, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Heah, 

Thanks for your reply.  First, I wrongly assumed that Jossi had started the deletions.  He just joined in and was the one who reported me for reverting.  I didn't know that there was an edit log that tracked all activity but someone showed me afterward.  I still maintain, however, that these deletions were indeed acts of vandalism.  They weren't corroborative edits, that's for sure.  They were, as I said, wholesale, repeated deletions of original text.  You speculate that the problem might have been my lack of citations but, in this case, I can assure you that's not the problem.  Jossi's full aware of the fact that both Geaves' comments and Rawat's own contradictory words (in his letter inviting his followers to the Millenium festival) are proven and accurate.  Here's a link to the Geaves' article:

Footnote 5 is the one where Geaves' relieves Rawat of any knowledge or responsibility for the Millenium hype.

And here's a link to the letter Rawat himself wrote which clearly puts the lie to Geaves' revisionism:

The Wiki rule about vandalism states that most is dealt with by fast reversions.  However, it doesn't say that persistent efforts in this regard may nonetheless violate the three-reversion rule and trigger blocking!  It does seem a little Kafak-esque, don't you think?

Finally, on the more general complaint I have about Jossi Fresco, I do invite you to take some time, if you would, and review his editing of the Rawat articles.  He is a paid web guy for a person who is most certainly a cult leader, a man who still has many, many followers who believe that he is God in human form.  Jossi is adept at using Wikipedia to ensure that the articles never truly capture the story of the man.  The fact that he's a Wikipedia administrator is worrying, in my opinion.  18:13