Talk:Ex-premie/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jossi/.140.1, I think your changes in the article are unjustified. I will revert it. Andries 17:13, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Andries: some of the contributions of IP .140 and Jossi were good NPOV edits. Please go easy on your reverts. -- Zappaz 19:55, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
-
- like what? I think they were very bad. 19:56, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Zappaz, as usual, I do not agree with your edit. Ex-premies really think that they form the majority. Jim Heller said this on talk:Prem Rawat. You may not agree, but they really believe that. Andries 20:30, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I know that they believe that... The fact is that they are a very small group of people that are very dedicated (to put it mildly) to discredit Prem Rawat. This is a common phenomenon in NRMs: apostates claiming to represent the "majority of society", labelling an NRM as a "dangerous cult" and representing themselves as doing a public service. No news here :) You seem to have a high regard for Jim Heller, and I don't understand why. His behavior, words and actions in WP don't warrant that. -- Zappaz 22:11, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Zappaz, why did you remove the references to the numbers? I think they are important for the reader. Andries 22:07, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Try to write it from an NPOV. --Zappaz 22:11, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
[edit] The People
Who placed the names of private individuals on the section called "The People?" None of the named individuals are public figures, including myself. Nobody asked me for permission to include my real name on that article.
Prem Rawat is a public figure and there is a legal distinction. Until I am formally asked if it is my wish to have my name listed in this section I am removing the entire section now. Until I receive a formal request to consider this, no one has permission to place my name in any of the Wiki articles.
Cynthia Gracie, Aug 31 2004
- The editor that added these names was Andries. You can ask him why, but I guess is that he was trying to use your name as a citacion or reference for the content in the article. In some articles dealing with controversial NRMs, the main critics or their leaders are sometimes mentioned.
- (PS: In the future, please write new comments at the bottom of the talk page. That is the convention. Thanks.) --Zappaz 03:32, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Cynthia: Talk pages are an integral part of the article and their contents are there for all readers to see. Note then, that you are already signing your full name in these Talk pages... --Senegal 03:56, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-
- Zappas: This is not about precedents set on Wikipedia with previous articles on NRMs. This is about the laws within the U.S. that protect private citizens from libel. Wikipedia is a U.S. based non-profit corporation, correct? I'm doing you and Wikipedia a favor here by bringing this up. Check with your legal dept.
-
- Prem Rawat is a public figure and is the subject of these articles. The reason I continue to use my real name when signing my comments here and on the ex-premie forum is to protect myself because my life has been threatened by premies. I've also been libelled by Elan Vital in their FAQs, which are on the same page where my name was placed. Plus, no one asked my permission.
-
- Please try to place your vigor as a Wikipedian hobbyist aside and consider that real people who call themselves ex-premies have already been harmed in real life by Rawat's students and his organizations. So many ex-premies have been threatened and harassed into silence and anonymity because of online libel and hate expressed by anonymous premies towards them. I know you don't like me because you consider me to be polemic, Zappaz, but Wikipedia isn't the real world. Having one's livelihood destroyed, being the object of character assignation, and especially having one's life threatened is serious business. All these things and more have happened. In real life.
-
- Cynthia Gracie, Sept. 1, 2004
- Your allegations are not believable. If just 5% of these were true, you would have gone already to the police. The fact that you haven't, means that you are either liying, deranged, or your intentions are to twist the reality even more, and further smear the object of your hate,. Your name was never mentioned in any of the elan vital pages, so how can you have been libelled? -- 64.81.88.140 15:20, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-
- (Sigh...) You don't know what I've done or not done, but I do thank you for proving my point about anonymous personal attacks on my character and my mental health by premies and EV. Deranged? That's not very original, 140! Premies have called me a baby-killer. Why? Because I've written on the forum about my abortion in the 70s that the cult played a part in coercing me to have. At least have some originality!
-
- If you want an explanation about libel, consult an attorney. Meantime, 140, calm down. Why don't you do what you claim Maharaji teaches you so well to do? Isn't that the whole point of these articles? Go "within inside," meditate on Holy Name, so you can feel and express some of that real peace he teaches so well, according to his students on all those official websites. Btw, I don't lie. The only time I have ever lied continuously was when I worked for him. Lying to benefit and protect Prem Rawat is habit-forming amongst his students. Once again, I don't hate Maharaji. That's his, Elan Vital's and your characterization.
-
- Cynthia Gracie, Sept. 1, 2004
-
-
- Cynthia, I only revealed names that were already openly on the internet such as your name so I did not break anyone's privacy. Do you want me to remove your name? Andries 16:56, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-
-
- 64.81.88.140 Cheating people in the name of God is not a criminal offense so even if all the accusations are true then it does not make sense to go to the police. Religious charlatans have nothing to fear from the law. Andries 16:51, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I am curious — what untrue statements about Ms. Gracie were made on this page? 129.115.29.205 17:02, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-
- Gee, nice try. Really, that was good! Are you a lawyer for EV? You tell the folks here which item on the faq describes me. I'm quite sure you already know which item describes me under this statement: "Of the 15-20 people posting as various anonymous personae on the hate (my emphasis) site, it has been documented that:..." You go first, 205. I mean really, 205, it's so obvious that I can't understand why EV didn't have the cajones to name me! And sorry, I'm not going to tell you anything about what I've done about threats.
-
- Cynthia Sept. 2, 2004
- You must be blind: Cynthia was making accussations about his life being threatened. You go to the police for that. She hasn't. Has she?
-
- My life was threatened today too by a collegaue with a knife but I did not go to the police or to the human resources departement. Andries 19:36, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Merging
Please respond to the proposal to merge this into the Criticism of Prem Rawat article on the talk page Talk:Criticism of Prem Rawat --Zappaz 17:15, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I think it's too early for that. We need to get more raw info first. --Uncle Ed 14:50, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
[edit] What is a premie? I think you are wrong Jossi
Jossi, a premie is a follower of Maharaji. So ex-premie=ex-follower. Some of these ex-premies are vocal critics. Andries 17:33, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- No, Andries, No. You are getting a bit confused: Ex-premies are a small and vociferous number of ex-students that call themselves "exes" or "ex-premies" and that are the generators of 99.99% of the criticism aimed at Prem Rawat and his students. I have friends that are no longer students and will be shocked to be called ex-premies and be to be bunched together with the likes Jim. Do your research. Students of Maharaji have stoped calling themselves "premies" long ago. In India they still call themselves that as it is appropriate within their culture. --≈ jossi ≈
-
- Jossi, when did they stop calling themselves premies? Andries 19:31, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-
-
- I would say about 15-20 years ago. --≈ jossi ≈
-
