mar 12, 2006, 11:11:36
|
|
|
|
I always thought that "Bolie shri satguru dev maharaji ki jai" meant something like "All praises to the Living Perfect Master (King)." Most importanly, Prem Rawat NEVER told us not to scream that phrase to him at the festivals (incessantly) where he was dressed up like Krishna, sitting on a throne, his (lotus) bare feet on a silk pillow, wearing garlands. He accepted open worship from premies. He never said "Stop doing that!" Anyway, reading about the lastest ploys on Wiki to revise, no LIE is the right word about MY past as a premie got me searching for the meaning of Bolie, etc.... I did a search and it brought me to the Oui article on EPO written by Marjoe Gortner, who covered the Millennium Festival for Oui, and the article was published in May, 1974. Here's a short excerpt: I got back just in time for the first address by the guru himself. His first words -- preceded by the followers' unison chant, "Bolie Shri Sat Guru Dev Maharaj Ki Jai"--squeaked out in a small, high voice: "It's so simple. I have the answer. What can I tell you? I have peace for the world. I am the perfect Master. It is like a four-wheeled car . . . ." Maharaj Ji speaks in parables. No direct answers. They have trained him--or he has learned--to give you a roundabout answer, never direct. When asked if he is the Christ, the Messiah, his answer goes, "What can I tell you? It is not for me to say. However, I will say, when the sun rises in the East and you look at it, you do not have to ask if this is the sun. The sun does not have to say, `I am the sun.' Everyone knows it is the sun." Here's the page on EPO: http://www.ex-premie.org/pages/ouimag74.htm
Modified by Cynthia at Sun, Mar 12, 2006, 11:54:11
|
|
|
|
Hello Cyntia or as we used to say in the past to each other "Jai Sat Chit Anand"meaning "Truth is the conciousness of Bliss". I remember the new language arriving in the west at the same time as the boy Guru Maharaji aged 13yrs of age. i was very curious what all the new words ment, i remember asking the people i met from India to tell me the exact meanings, just to help me know at least what I was saying when explaining to others about Maharaji and the gift of Knowledge he had to offer anyone who wanted it!Mata JI means Holy Mother. Premie means Lover, Prem means Love. Maharaji means Great King. Premlata means Vine of Love,Pranam Maharaji means " I bow to you Great King".Maharajis full name is Prem Pal Singh Rawat. His ansestors were obviously Sikhs, just like mine were another denomination! people did ask Maharaji in the past was he God and he answered by saying my Knowledge is God! That makes sence to me Cyntia especially after 33yrs of practising Knowledge! Like everyone else on the planet, i have had to deal with this and that, as we all do over the years! My Dad had a stroke and was in a wheelchair for 6yrs before he passed away, my Niece died on the day of her 22nd Birthday, I have a 15yr old Nephew who has cancer and hopefully will recover, my Husband passed away on 9th Feb'06 my Childrens Dad, and sure i could go on and on as im part of a very large Family> Lots of very exciting things have happened too, like travelling here and there over the years to events where Maharaji would speak and I have to say honestly I had a great time! I met some very nice people indeed and some who had no manners at all. its all interesting to me to see the different ways so many people can view the same experience from their intellect and yet in the heart Love is Love and Peace is peace! I like Maharaji and have always found him to be a perfect Gentleman from India with a nice Wife and Family. When people who refer to themselfs as ex premies it littery means x Lover, yet I understand people mean they dont practise the knowledge they received and must have wanted at the time they asked for it! My curiousity is why do people not practise, surely if i wanted a piano, i would want is so as i could practise and hear the music otherwise why would i want one, mind u some people have grand pianos and the only thing happens to the piano is the cleaner dusts it once a week, but no MUSIC. Nice to chat to u and hear ur views and opionions if u wish Cyntia. Best Wishes and Love Julie
|
|
|
|
Cynthia is an old-timer (as are most of us here) and she used to regulary interact with and do full-time service for Rawat so she knows the whole shtick, thank you very much. Personally, I find your words so naively innocent in the sense that you possibly feel that by GMJ's grace one of us "monmots" can be saved from our ignorance and and returned to the fold . . . that I find what you say amusing. But I should warn you that not everyone feels the same way and that it is possible that the forum's adminstrators will block you if you persist in not being sensitive to others' perspectives here. However, if you would like to stick around I would suggest that you familiarize yourself with some of information on Rawat that can be found linked to at the top of this site on the right. You may be challenged a little but certainly not bored by reading some of the material at the Ex-premie Org. site or the Maharaji Info site, Mike Finch's site (a former instructor and one of the earliest western premies) and the other stuff linked there.
Modified by Dr.wow at Sun, Mar 12, 2006, 19:34:00
|
|
|
|
I know Mike a long time Doc. and have always found him to be a nice Man. i also have done full time service for Maharajis work in this world snd still do, service is an experience of love, its not what u do its where ur at when u do it, and i know where im at doc. im not here to judge whos saved as thats nothing to do with me, i will say once again i have no problem hearing peoples views about Maharaji and the Knowledge which i practise my dear friend. best Wishes Julie
|
|
|
|
i know where im at doc. im not here to judge whos saved as thats nothing to do with me, i will say once again i have no problem hearing peoples views about Maharaji and the Knowledge which i practise my dear friend.
The views that you profess to be interested in are linked to at the top right of this site. Given how you have gone about interacting on this forum and the extent that you have paid attention to the forum ettiquette advice given to you thus far - you are not likely to engage in any fruitful exchanges here.
Modified by Dr.wow at Sun, Mar 12, 2006, 20:41:00
|
|
|
|
Hello Julie, As others have said here, I do know the meanings of the hindi terms and was being ironic. But, I don't want to talk about me or Maharaji right now, I want to talk to you. I'm so sorry to hear about all of your losses. That's a lot to handle, but I want to tell you that it's okay to feel sad and to feel grief about those losses. Being a premie doesn't mean that you are not allowed to feel all the normal human emotions that non-premies feel. Knowledge doesn't make people super-human, after all. I'm especially sorry to hear about the recent loss of your husband. I've been married nearly 25 years and that would be a huge loss for me. You seem to be doing okay, but don't forget, you're a human woman who is allowed to feel that loss. It's perfectly okay to cry, too. In fact, if you said you didn't cry I'd worry about you. A lot of people have told you that it would be more appropriate to post on the Premie Chat Room that's linked above. You might want to try that, Julie. But, maybe you are also new to posting on any forum so I'll give you a few pointers. Please try to break up your writing into paragraphs, because most of us are in our 50s, so our eyes aren't so great, anymore. Try to think of your posts as words in a regular conversation with people in real life. By doing that you will be able to communicate with other people much, much better. For instance, if someone asks you a question, the polite thing would be to answer the question. Think of yourself as being in a room with people who are talking to you, with you talking back. As in a normal conversation, you would answer a question. Right? Please try to remember that ex-premies who post here have left Maharaji behind. There are exes here who like you, also spent three decades of their life practicing Knowledge and worshipping Maharaji, so they've heard all of the things that you say about him and Knowledge. Now we have rejected all those concepts that Maharaji instilled in us over so many years. Therefore, please don't give satsang here, because you won't get a good reception from folks if you do that. Finally, you must have read my name incorrectly, because it's spelled "Cynthia," not "Cyntia." It's no big deal, Julie, but I wanted to let you know. Best wishes, Cynthia
Modified by Cynthia at Mon, Mar 13, 2006, 13:47:09
|
|
|
|
I guess Maharaji never used that phrase! lol. Where's your letter from the knowledge packet? That ought to be included. I'm not the least bit surprised at Jossi. When the article "Techniques of Knowledge" was written some of the editors didn't like the article because the K meditation techniques weren't explained in the article. Any of us who have "betrayed" M's trust by "revealing" the techniques are considered especially hateful people. We broke our vow to Maharaji, but Jossi hasn't, neh neh neh neh neh... If you look at all of the articles as a whole, the Rawat Wiki project one huge piece of spin-doctoring. Put that together with the Wikipedia NPOV bullshit mentality, and the articles are practically engraved in stone. What's truly funny is that Jossi now has the POWER to block anyone he deems to be impolite, but none of the other Wikipedians, including Scott Perry, (a Wikipedian himself) is questioning the validity of the entire NPOV method/mentality that's making the presentation of Prem Rawat on that thing nothing more than a bunch of big, fat lies. Ya gotta laugh. Cynthia, a proud apostate
Modified by Cynthia at Sun, Mar 12, 2006, 09:54:06
|
|
|
|
then please translate the description by Kranenborg in Dutch that I posted on the talk page and insert them in the article. The objection was that the techniques were described by apostates. Oh sorry, now I remember, you don't do Wikipedia. You only complain. Andries
Related link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Techniques_of_Knowledge
Modified by Andries at Sun, Mar 12, 2006, 09:56:34
|
|
|
|
Andries, one of the reasons I've gave up on Wikipedia is because of an emotional reaction I have to it, especially concerning Rawat. I've gotten a terrible, horrible feeling in my stomach trying to communicate with Jossi, Zappaz, and even other Wikipedians. It's like trying to talk to a premie here; I can't do it without getting angry and rude. The rigidity of the NPOV and other Wiki rules also gives me a similar adverse reaction. But, I still feel free to complain because the articles are...you know what I think!
Modified by Cynthia at Sun, Mar 12, 2006, 10:00:36
|
|
|
|
I can understand, but do feel free to edit subject that you like with a less hostile atmosphere surrounding it. With regards to "Techniques of Knowledge", Wikipedia does not respect "secret knowledge" or "secret teachings" of any (semi-)religious movement, because its object is to inform. Andries
|
|
|
|
>Is there no-one we can complain to?< Creating a "Prem Rawat Sucks Wikipedia" website is about all. N
|
|
|
