| Revision as of 15:08, 18 March 2008 editMaelefique (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,654 edits →just a note...: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:04, 18 March 2008 edit undoPatW (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,382 edits →just a note...Next edit → | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| Hey where are all the flames on this page? I expected there to more here! :) Anyways, I just wanted to say, regardless of it's acceptability/appropriateness/whatever on the PR discussion page, that as a historian I found your related experiences that you recently posted to be quite interesting and somewhat enlightening. Generally speaking, I see problems with any group who uses secrecy as a primary tool against scrutiny. Thanks again.-- ] <small>]</sup></small> 15:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC) | Hey where are all the flames on this page? I expected there to more here! :) Anyways, I just wanted to say, regardless of it's acceptability/appropriateness/whatever on the PR discussion page, that as a historian I found your related experiences that you recently posted to be quite interesting and somewhat enlightening. Generally speaking, I see problems with any group who uses secrecy as a primary tool against scrutiny. Thanks again.-- ] <small>]</sup></small> 15:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC) | ||
| Thanks. Re the flames. I originally used this page as a brief statement of intent so as people could be clear of my position regarding the Prem Rawat article which frankly was the only article I felt strongly enough to come here to edit. I am altogether too busy with work to have the time really even for this let alone other articles. Various discussions spilled over from the Talk Page article to here, over a period of 3 years, notably on Prem Rawat's divinity. Recently I was warned that my Talk page amounted to 'soapboxing' (which I'd never heard of before). So I removed it to show willing to conform to Misplaced Pages protocol. I suppose it is effectively not really removed as all previous content is recorded in the history menu. So it was essentially just a gesture towards compliance and civility.] (]) 18:04, 18 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:04, 18 March 2008
Request for Arbitration
You have been named as a party at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration#Prem Rawat ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 20:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Prem Rawat
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Prem Rawat/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Prem Rawat/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, John Vandenberg (talk) 02:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
just a note...
Hey where are all the flames on this page? I expected there to more here! :) Anyways, I just wanted to say, regardless of it's acceptability/appropriateness/whatever on the PR discussion page, that as a historian I found your related experiences that you recently posted to be quite interesting and somewhat enlightening. Generally speaking, I see problems with any group who uses secrecy as a primary tool against scrutiny. Thanks again.-- Maelefique 15:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Re the flames. I originally used this page as a brief statement of intent so as people could be clear of my position regarding the Prem Rawat article which frankly was the only article I felt strongly enough to come here to edit. I am altogether too busy with work to have the time really even for this let alone other articles. Various discussions spilled over from the Talk Page article to here, over a period of 3 years, notably on Prem Rawat's divinity. Recently I was warned that my Talk page amounted to 'soapboxing' (which I'd never heard of before). So I removed it to show willing to conform to Misplaced Pages protocol. I suppose it is effectively not really removed as all previous content is recorded in the history menu. So it was essentially just a gesture towards compliance and civility.PatW (talk) 18:04, 18 March 2008 (UTC)