User talk:Jossifresco~enwiki/archive1

Combating accusations of being cult member
Jossifresco, I urge you to please go to NRM, cults, anti-cult movements, make corrections and them keep coming to maintain the objectivity. I am trying to do the same, but I need supporters. There is no point to say your group is not a cult, while others probably are.

Just briefly: "cult" is a derogatory word, but some anti-cult scholars tried to develop something like scientific base to make the label sound like a term, so they developed 'criterias'. I suggest keep adding, expanding and rephrasing until balance is restored in these articles (or until people are tired to revert the changes back) and THEN point to these articles and argue that there's no such thing as cult, its not scientific.

I would very much like you to help me in this.

If we have 10 people opposing anti-cult activists (including people uncritically absorbing these strange anti-cult ideas), we will restore the order :-) In Russia, I also never heard anyone accusing me of being a Jew, but accusations of being member of a "cult" I hear all the time. :-)

But: please refrain from just deleting something, you need to provide a quote or explain why exactly you deleted this. Best explanation: inaccurate, so not 'facts'. If you can't do that, then create a separate paragraph titled like "accusations" or "controversies" and put criticisms there, then rephrase them to sound less credible. But just deleting something over and over again is counterproductive.


 * Surely.... I have been called "jew", "Nigger" and "cult member". (I am Jewish, I have a dark skin, and I am a student of Maharaji. --&asymp; jossi &asymp; 03:52, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)

Dictionary definitions
The content you have uploaded to Contentment, Contented, Satisfied and Acquiesce are all dictionary definitions as well as being sub stubs and belong in Wikitionary rather than Wikipedia. All will be speedily deleted. Thank you. Have you taken a look at some of the links from the welcome page? There are guides there to what is acceptable and what isn't. -- Graham &#9786; | Talk 21:11, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks... I can see now...

DO NOT REMOVE FACTS FROM THE ARTICLE MAHARAJI. You do not deserve to edit Wikipedia if you repeatedly remove facts. Thanks in advance. Andries 17:45, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not allow you to write articles that are propaganda. Please follow not only the guidelines but also try to be reasonable. Andries 18:14, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Andries. What are you accusing me of exactly? --jossi 23:29, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Removing Documented Facts
Jossi, I want to thank you for the concessions that you have made on Maharaji but I will still request you to be banned from Wikipedia if you remove one of the following documented facts from the article. With documented facts I mean the information described in schorlarly references that I have at home David V. Barret "The New Believers". Scholarly references serve as the basis for articles in Wikipedia. If you have other scholarly references that dispute the points hereunder then please let me know. Facts according to Barrett include


 * 1) that he fell out with his mother after his marriage.
 * 2) that he became the guru of the DLM in 1966
 * 3) that the event in the astrodome in Houston was a disaster
 * 4) that Maharaji had legal battles with his brother over the DLM 5. there were press reports in which his mother said that she disapproved of Maharaji's luxurious living style.
 * 5) that the closing of the ashrams in 1983
 * 6) that he used to style himself as the Lord of the Universe
 * 7) that the DLM used to be criticized for allowing Maharaji living a luxurious lifestyle on the donations of his followers.
 * 8) that the DLM was sometimes criticized for its emphasis of emotional experience rather instead of intellect

Kind regards, Andries 03:32, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * So one reference from one book has that kind of power in wikipedia? If that is the case, I will do some research and present other scholars that differ with Barret. What about that?--jossi 04:25, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Yes, that is how Wikipedia works. Finding more research can only make the article better. Thanks in advance. Andries 04:28, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Jossi, I think I can guarantee that you won't be banned from Wikipedia, merely because one other user "warned" you not to remove "facts". We're much more lenient and forgiving than that, around here.

Andries: (1) Chill out, dude! :-) (2) ...and while you're chewing that chill pill, please read Don't bite the newbies. --Uncle Ed,a Wikipedia "Bureaucrat". 00:19, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Ed, yes, Jossifresco was quite a newbie but he knew exactly what he was doing when he repeatedly remove relevant documented facts from the Maharaji article to present a whitewashed picture of Maharaji/Prem Rawat. How can an administrator allow that? How can Wikipedia ever become a good encyclopedia if users are allowed to do this?  Andries 16:42, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Andries... please relax... First I only did that once (never again...!). Secondly I have backed-off from touching that page, only monitoring for vandalism. Other editors are doing a pretty god job on NPOV without my help. I am too vested... And thirdly, it will really help everyone if you stop cavorting and colluding with the ex-followers, to push their POV and to ban me anmd . Your accussations border on the histerical. --jossi 17:08, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Jossi, I didn't have problem with your accusations towards me but I did have problems with the way you edited the Maharaji article. You knew the subject well and I couldn't give you a good rebuttal because I didn't know the subject well. So I was battling all alone against somebody who had superior knowledge and used, what I saw as, foul tricks. I hope you can understand know why I got so extremely upset about you behavior. I believe that you are a nice and reasonable person when you are not editing the Maharaji article. Andries 07:41, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Maharaji
I'm happy to help you on the Maharaji article if I can, jossi. I believe I have begun to build a relationship of mutual respect with Andries, and I believe there is room for negotiation and a good, NPOV outcome. My immediate suggestion is that we all focus on the text. By that I mean, any other inter-personal stuff, whether it be reverts, threats, whatever, does not matter. Wikipedia is built on consensus, and the overall group of editors here recognize good text and NPOV when they see it. I expect everyone will have to give on some stuff and maybe have stuff in the article they're unhappy with. Heck, you may not like everything I have to say. But if we all try to focus on the article and give reasons for every piece of text we add or remove, and be willing to accepts compromise and alternative phrasings and material, I think we can get there, and everyone will be at least satisfied. Take a look at Uri Geller/temp, for instance, as an improvement over the current article, Uri Geller, as a sample of what I have done to try and balance both sides. --Gary D 05:57, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Jossi, re your gracious words on my talk page, you're very, very welcome. I had a great time chipping in, and I'm pleased with all the group has managed to accomplish. And when people managed to look beyond their differences and work together, that was the best of all. Thank you for your kind offer of invitation, and I look forward to both your website and Richard's article. --Gary D 19:41, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

Be careful what you ask for
Did you ask me for help with the Maharaji article? If so, I suggest you tone down your rhetoric. And also read Keeping cool when the editing gets hot.

Meanwhile, I've changed the article location to the man's birth name. And I'm going to start going through the article line by line, trying to neutralize bias by casting each instance as the POV of a particular source. --Uncle Ed 00:36, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia a cult?
Hello Jossi, do you think that Wikipedia should be on the list of purported cults? Please read this article Wikipedia:controversial issues. Thanks in advance Andries 14:54, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

You must be totally insane, or I am missing something? -- jossi 23:24, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Divine Light Mission
Jossi, what is wrong with my version of the Divine Light Mission? Please do not revert without explanation. Thank in advance. Andries 19:02, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

See my responses in the talk page -- jossi

I did not accuse you on forum8
Jossi, I did not accuse you on forum8. I did not ridicule you or put you in a bad light there. (I have to admit that I did that once for which I want to apologize.) I only noticed the fact that we argue a lot with each other in Wikipedia and revert each other's edits. This is unfortunate and a waste of time for both of us. I do not see any way how to resolve this, given the situation that I consider you seriously misguided with regards to Elan Vital and related subjects and that you seem intent on defending Elan Vital.

I oppose militant anti-cult activism but from my background I also oppose naivety and gullibility with regards to NRMs. I was seriously harmed by a new religious movement, which would not have happened if I had had access to accurate and balanced information such as Wikipedia can and should provide. I believe that some students get hurt by following Prem Rawat. I do not think that students of Prem Rawat deserve a stigma, but I think that information in Wikipedia should all sides of the story, including the stories and testimonies of ex-premies. Andries 10:35, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Andries: you were duped once, don't let it happen again by listening to the ex-premies. I have know Maharaji for 25 years and I can assure you that my life is beautiful and dignified, full of joy and excitment for life. I thank Maharaji for all what he has done for me. I am proud of being his student. How can he harm me when he asks me to stand on my own feet and live consciously. If anything, he challenges me to remain true to myself, to know and to love and apprteciate my life. -- jossi 17:10, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Jossi, please try to be sportive
Jossi, I think that you are not behaving in a sportive way. When you want something I often hear new complaint from you when I have rebutted your old complaint. This does not make a sincere, sportive impression. This is your habit on all subjects related to Elan Vital/DLM/Prem Rawat. Please believe me, I try to be fair and reasonable but I do have a POV of course that is strongly opposed to yours. Andries 22:52, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Your POV has nothing to do with it and you are absoultely not being reasonable. Quite the contrary, IMO. Read my message to you in your talk page for details.-- &asymp; jossi &asymp; 22:57, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)


 * If you think that I am unreasonable and you are reasonable then ask others to read the discussion on talk:list of controversial new religious movements and ask them who is unreasonable there.Andries 23:07, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I am willing to listen to the students' side of the story, where can I hear it?
How do you know that what Jim writes is propaganda? I am really interested to know what you and other students think. May be I miss something. Andries 23:21, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * You can start by reading some comments by students at http://www.whatpeoplesay.org/
 * Are you in Holland? Go to http://www.elanvital.nl/ . make contact with some people there, invite them for a beer and have a chat with them. Nothing beats a first-hand account.-- &asymp; jossi &asymp; 23:42, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)

Brainwashing article
Hi,

You added to the "brainwashing" article:


 * Psychologists, sociologists, most ex-members of purported cults and most anti-cult activists now accept that the brainwashing theory has been discredited. Some anti-cult activists, like Steven Hassan started using the term mind control as a more modern alternative.

I think it is fairly clear, in context that you mean not that something called "the brainwashing theory", or just the idea that brainwashing exists, but that the idea that brainwashing explains the success of some so-called cults has been discredited. If that is true, could you please rephrase what you have written to make it clearer? (Also, it is unclear whether any conceptual clarity has been gained by use of the term "mind control." Since there are organizations around such as Silva Mind Control that may make money but don't, as far as I know, make converts, I doubt that use of the term will have been of great benefit. But I haven't followed the debate.)

Thanks. P0M 14:25, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply on my talk page. Now I see that you just moved that paragraph there, rather than writing it yourself. P0M 05:11, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Apology
I agree that Inner peace and Peace of mind are different. My criticism is based on the fact that the article is so thin. You have addressed that criticism by saying that you plan to expand it. You are also incredibly presumptuous to publicly state on Andries' talk page what it is that you believe that I, at least, "believe on." Such insults show a thin skin beneath the dignity of a truly peaceful religionist and cast doubt on your motives. I never insulted you, I criticised an article on Wikipedia, I was careful to say twice that it is my opinion and my taste which were challenged, not objective truth, and on a talk page, no less. Hopefully you can see the difference between that and a personal insult to you. An apology is expected. Fire Star 04:29, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I have not insulted you... What trigger that feeling in you? Maybe is it you with the thin skin?.  Anyone reading my comment and your reply will clearly see that. Relax, Fire Star... :) --&asymp; jossi &asymp;

Teachings of Prem Rawat
Jossi, I accept your kind invitation, and will be doing some synthesis editing on the Teachings of Prem Rawat articles. Other demands being what they are, though, the work may go slowly. Thanks for inviting me in. --Gary D 22:49, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

Pleasure is mine, Gary. You have demonstrated your capacity as editor, your kind manners and earned my respect and the respect of many around here. &asymp; jossi &asymp; 23:11, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:


 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

ACIM
A question about ACIM: I came across a website in which ACIM is available, and from what I read so far, I found that many of the quotations (for lack of a better word) resonate with my own understanding about life and about myself. My question is: I see that in each "lesson" there are two parts. One is these insightful quotations; the other an explanation/interpretation/application notes. Are both the "quotations" and the "notes" from the same author? were these written at the same time? &#8776; jossi &#8776; 16:08, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I find it quite a book. ACIM has a main book and then a workbook of 365 lessons, each lesson being about a page of text each, some longer, some shorter. The main book and the workbook were all written through the same channeling process by the same author, over about a seven year period. I don't quite know the answer to your question, though, because the lessons aren't really organized as quotations and then notes, so I suspect you may have found a website where the quotations come from ACIM and then the notes are supplied by some other commentator. Feel free to give me the website address, and I'll be happy to check it out and let you know. --Gary D 19:17, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)


 * Okay, the top line is the title/theme of the lesson, and the rest of it is the body of the lesson. Yes, this is all of a piece; it is all by the same author and developed in the same manner. --Gary D 04:15, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

re: Criticism of Prem Rawat
Good evening. You just added a comment on my Talk page. Unfortunately, I do not have the context necessary to understand your comment. User:Andries politely asked for some general advice on the dispute resolution process. Your interest in his question is ...? Rossami (talk) 06:30, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Certainly. You should be able to go to my user page and click the "e-mail this user" link on the left.  I'll also ask you to drop me a short note on my user page so I can expect the message.  (I don't always check that account as regularly as I should.)  Rossami (talk) 02:15, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)