|
|
|
Enter the phrase "ex-premie" into the Wiki search engine, and you're re-directed to a page with this:quote Prem Rawat (also called Maharaji and formerly known as Guru Maharaj Ji attracted controversy and criticism since he started delivering his teachings in the 1960s. This criticism has also been directed at related organizations such as Divine Light Mission, now known as Elan Vital. The sources of criticism come from individuals related to the anti-cult movement of the 1970s, media articles from the 1970s and 1980s, and articles by several scholars in the 1970s and early 1980s. Since the 1990s, a number of former students who call themselves "ex-premies."[1] level criticism at what they consider claims of divinity made by Prem Rawat, their unresolved issues about their former belief in Rawat's personal divinity, and his newer image as human teacher; at what they view as apparent historical revisionism, financial exploitation, hypocrisy, encouragement of uncritical acceptance, and at other issues. The criticism by these former students is dismissed by Elan Vital as allegations typical of apostates. Their character and motives are also questioned, and they are described as "an insignificantly small hate group of no more than a handful of individuals who constantly harass Rawat and his students".[2] Elan Vital supports these statements with sworn affidavits filed with the Supreme court of Queensland by two ex-premies who allege that the underlying purpose of the ex-premie group is to harass, defame and annoy Rawat and his students, and to purposely interfere with the rights of people to experience their own spiritual discovery and their right to peacefully assemble.
endquote
(though there's plenty more of the same at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex-premie ). Personally, I only use Wikipedia for subjects that are not contentious (ie subjects that no one person/group has ulterior motive for twisting to their own advantage). Otherwise, I've better things to do with my time than trying to out-edit the likes of Rawat's webmaster (Jossi Fresco) - who's taken over the Wiki article as if it's his own private project. The article on Rawat (and on his critics) is so obviously biased in his favour to give Wiki the bad name it shouldn't have to deserve. But I guess Jimbo Wales could easily have sold out by now - or may do in the future. In fact, I'd say he already has done - for free. (Think of the money Rawat might have offered for biasing the article about him in his favour - then ask yourself why Wales is unwilling to put safeguards in place to prevent such blatant misuse of a so-called "encyclopedia").
Modified by cq at Sun, Jul 02, 2006, 11:16:55
|
|
|
|
I don't use Wikipedia and it annoys me when I search for something, anything, and it shows up in the first 10 to 20 hits. It bothers me because after my little excursion there, I was black-balled by Jossi Fresco. Now thinking about it, I wasn't willing to give up the copyright to Wikipedia for any of my writing. No way. People invest a lot of time and work in the articles and they don't own them, they are subject to change and, I'm just not that surrendered. One funny thing is that Tom told me he couldn't stand looking at that pix of Rawat at the top of the article first thing in the morning. We'd be having our morning coffee and he'd happen to look at my monitor and say, "No, no it's too early to look at that mug shot." I don't even notice it, but it was too much for him to have Rawat for breakfast  And now that I've written here about Jossi Fresco, he's got another "occurrence" to log about me "personally attacking" him here. Good, I hope they put me on their black list, it'll be an honor. I wrote something on Andries talk page in defense of him to a Sai Baba devotee who's been smearing Andries all over the internet and giving him a really hard time. The guy was being a real asshole about a lot of stuff concerning the SSB article. But he also really attacked Andries personally there and he has whole website sections about Andries, just filled with lies and defammation. Typical cult-backlash stuff, like EV does to us. So I took him to task and told him to stop it and that I thought he ought to be blocked, and he was being demanding, controlling, and rude. This guy, SSS108, another anonymous one, who I don't know from Adam, wrote me back using my real name that he got from this forum, and told me this: It is amusing that Sylviecyn (i.e. Cynthia) comes forward to defend Andries. Sylviecyn (i.e. Cynthia) vehemently attacks Jossie on the Prem Rawat Talk Forum and ceaseless sucks-up to Andries. Far be it for Sylviecyn, of all people, to give me advice against rudeness and disdain! Sylviecyn, your words are worthless [smiley face his]
This guy can't read well if he's telling me I suck up to Andries on this forum. So Jossi Fresco is stalking me around Wikipedia and monitoring me here, and this banana from the SSB cult is giving me shit about what I write here too! After I read it I wanted to take a shower. Then Jossi Fresco had to pipe in, Mr. Wikipedia himself, and well, that was expected but I got another reply from the SSB guy after I really told the SSS108 guy off, especially about monitoring me on this forum and using my name. This is his reply to me, I didn't bother to respond (what a "last word" freak): Sylviecyn, I do not know whether your real name is "cynthia" or not. It happens to be the name you use on the Prem Rawat Forum, which is the reason I mentioned it (so others can see the type of posts you make there). It appears that the only person talking herself blue in the face is you. Reread my last post and place particular emphasis on the last sentence. Have a nice day [smiley face his!]
Unbelieveable. Creepy.
Modified by Cynthia at Sun, Jul 02, 2006, 18:41:37
|
|
|
|
Kudos to you and anybody else who has tried to bring some sensibility into that bit of cyber-lunacy. It's a futile exercise in nerve cell destruction. Unless you're getting paid, or uh ... in a cult, or Dutch I guess, you can't stomach it for too long.
You can't blame the premies though. They are just taking advantage of the situation. The responsibility rests squarely with Whales and cohorts who have made it so vulnerable. If you leave food all over the floor, you can't blame the mice for coming in the house and eating it.
Stepping out of our own little inconsequential area though, this is pretty tragic and ultimately hopefully the death knell for WP. It's one thing for Jossi and friends to characterize Prem as a person of consequence, but it won't make him one. All their efforts do is potentially slow the real information from getting to people who are looking for it, namely Prem's small group of followers and those who are just hearing about him. But the information is out there and it just takes one Google to find it.
However, there are lots of real luminaries and interests with real PR teams who will run roughshod over WP. It's already happened. I know for an absolute fact that the practice has become pretty wide spread. As I said earlier, either you are getting paid, you are in a cult, or you are a mad hatter (or you're Andries). One indication of the level of abuse is that Google has now changed their evaluation of links from Wiki, basically that they are no longer counted in determining a site's relevance. Well it was bound to happen and now it has. But mark my words, WP editing has become professionalized.
In the end I think the real tragedy is for people like Andries, and I guess these people represent a large community, who out of idealism have made WP what it is today. The whole time I couldn't help but feel that these people were being used. I think we are going to start seeing this coming to light now. In that sense, WP really is a lot like a cult, which many have accused it of. And here is the nail on the coffin: the abuse of the flock. I've never "followed the money" on this one, but it would be interesting to do so.
Modified by aunt bea at Sun, Jul 02, 2006, 13:00:16
|
|
|
|
If people leave they try to make it look as if they did not exist. They have no compunction about it. They do not consider the person's health or well being; more likely they intend the effect it will have on the person's mind and life.
Now they try to do it on the web.
They sweep us under the carpet, or think they do!
LP
Modified by LP at Sun, Jul 02, 2006, 15:19:06
|
|
|
|
I agree, Auntie, Good post. Wiki is just another example of people trying to impose upon the internet older, pre-tech ways of media thinking. The idea of writing an on-line encyclopaedia, which everyone can join in with, and which just keeps growing may have a novelty value and offer a sense of purpose in life to its more dedicated authors, but isn't that what the internet is by definition? Wiki would like to become the Web, but the Web is already here. We are all part of tomorrow's encyclopaedia, every time we write a forum post or contribute to any other website.
|
|
|
|
You know after I wrote my first post, I looked into the structure of WP. The whole thing really stinks. Really it is owned by Whales and two cohorts from his Boomis company. Since a year I think they have allowed two user-elected people onto the board, but their three can obviously always outvote them. And Whales has this bizarre special status as fearless founder. It is even written into their bylaws. He has the unique status as lifelong member, and he is the only member who doesn't have to contribute or pay dues.
The other thing that I find so bizarre is how WP continues to be based on "the ideas articulated by Jim Whales". He maintains a total grip on the project. If he was sincere and truly trusted in the thing, why wouldn't he also let the board be completely elected by users. Oh no, the fun and games with social experiments stop long before they get to his door.
I could go on and on. But reading your post really clinched it for me. Already Whales has reaped so many benefits from this. He is on other boards now. He has become a celebrity and some kind of expert.
Also he has some side projects which are associated with WP where he does cash in. This is the typical open source model, where you offer something for free and you make money with ad-ons.
The guy has money, power, brand and celebrity. Well he is a financial wheeler dealer by trade and seems to have a good measure of charisma.
So you are completely correct. He is trying to create his own web, with himself at the steering wheel, and through the cynical abuse of volunteer labour.
Well I love your last line: "We are all part of tomorrow's encyclopedia."
Except I have to say that, as an active participant in that, a good deal of the content is pretty lame and derivative. Then again, encyclopedias were always lame. They were outlawed from my university.
|
|
|
|
Hi Auntie, All the regular cults are doing articles on their leaders. I don't know about the money either, but Jossi Fresco has dedication and devotion, and he definitely deserves personal darshan for that article, imo. In the end I think the real tragedy is for people like Andries, and I guess these people represent a large community, who out of idealism have made WP what it is today. The whole time I couldn't help but feel that these people were being used. There are lots of good people there and they are work-horses for that site and they pump out a lot of writings. But, if someone isn't politically connected to the Wales clique, which Jossi is in some ways, it doesn't matter at all, especially when someone like Jossi and Momento just bully everyone else on an article, and make up new rules to suit their needs. I have other problems with Wikipedia. Afew years ago it was the "Child Love" by the pedophiles articles that got me ranting. I recently found out that the guy who wrote the "Penis" article took pictures of his own limp and erect penis and used them for the article(!!), because he was able to easily sign off the copyright and, I suppose, isn't very shy. Can you imagine? Omigod. And he admitted it. That was when I knew I had to stop being a Wikipedian. 
Modified by Cynthia at Sun, Jul 02, 2006, 18:29:22
|
|
|
