Restricting the posting of unidentified members - Cast your vote and share your thoughts

The idea of limiting the posting rights of members whose identity is unknown has been proposed. The idea is that we would restrict those who do not identify themselves to the Questions and Answers section, or possibly to other selected sections.

The rationale behind this is that the quality of discussions is likely to improve when the participants are somewhat aware of each others' identities. It also creates an awkward situation when a basically unknown person comes in out of the blue and strongly disagrees or starts preaching something. As pointed out before, we are far more likely to be open to critique when received from a person we know. Also, we would like to see that people are willing to stand behind their words, since many things are easily said when anonymous, since an anonymous person can get away with virtually anything.

If there are no specific objections to this, we would like to start implementing this over the following weeks. Members who would wish to keep posting rights to the entire forum should fill in some basic information in their member profiles to indicate what their background is and where they stand.

Of course exceptions to the rule could be made, for example in a case where the member in question is in a volatile situation for example in his respected religious institution, and the full disclosure of his/her identity might lead to undesirable social ramifications. They would, however, have to disclose the situation to the moderators. In a case of such anonymity, the member would naturally have to use discretion in conflict situations and not rush in head on with the pen as his sword, as that would likely annoy other participants and prompt the question, "just who exactly are you?"

As a clarification, I would like to note that this does not mean permitting anonymous guest posting, but refers to registered members who have not identified themselves in their profiles.

In closing, let me add that this development is not tied to any particular case, but is rather a part of the general evolution of our online sanga.

Any further thoughts on this?

This change has now been implemented. Those who have not been upgraded to the Full Member status are now permitted to post only in the following forums:

- Questions and Answers
- Community, Moderation and Feedback
- Health and Related Topics
- Tech Issues
- Test Zone

To upgrade your status to a Full Member, please fill in your profile and PM me to have the member category changed for you, or if you have a good reason to not fill it in but you'd like to nevertheless participate, at least let the moderators know who you are.

For example, the following items would be welcome in your profile:

• Age
• Location
• Interests - what are you interested in?
• Who is your primary source of inspiration, ie. whom do you follow, if anyone at present?
• A breakdown of your devotional history, where have you been and what have you done?

The aspects above should give us a fairly good picture of who we are. A photo is of course great, if possible. At least I personally like to know how people I am talking with look like.

Let me add that of course nobody needs to give their legal names, addresses or anything of the sort. Just let us know who you are in terms of your interests and history, to help us relate to you.

To edit your profile, go to My Controls at the top right of the view, and see the "Personal Profile" section there.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I think Jagat put it best when he said that an exchange, even ones as seemingly "heavy" as some have been between Jagat and Advaita, are in the context of a relationship. It is that context that makes certain sharp statements palatable for all concerned and, most importantly, allows those participating in the conversation to understand where everyone is "coming from" in a theological sense. However such statements, or even ones less drastic, by someone that we have not a shred of insight into can be rather disturbing.

My thought was this:

Before one becomes a regular member they are able to view the site in its entirety but they can only post to a category like Question and Answers until they become a part of the GD community. This allows the site to introduce these topics to anyone interested and afford them the opportunity to better understand their past/current state in relations to what is happening in this cyber community. They can test the waters of participation by posting questions and/or comments in a designated area.

In order to be a regular participant at this website one must fill out a complete profile (questions that all member’s answer as a part of the registration process and posted profile). This would at least bring context and insights to one's posts as well as uphold the integrity in our exchanges. I remember when I first encountered many of Advaita’s post I had a bit of trouble understanding what he was trying to say. I clicked on his name and was able to find his website which gave me access to who he was, from a theological level which was extremely helpful in understanding where he was coming from.

For those that have a specific need to remain anonymous that can be explained to the moderators and they can then make a decision.

I know I have personally had periods here where three to five devotees would write me letters and PM's that would make more sense if they had a context, at least for myself, as to who this person was and what their background is. It forces us to be a bit more responsible in what we say and I think it will encourage quiet people, like me, to come out of their shell as they are speaking to a community of friends, ones that may not agree all that often, but who have given their insights and experiences to the community as a whole.

Personally I am very grateful to this site as it has given me sanga to go along with my discovery of the books of Srila Ananta dasa Babaji. As much as those books have empowered me to move out of the muck I found myself in they wouldn’t have been nearly as effective if I didn’t have the sanga of so many of the wonderful Vaisnavas here who have given me further insight and the confidence to delve deeper into our spiritual theology, heritage and community.

Personally I think this site is something special and could be a terrific way to provide sanga to many more if, and I do believe there is an if, it remains different than ever other message board which quickly develops into a political/institutional vehicle (pro or con) or a place where faceless people do their best to demean other faceless people.

One may ask if this is a form of censprship but the member's of this board have to decide if we are intrested in a forum where anyone, at any time, can say whatever they want or if this forum is a meeting place for those that are looking for a greater Vaisnava community and relationships with these particular Vaisnavas and aspiring Vaisnavas. I, personally, am more interested in the latter. Relationships are built upon more than remembering someones cyber nickname. They are built upon a common bond, communication, trust and even disagreements.

Jai Radhe!

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

I personally don't mind disclosing my identity because I feel relatively comfortable with the crowd here. I don't feel like changing my whole user name though, so is having a signature enough?

Another thought would be maybe an identity thread, where everyone (with exceptions if needed) posts their short bio first. Personally I love to learn about the people on the board so I have been through plenty of user's profiles, but some little introduction method would be neat.

Feel free to use whatever username you wish. Even the name in the signature isn't really necessary, as long as you have something relevant filled in in your profile. Whoever is interested can then look it up.

Perhaps members like Babhru and Audarya-lila can also have "ID verification*" power just in case someone felt both a strong reason for not divulging their identity publically and a hesitation to introduce themselves to an existing moderator? Having a couple of demi-mods from an ISKCON/Gaudiya Math background might give a more inclusive aura to proceedings.

That said, it is a somewhat sad and strange scenario that people want to dance yet wear a veil. I guess it's understandable if someone does not have an independent lifestyle or mindset and fears the damage that may be done if their authorities/followers/partners/whoever find out about their participation here. Hopefully no one holds back from introducing themselves out of a desire to engage in the dastardly act of sniping nor, at the other end of motives, out of fear that their contributions will be ridiculed.

* verification is too strong a term obviously, and the process should really just be a confidential introduction, "My name is... I live in... I'd prefer to remain private because..." I don't think anyone needs to send copies of their passport or bank account number. Hmmm, then again...

I made some remarks about this on the Shastra thread just a minute ago

http://www.gaudiyadiscussions.com/index.ph...165&#entry18211

My main point is that one of the things that I have been appreciating most about this forum is that a sense of community has been building here, even with the steady addition of new participants.

Of course, I realize that Madhava and I, as moderators and most prolific posters, take up a lot of the place here and so it is quite natural that some people may feel repulsed by our personalities and viewpoints.

This is quite natural, and though somewhat distressing (who doesn't want everyone to like them?), little can be done about it.

However, the key is a fundamental sense of respect for everyone else who is here. We have to keep coming back to that baseline, even if we sometimes slip up in the heat of a disagreement.

The idea of giving some profile information is simply to make this easier. It helps me a great deal to know that Member 312 is from Switzerland, is 45 years old, spent two years in Iskcon, 5 years in the Himalayas practicing kriya yoga, and the last six years working in the Geneva sewer system. This would automatically endear him to me personally, and give me a sense of respect for his life experience, an interest to hear what light those personal experiences could shed on bhakti yoga, etc., etc.

On the other hand, those who mock us with false information or refuse to share are, in effect saying, we don't really want to participate. We are not asking for a full detailed confession, but as a community, we should follow Rupa Goswami's dictum:

dadAti pratigRhNAti guhyam AkhyAti pRcchati
bhuGkte bhojAyate caiva SaDvidhaM prIti-lakSaNam

This is just a kind of beginning point, that's all.

Since the poll seems quite unanimous, I'd like to start implementing this within the week.

After the change, those who haven't filled in their profiles or contacted a moderator to present their case will receive a notice about the restriction, encouraging them to share more of themselves and for the time being post their questions to the Q&A section.

Is that all right?

I note that most (3/4 or so) of our regulars have already filled in their profiles. If you haven't done that yet, now is as good a time as any.

I will announce in the second post of this thread (the blank slot) when the change becomes active.

We need to define some common things that should preferably be mentioned in everyone's profiles. I would suggest the following:

• Age
• Location
• Interests - what are you interested in?
• Who is your primary source of inspiration, ie. whom do you follow, if anyone at present?
• A breakdown of your devotional history, where have you been and what have you done?

The aspects above should give us a fairly good picture of who we are. A photo is of course great, if possible. At least I like to know what people I am talking with look like.

I agree with this, but I also reiterate:

There is no need to use a real name, if you feel that this may lead to problems. Though I cannot think of many reasons why this would be so, it is possible that one is living in compromised circumstances where participation on this site would be looked upon unfavorably.

I cannot really think why anyone would feel the need to hide any of the other information Madhava has suggested be given. If anyone can think of any good reasons, then please let us know.

There are, of course, plenty of ego reasons. Someone may not wish to say, "I push amphetamines in front of the New York Public Library and pimp a battery of prostitutes for Krishna." This, I can understand. But that is not what we are asking for: just a general orientation and not a full confessional autobiography.

For those of you who wish to have your real name visible, you can now go to your control panels, and change the "Custom member title" field under your profile info.

The following has now been added to the board rules:


I will start implementing the change now.

Users who have not been upgraded to Full Membership will now receive the following message when attempting to post to forums where they don't have permissions:


I will now send PMs to all active users who haven't been upgraded. You can view all full members from the member list by selecting Full Member as the search criteria.

I'm not for it.

HEY! That was a test to see my status. Guess I'm still on.

Please bear with any glitches in the transition period.

This is one of the places where you can post, in contrast to the rest of the site. A careful reading of what I just wrote tells you:


Depending on how things go in this forum, we may in the future limit that to only Q&A and Test.

I can't see why there would be any, it was a pretty straightforward modification. Or do you think this forum should also be restricted? I left it open for the sake of feedback, but now that I come to think of it, the unidentified folks shouldn't have that much to contribute on moderation policies etc. Shall I drop this one from the list?

Those who are Full Members:

• Now have space for 2000 PMs
• Can send PMs to up to 10 receivers at once
• Can add events to the calendar

*glitches* I just meant I received a PM from someone whose membership seemed to not have been updated immediately.

I had an hour or so spare time here while making some phone calls, so I deleted some redundant and/or duplicate member accounts that have been inactive for some time now and with only a few or zero total posts, just in case someone wonders where some names have disappeared.

Hmm... The membership doesn't update automatically when you fill in the profile. I have to change it manually, so PM me if you need your member status upgraded. I believe it was put quite clearly in the message that was sent out.

I mean, otherwise someone could just fill in blablaabcabc and post all over the place. The profiles need to be previewed before the upgrade.

We went over all active members yesterday before the upgrade, and everyone who had their profiles filled in at that time were upgraded; the others were sent a notice to upgrade and notify the Administration to have their account upgraded.

Sorry, I did not read it carefully enough. My apologies.

Madhava and Jagat I remember you both suggsting that I not do this to my own forum when we had trouble w/ the istagosthi folks comming and causing trouble. You both said a closed forum would not work.
Good luck w. it anyway

I was under the impression that that was "closed" in the sense of forcing people to log in before they could read. I still wouldn't do that.

Dear Brian,

This is not a closed forum. No one has to log in to read. It simply restricts posting to certain areas. Nor is this a kind of censorship system: people will still be able to speak freely. Nor is it a surreptitious government identity gathering conspiracy.

All we want is to create a certain community spirit, which in our opinion, requires a little bit of give, i.e., you tell us about yourself. We don't really want people to come in here and speak impolitely to others without letting us know a little bit about where they are coming from.

For instance, my attitude would be quite different if I knew you were a 17-years-old ethnic Russian from Tajikistan who saw people chanting in the streets of Alma Ata one day, or if you are a 40-year veteran of Iskcon who has never read anything but Prabhupada's books. It's about facilitating interaction and the new integration of members.

We want to keep this site as open as possible, but we basically want members who want to be a part of our community, who share in its (rather open) goals, and not people who have other motives.

Does this make better sense to you now?

If you like, you can now upload your picture in a max. size of 500x500px instead of the 250x250 we used to have.

But these days, sonny boy, you never know, you never know!

In the words of a fellow sceptic:


So, watch ye!

Once again, this is a misunderstanding. Please folks, read this thread carefully. No one has to give their real name or exact details about residence, phone number or even email. As a matter of fact, I would advise against giving anything other than a generic email address or home website.

However, a general indication of country, state or city would be helpful.


The point here is this: Not everyone has the time or patience to go looking through all your posts to find out exactly who you are. So if you have already given information about yourself somewhere on the forum, what is the harm in just giving a brief resume of it on your profile where people can find it right away?

All this hassle just to get rid of Rasamrita......

The suggestion was sent to me; I am not behind the idea, though I found it valuable, as did many others, the poll indicates.

If I had wanted to get rid of RasaMrita, I could have just firewalled his IP address block from the server and he wouldn't have known what hit him

I said in the first post of the thread:


Are you saying I'm dishonest?

Really, Advaita. Why don't you read what we have been saying? Rasamrita was only the "goutte d'eau qui fait déborder la vase."

You may remember me going through this with Dirty Hari a while back. Dirty Hari has kindly provided an interesting profile which I greatly appreciate. It is clear from Rasamrita's comments that he is a little paranoid and does not have much appreciation for the people here or purpose of this site. He has left on his own, but is welcome back whenever he wants to come back.

Of course, if he shows continued bad manners and disrespects the participants in this group, we will count the strikes until he is out, profile or not.

Bad manners as in respecting the shastra, unlike you?

Show me where he showed bad manners, please. Quote.

Didnt I warn you, Madhava? Didnt I? You think your Gurudeva will be pleased with this? Do you even care?

For example:


I can add more as they surface. There are a number of rather disdainful recent comments out there, and some more in his older posts.

What the heck does this have to do with my guru? If somebody goes berserk like in the quote you presented, how does that relate to me or my guru?

Unless you of course decide to write him a letter out of concern and present your story of us apostates and what not. I hope you are mature enough to not do that.

Do I even care? No, of course I don't because I am an apostate and consider him an ordinary mundane man, just like Rupa Gosvami, if that's where you are heading at. Make sure you tell him I said that, too.

Now come on.

At any rate, Advaita, it is clear that you have difficulty understanding what it means to participate in a discussion group that is somewhat pluralistic in its outlook.

You are quite welcome to start a hard-line, no-nonsense group that adheres purely to your shastric principles. Or, since you already have your website where you can state clearly your uncompromising position, you are welcome to regularly refer people to your articles there. I myself do this from time to time as I feel it helps me save time and self-repetition.

The Bhagavatam says, I believe, that even a worm in stool is happy and refuses to accept the wisdom of the sages. You cannot expect everyone to hold the same opinion, or to be outraged about exactly the same things as you. So we ask you to show a little detachment from the results of your preaching.

On the whole, I think we have been respectful of your position, even though you took great offense at the comparison to Iskcon. I am sorry for that; you seem to have misunderstood my intention. I was only trying to show that there was a certain common mentality; but it is quite true that there are both liberals and conservatives within Iskcon, as the Krishna Culture site illustrates so clearly. So it is meaningless to use Iskcon as an example, and I will not do so again.

In conclusion, if you find that Madhava and I, as well as the majority of the participants here, are too heterodox for your liking, we cannot oblige you to remain in a sangha that is not sajatiya, nor snigdha, nor svato-vare. Evidently, if you find us as offensive as you say, and you cannot convince us of the error of our ways, then it would be incumbent on you to either kill us or cut out our tongues. If that too is impossible, then you should avoid us, for everything we say is contaminated by our offenses, like milk touched by the lips of a serpent.

Your servant, Jagadananda Das.

This is type of personality that should be kept out IMHO. He has already proven to you all that he likes to talk behind peoples backs in PM`s.

The old Raganuga-forums were closed down because somebody said something, I still do not know to how drastic an extent we were misrepresented, to my guru about what is going on in the forums. His main concern seemed to be that someone might get offended and that that would not be good, and that no such thing should be connected to him. It had much to do with the clash between our respective traditions and some exponents of Gaudiya Math philosophy. Therefore we closed the raganuga-forums and moved the sangha into a neutral territory in which nothing could be interpreted as the policy of anyone but the one who speaks. This is really very clearly stated in the statement of purpose of the forums and additionally all over the place at regular intervals.

Ever since the beginning I've received complaints about impolite postings, and I hate to break the news but most of the time it's been about you. I've even received messages where people threaten to write to my guru unless I block you from posting your harsh critique of ISKCON and Gaudiya Math. As you know, I nevertheless never did that for whatever reason, though the thought occured to me on a number of occasions when I felt uneasy about the harsh and blunt language you sometimes employed to drive your point through, the point you firmly believe is the truth.

How ironical it is that now you sound like you are about to go to him and complain to him about me. I am hoping to keep him out of petty quarrels, but rest assured that there will be two sides to the story if it comes down to that.

The bottom line is that we are trying to develop a broad-based cyber-community here, in which people with diverse views from all nooks and corners of the tradition can interact in a peaceful environment without - as was my guru's primary concern with internet forums - offending each other. This is too valuable a thing to be abandoned, and I am going to see to it that it will prevail.

Well said, Madhava!

I find myself keeping back to mainly learn here. But probably thats just whats causing suspicion: what is he doing with the information he's reading here? What about I'm saying this and this person is not really trustable and uses what I said in a different context so it can cause harm? Anything can be misinterpreted when taken out of context. To understand the spiritual situation of someone is complex and definetly requires faith in order to make it through occasional misunderstandings. Newcomers often judge a Vaishnava the way he looks, his eyes, his body language surcharged with his spiritual realization. From sastra we learn, no, a Vaishnava is not recognized the way he looks but the way he speaks.

An internet forum provides the way a Vaishnava speaks, but isnt it that great Vaishnavas sometimes refuse to reveal certain knowledge just by seeing the individuals in an audience? And thats probably the same at a Vaishnava forum, we cant see the one who's reading and thats makes one feel unsure?

Madhava:

I understand the circumstances, and see how Advaitadas' clarity of expression in this regard can cut deep into someone's faith, but isn't it understandable that if one has such a clear view of the orthodox tradition as Advaitadas has, that he then has no other choice than to voice it in clear language? Maybe he just needs to learn to say the same thing in a more polite way. Personally I felt he took the role of the traditionalist that was also needed among the voices of this discussion group; I am talking now about the relationship from the traditional side towards the neo-Gaudiya groups, first of all Iskcon and ACBS. This author and guru never hesitated to speak/write in blunt and sometimes offensive ways, that it appears quite fitting that there is one voice on our side that does that too.

Perhaps it would be helpful for him like for all of us, if we could read posts as though we had received them in snail mail, and answer as though we did it by handwriting a personal letter to the recipient. The focus of us all here is the summum bonum, the highest good. Yet, the medium, this Internet-speed, makes a huge difference, and we actually should slow ourselves down in both reading and answering. The soul gets lost in all this speed. Behind each post is a human being, which we tend to forget. We need to feel more, when we think, what we think, and how it affects others, our readers, you out there.

Sadhu! Sadhu!

I often find the tone of Advaitadas' posts unnecessarily rude, and quite counterproductive to the good effect he surely wishes to achieve.

However, I find his posts extremely valuable. This forum has seen a few posters who are as rude as Advaitadas (or more so) but whose rudeness is not balanced by the deep and important content that Advaitadas routinely provides. So I don't consider Advaitadas' situation to be parallel to theirs. As long as the moderators are ready to delete the rare "over the top, unnecessarily obnoxious" post, I see no problem.

Let me say, however, that I find it repellent to read threats of "I'm going to tell your guru what you said/did/wrote." Such threats seem more like what one might expect from a cowardly elementary school bully, rather than from a mature Vaishnava. In fact, I wonder whether the forum policy specifically forbids participants from issuing personal threats against one another? If so, such "I'm going to tattle on you" posts might merit deletion in keeping with forum standards.

We should be able to defeat opposing arguments by citing guru, sadhu and shastra, and using the standard tools of reasoned debate. Arguments that boil down to "my guru can beat up your guru" belong on the schoolyard, not in this forum.

Sadly, when such issues are brought up, the poster may consider his anger and harshness well justified, as we saw in a certain recent thread. The poster was extremely annoyed by the fact that his freedom of speech was being infringed upon. So that seems to be a problem. I agree that the informative content of Advaitadas' posts is precious. However, statements such as the following tend to lead into problematic situations, this one in the context of ISKCON/Gaudiya Math.


I appreciate his participation, but I find this indignition at the earliest sign of disagreement troubling, this attack and defeat mode. One might draw a parallel between that and a certain class of preachers, but for peace's sake let's leave that aside.

We have slightly broadened the arena for those who aren't full members. They can now also post in the following sections:

- Health and Related Topics
- Tech Issues

It is unlikely that anyone could cause a big stir in them as long as the topics stay within the parameters of their respective forums.

I would like to be able to particpate in every topic that I started.

I am no longer a Full Member because I withdrew my biography. My reasons for withdrawing my biography are manifold and include:

the cultivation of , what appeared to me and others as, a patronising attitude toward me based on information in my biography.

I am going to put in another biography and I will deal with the patronisation and condescension as and when it arises rather than carry it as scar tissue. This wiil be good for my maturation.

I cannot recall your having ever reported #2 to the moderators, not to me anyway. Please direct me to the posts in question and I'll edit them accordingly.

To post in topics you've started in sections reserved for full members, you'll need to be a full member. I take it you have requested to have your member status changed in full knowledge of this fact. If there is a particular topic you've started which is still active, PM the URL to me and I'll see if I can fit it somewhere where you can post.

I am 18 now and old enough to be on my own. I shall be moving soon closer to a temple atmosphere and will no longer be posting to Gaudiya Discussions. I pretty much discussed everything I wanted to on here anyway. Thanks to you all for your kindness and compassion upon this foolish girl. You seem like a good group of devotees and I pray to Krishna you will all become nice Iskcon devotees again.
Hare Krishna and goodbye,
your fallen servant,
gopidust

I personally do not approve of "outing." I am afraid I may have been lax in confronting it. So I am very sorry if it has happened to anyone. I will certainly be more vigilant in the future and will insist that everyone respect the identities in the way that the people using them want.

I cannot recall being patronizing myself, but I may have done so in a misplaced attempt at jocularity. If that is the source of the difficulties, it was done unintentionally. Once again, I apologize. Hopefully neither of the above complaints will have reason to arise again.

In general, please do not hesitate to level openly with the moderators. We are not trying to make life difficult for anyone, and we would appreciate it if you did not try to make life difficult for us as well.

I hope that we can continue to improve our moderation standards to a level of comfort for all participating members.

Your servant,

Jagadananda Das.

Point taken.

I realise I was incredibly offensive to the ritviks in istagosthi.org but I actually was attacking only the bogus philosophy even though it didn't sound that way. You made a good point I don't think Radharani would like me acting that way. I know offending the devotees is the worst aparadha. I was able to do it while acting anonymously but I don't know what kind of reaction I will get anyway. Hopefully none because I was sincerely trying to serve Krishna but so were the rest of them. Oh well.
I'm not leaving because of anything else but I am moving on with my life. I am still "in the closet". Nobody will know who I am at the temples and I can live a normal lifestyle. Jaya.

Yes, anonymity won't do much good. Paramatma has a pretty good GPS system in place for locating offenders as they speak, regardless of their hiding behind anonymity.

We should leave the position of speaking for Paramatma to...Paramatma. This kind of threatening other vaisnavas with the wrath of God, is unpleasent to me.

i think the restricting of posts is a good idea... while i am a latecomer to this forum to see it here, i am aware of it from other forums where folks come to disrupt or lack a maturity or consciousness for communication

what i do think is odd though is only moderators can respond to news events that a moderator posted... i mean like really odd...with my current status i can inquire and respond to topics relating to the confidential lilas of Radha and Krishna but a news event on the front page of the n.y. times i can't... anyone explain this to me?

i wanted to respond to someone's new's article

and so if one wanted to, they could send you some news that they considered pertinent to gaudiya vaishnavism and then if the moderators considered it pertinent as well, it would be posted and if it stirred a big discussion as many people responded to it as in moderators responded but because i wasn't a moderator, i couldn't respond to the article that i submitted

so why this keeping such a tight lid on the news and giving us all the Radha and Krishna opiate that we want?

i'm actually not complaining... just curious ... sometimes things sound very strange to me and when i hear the explanations, they make perfect sense

Thank you Madhava. Sounds like a good plan. To comment upon the news in the appropriate forum.

Ys, Babu

I would like to quote the following from the original post of this thread to remind everyone of the fact that exceptions are possible.

Dear Vaisnavajis,
Please add me as a full member; my whole existence is dedicated to Gourangadev.
(Has been for a very long time).
Truthfully,
Vishnupriya Devi