"

 ""disrubtive edits and Abuse, On the Tm page by the 7th and LB 

A selection of my so called disruptive behavior and abuse:

                    Evening/morning/afternoon. i am sure you have read and discovered - unlike some here - that I am the 7thdrI . My personal views can be found on that talk page. I see you are new to the mediation process; you have my sympathies getting this one ) Namaste Lotus Blossom (ak the 7th) (talk) 

                Edit, you may find the manner in which I address many of the other editors on the page ""strange"". The reason is they have stopped talking to me except in the third person. A curious development, but I thought if I returned the favor they might - as they say ""in this neck of the woods"" - ""get the hint"" -) Lotus Blossom (ak the 7th) (talk)  

            thanks gentlemen.Kbob (talk) 

                Who on earth said I was a man? The7thdr (talk) 

                    Who in heaven said you were a woman? Kbob (talk) 

                    Patriarchal assumptions and language is something that I encounter everyday in my profession Kbob - it would be nothing new here -). Your assumption,seeming without question, that I was male might be one to ""mediate on"" -) Please see Gender neutrality in English But you are forgiven, you are after all less the result of your genitalia then you are a dominate form of socialization. Anyway, let us stop lest you lead me down to a discussion of assumptions, language, professions and gender roles -). Perhaps I shall change by avatars name here just for you -) The7thdr (talk) 

                            Hows that? Better? -) Lotus Blossom (ak the 7th) (talk) 

                            So I guess you are telling me that you are a woman and resent being called a gentlemen. OK, I stand corrected. Thanks for the heads up. -)Kbob (talk) 18:37, 3 August 2009 (UTC

________________________________________________________________________

    I suggest that this article would be best focused on the meditation technique, and organizational aspects should be moved to another article.   Will Beback  talk  

I agree.Uncreated (talk) 

        I agree; although if it is to be included here I think in the Relgion section - as it does seem to support the idea that TM is a religion The7thdr (talk) 

            We may not like it, but this is a celebrity-focused world. The involvement of celebrities in TM probably did more to promote it adoption than all of the scientific studies combined. Both deserve space in the article.   Will Beback  talk  

            This what i said before the ""popularity section was added - but it was ignored. Now it is in place I think it makes interesting reading. Like it or I do have to sadly agree with WILL. Whether, ""we"" like it or not, celebrity is important. Indeed, it was the TM authors of this piece that argued this section be added. It is now a little late to complain about something which TM argued to include, when it appears that many of the celebrities (especially the dead ones) its website and promotional material is so keen to suggest endorsed the technique may have actually had a very different view

            keithbob: it is a ""personal website"" from an expert in his field - just as OJ is. (Actually, it's an authors page a much different thing but hey, I'll play along if you want). It was included, so the reader could actually read the full interview. However, if you wish to cite a published source for the same interview - you are obviously unaware of the author - you could cite the following just as easily: Conversations with Kurt Vonnegut: By Kurt Vonnegut, William Rodney Allen. Where the full text is also included. Alas, not all of it is available to GoogleBooks preview. The7thdr (talk) 

I agree with Will and we should remove the recent additions where people are quoted with negative remarks. It just makes the whole popularity section unbalanced.Uncreated (talk) 

        Not sure what part of WILLs statements you are agreeing to uncreated. Until a balance is archived where it does seem that the people cited are endorsing the produced I do not see how you can remove the recent edits. KV was esp