I've kept half an eye on the Wiki phenomena for some time. They're "just another" form of groupware, stuff that allows groups of folk to interact, like usenet ("newsgroup").

Wiki's can be well useful, this Forum's a kind of Wiki. Many software engineering projects use them to keep tabs on all the information and documentation they need. They are so very useful in that context, just because the content of the Wiki can be tested and relied on.

I mean, in an engineering context, we can generally tell whether info is accurate. Bullshit serves no-one's purpose. You won't find many engineers claiming a Neutral Point of View is a Good Thing. Engineers get things right (a Good Thing) or not (a Bad Thing) -- no room for the NPOV there!!

So it really is true that the Wikipedians want to make a Great Encyclopedia of the Knowledge of the World, one which embraces a Neutral Point of View? That's funny, and an hilarious perversion of the technology they've adopted. A good and useful source of information about the world *cannot* have have a Neutral Point of View, just because there are flawed and useless things in the world. Rawat's teachings, for one.

And sadly, as we have seen, the Wikipedian encyclopedia model, for another. Listen up, Wikipedians, there *is* such a thing as Truth -- if you don't think that you have no business trying to create a reference work in the first place.

I do hope the Wikipedia does not waste too much of its idealistic supporters' time. With a bit of luck it'll waste the time of cult activists instead, keep them busy rediting information until their respective leaders are happy with the "Neutrality" of the "encyclopedic" information served up about their mind control rackets.

Perhaps we should use the Wiki technology to make an "Encyclopedia of Maharaji". The badly broken Wikipedia would then matter far less, at least in this one small (in scale; not in principle) area of human knowledge.