Talk:Prem Rawat/Archive 9

message: Zappaz, you have kindly asked me to come over and give temp1 a copyedit. I'm of course very flattered, and I do want to help out. Upon reviewing the article, however, I see a problem: to be honest with you, I think the PR article (any of the current alternative versions of it, in fact) needs fundamental rework, of the tear-down-to-the-bones-thrash-structurally-and-reapply-new-meat variety. This is the kind of thing I could attempt (as painful as that might be) with the main version when all factions are represented and not feel like I was stepping on any toes, as I could simply be brutal in my editing in the name of a better final product. In contrast, though, temp1 was explicitly set up to give the pro faction a chance to construct an article version in peace, and while frankly it was expected that the resulting product might tend toward a pro-PR bent (just as it was expected temp2 might tend toward an anti-PR bent), it would represent a finished product that the pro faction could use as their benchmark and as a resource for contributions to the final article. In other words, temp1 was explicitly set up as a haven for a pro-PR editing stance where no one was going to come in and fundamentally thrash your work into unrecognizability. I fear, though, if I perform the copyedit that the little editor voice in my head starts describing when I scan through the current article, that is precisely what I will be doing to your efforts. That would mean my brutally thrashed, practically unrecognizable article sitting atop your temp1 edit history. You would then be faced with whether to revert large portions of it to recover your original effort, which might be personally awkward for you because you and I are enjoying a cordial relationship and you wouldn't want to seem ungrateful after asking me to come over here in the first place. In other words, I would characterize your gracious request to me as being to come over and polish temp1 before it is thrown to the wolves, but I must now make clear to you, my friend, that I am one of the wolves. With all that in mind, I am disposed to backing away from a temp1 edit. However, I am your servant and will do what you like with regard to your version. I could attempt a style-only edit, but most of the text already looks reasonably readable, and the boundary between stylistic and substantive editing can get fuzzy, especially for me once the adrenaline starts pumping. I would be more than happy to do the full edit, but you now understand what that would entail. I suppose I could do something on yet another temp page. To minimize any personal awkwardness for you, I am adopting "standing down" as my default position, so that you need do nothing; unless I hear from you affirmatively otherwise, I will simply suspend my plan to copyedit temp1. I'm sorry for any inconvenience. --Gary D 08:37, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)
:Thank you Gary for the honesty and candor. Much respected and appreciated.
:I have "saved" the current revision at Prem_Rawat/temp1/Rev_a, so this is my humble request to you:
:#Go ahead, get the editor-"wolf" in you loose, get the adrenaline flowing, and copyedit temp1 mercilessly. 
:#One condition, thought: Do the edit within my proposal of two separate articles, i.e. Summary of criticism with link to Criticism of Prem Rawat
:Looking forward to see the results of your work on temp1, if you agree with the above :).
:(I hope that Richard G, who has contributed to this version as much or more than me, will agree to this, if you don't Richard, just say so...) 
:--Zappaz 18:59, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Good start, Gary. I may be posting some raw text in some of the new sections (as bullets maybe), just some facts that you can weave into the story. I agree that there is a story to be told here. BTW, I do not think that PR needs "varnishing"... his story since he was 4 years old, including the controversy, provides quite a bit of fascination already..... Look forward to working on this. Maybe Richard can chip-in as well with some more facts and data. --Zappaz 04:26, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Gary D's second thoughts

message: Any premie who was accepted to live in a DLM ashram was required to live a life of poverty, chastity, and obedience. These ashrams were considered by both community and ashram premies to be Guru Maharaj Ji's ashrams. The ultimate obedience was to Maharaji himself, but it also filtered down from the ashram "House Father or Mother" and community coordinator for day to day activities.  It was required that Arti be sung twice per day to a photo of Maharaji that was set up on a altar in the ashram medition room or in the main room of an ashram that also had an altar set up with a chair for Maharaji, a pillow for his feet, and a large photo of him.  Because Arti was usually sung after nightly satsang meetings in the community setting, singing Arti at night was not repeated when an ashram resident came home to the ashram after evening satsang.
A vegetarian diet was not an option but was a requirement.  No meat, fish, or eggs were allowed in the ashram diet.  Another requirement was that no ashram premie use alcohol, drugs, or tobacco.  It must be noted that a community premie had to be accepted into the ashram -- one couldn't simply move in at will -- there was an approval process, usually conducted by the community coordinator who had to be an ashram premie, and sometimes in conjunction with a traveling Initiator/Instructor.  This was how the ashrams were managed from 1976-77 in the U.S. through the time the ashrams were officially closed by Rawat.  Another requirement and full understanding was that any premie who was accepted to move into one of Maharaji's ashrams was that they were making a life-time commitment to Maharaji by doing so.  
Another Ex-Premie 13:34, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Ashrams

message: I have never heard Maharaji call himself an "inspirational speaker", neither any of his students will make such comment about him.
Maharaji is a teacher and guide. In India, you would call this perosn a "guru". In the West that word is loaded with negative connotations or at least associated with Hindu or Sikh religion. Calling it a "teacher" does not cut it either, because a teacher is only such for his students, not for others.
Making the comment that he is a "sometimes controversial inspirational speaker" is misleading. I agree that he is controversial, as would be anyone challenging the status quo. But to say that he is an inspirational speaker is wrong.
I am changing it to "controversial figure" 
I also removed the disputed label, as it no longer needed given that this is a well referenecced biographical account.
--64.81.88.140 15:57, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inspirational speaker? 

message: I kind reminder to another-ex-premie, .140 and others: This Talk page is not Usenet, or a discussion forum. You may want to take these interesting discussions to the many forums available for that purpose or to Usenet. Thank you for your consideration .--Zappaz 18:37, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  A reminder: This is not USENET