Loading AI tools
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Meher Baba. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
Can somebody fact check my change the 1957 date for visit to more likely 1956?
Definitely in Myrtle Beach in May 1958.--Nemonoman (talk) 14:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- I can confirm that the newspaper article is from June 30, 1957. I can send you the scan of the newspaper page if you want to see it. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 14:58, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I won't dispute the paper publication date, but I absolutely guarantee that the one and only time MB was at Duce's house was in 1956. He was not in US in 1957. There are numerous accounts, photos, documents, etc. So keep the pub date 57, OK. But isn't there any chance somebody screwed up? --Nemonoman (talk) 15:34, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- Also please see the section above this -- accident in India. Baba was bedridden essentially for 6 months or more following the accident.
- I do not know what to make of this .... so I am sending you the newspaper clipping via email for you to check and see if you can make sense of it. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- Note that the newspaper is from June 30 1957 and speaks in the future form of "he will be visiting" referring to July... ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- I have posted the clipping on my website here so all can see. It is just as Jossi says. But the content is also (sung to the tune of westminster chimes--)"Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong...wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong". I don't know how to prove the negative -- except to say that while the trip to the Duces in 56 is HUGELY documented, there is absolutely no reference anywhere to any 1957 trip to US or ANYWHERE, while Baba was barely able to leave his bed following his hip and leg fractrues. --Nemonoman (talk) 16:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
The newspaper speaks of a 10th visit, which was changed to 6th visit. ?? ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- Well, clearly that article couldn't be wrong. Apparently that 10th visit would be the one the newspaper said was planned for July 1957. Apparently the newspaper also knew of 3 additional visits that were to be executed -- or perhaps had already had been executed -- between the 1956 6th visit to US, and the visit the Newspaper says is planned for July 1957.
- NOTE: I'm pretty much done trying to reconcile actual Facts to the stupid misstatements attributed to the AP wire service. Please find some independent example of this story, so we can feel confident it was in fact an AP story, and not some gag made up by a bored reporter. Please find some other independent corroboration of the 10th visit in July 1957, and while you're at it, of the death in a cave story. Some alternate source with at least as unassailable a reputation for journalistic integrity, accuracy, and reliability as The Big Springs (Texas) Daily wire desk. I have presented multiple sources that show these stories to be in error, and with not much more effort, can pile on references that support that proof. Can you find independent corroboration of these supposed wire stories?
- Nemonoman, these are wires of the Associated Press... The reason I am providing The Big Springs is that these small newspapers are all available at newspaperarchives.com and thus searchable. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 05:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to say, NO, I disagree, there is a need to corroborate. There are a lot of links of trust in this chain.
- Did the AP get the story right?
- What was the distribution date of the AP story?
- Did the Big Spring (Texas) Daily publish the story AS THE AP DISTRIBUTED IT? and WHEN the AP distributed.
- If the story hit the AP wire, surely SOME other publication picked it up.
- As for the AP death story, I HAVE seen that story in another paper -- I think maybe New York Daily News -- at the Meher Center Library. That one WAS clearly picked up. But why should a CLEARLY erroneous AP story be offered here? It's not a NPOV question or cultural context question. It's just wrong. Perhaps some good newspaper ran it, and then ran a retraction. We'll never know. We'll just glorify a stupid error. This is nuts.--Nemonoman (talk) 11:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. That is a lot of people's fear of Wikipedia that people will post false reports because they're interesting to write. It's very interesting that there was a false news wire about Baba's death. But it's not encyclopedic information that such a false wire was released. It could belong in an article about false news reporting as an example, or in a Trivia section. Meher Baba died in his bed in Meherazad at 12:15 surrounded by disciples. The death certificate was made out by Dr. Ginde, a respected Bombay surgeon who had been rushed to Meherazad to try to help with Baba's health and arrived just after Baba died. The death certificate was additionally signed by two other doctors present, Dr. Goher R. Irani M.B.B.S, and Dr. William Donkin, M.D. About visits to the United States, 1956 was his 5th visit, not his 6th. Meher Baba had several other tours of cities in the west, but came to the United States exactly six times, in 1931, 1932, 1934, 1952, 1956, and 1958. Cowalert (talk) 12:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- I stand corrected. See this compilation of Baba's trips. 1956 was 5th US visit, and one and only visit to Washington DC/Duce house.
- I have edited the paragraph, added a note to the reference (which see here), and moved the reference note closer to the Ivy Duce factoid it refers to. --Nemonoman (talk) 13:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Another reason for believing that this article was most probably written and meant to be published in 1956, not 1957, is its title Man Keeps Silence for 31 Years. Baba's silence began in 1925. Do the math. (Or perhaps the article's math provides enough reason to state that Baba's silence actually began in 1926 -- or that there are differing opinions about when his silence began -- or...or...or. Oh hell.)--Nemonoman (talk) 14:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I do not see any reason to include in this article references to newspaper stories that are clearly and obviously in error.
I can (sort of) understand a desire to include the AP "Messiah" story. I'd like it if there were a footnote saying "*Much of this is total BS."
But an article that says MB WILL visit Washington in July -- printed in June 1957 -- does not prove that he visited in 1957. And when the article clearly references an event that occurred and was highly documented as occurring in July Nineteen Fifty SIX, and dozens of people, some still living, have described being there, I'm SO inclined to note that the article is JUST FLAT WRONG!!!
And what's the reason for including it? "However, other one other source -- the Widely Respected Big Spring (Texas) Herald, winner of ZERO awards for integrity in journalism -- published an article indicating that an EXACT DUPLICATE of the 1956 visit was scheduled to occur ONE YEAR LATER! -- so take THAT uncited, point-of-view laden editors!!!"
Does this mistake change a non-neutral point of view. Is that paper, or ANYONE, maintaining that such a visit took place in 1957, or was even scheduled to take place in 1957, and that the MB article editors are trying to hide some relevant fact?
Same with the Death Notice. WTBF?? Numerous Indian Newspaper accounts describe the mourners gathering ON JANUARY 31 in AHMEDNAGAR, not in some cave hundreds of miles away. It's JUST WRONG. OK, it exists. But there are dozens of wire-service articles that are wrong -- just look at the archives of -- I don't know -- say the minutes following 9/11 attacks, or JFK assasination, or any damned event. And those often got picked up, printed, and never corrected even though the wire services sent out changes.
Including CLEARLY ERRONEOUS reportage does not advance the cause of knowledge. Unless we want to include a subsectino: Newspaper Articles of Dubious Reliability. --Nemonoman (talk) 16:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- Also, check out Ref 29 that leads to a page that says nothing of the kind stated. Something is going really screwy here. Meher Baba's major biographies are based on careful interviews and contemporaneously kept journals. The idea that these people were "too close to the subject" is absurd. What was their motive for getting dates wrong? There are also living witnesses to the 1952, 1956, and 1958 visits to the United States. Cowalert (talk) 16:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I am only attempting to find published reports related to this fascinating person, so please do not shoot the messenger. If these reports are wrong, meaning that there are an overwhelming number of other sources that report a different account, then we can decide if to use it or not. So:
(a) In regard to the 1957 account that is argued here happened in 1956, what published sources we have that say differently?
(b) In regard to the report of the death, what published sources do we have that say differently?
Here are some articles published in Time Magazine in 1932 and 1936. As there are editors here much more familiar with this subject than I , I would kindly ask them to help in incorporate this material into the article. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- "God on the Hudson". Time Magazine. 1932-05-02. Retrieved 2008-06-26.
This one is interesting as it makes a distinction between Indian disciples and others. The former referring to MB as "the messiah", others as "perfect master". This is interesting as it validates other press reports in this regard.
At Harmon, N. Y. where New York Central trains change from electric to steam engines, not far from Briarcliff, stands ready a retreat called Meherashram (Home of Compassion) where the pious of any & all sects may soon meet with a long-haired, silky-mustached seer who calls himself Shri (Mr.) Sadguru (Perfect Master) Meher (Compassion) Baba (Father). To his Indian co-religionists the Parsees, Meher Baba, 38, is the "God Man" or the "Messiah." To many another follower he is simply the "Perfect Master." His U. S. sponsors, Malcolm and Jean Schloss who await him at Harmon, think and write of him in uppercase: He, Him, His, Himself. Next week the God Man is to sail from England, will arrive at Meherashram May 16.
At 19 Meher Baba met a holy woman named Baba Jan (Angel of the Father) who died lately at Poona at the reputed age of 130. Meher Baba soon had a vision of his divine nature. For nine months he lay in a coma, came out of it "merged into God." It is explained that many people are in such a super-conscious state but few can remain in touch with the world, like Meher Baba, and help others to attain divinity.
For almost seven years Meher Baba has uttered no word. When he arrives at his U. S. retreat his lips will be unsealed with much ceremony. Meanwhile he carries a small board with letters and figures to which he points when he has something to say. He intends to found retreats in New Hampshire and California. Meher Baba is supposed to have performed many miracles but now he wishes only to make "Americans realize the infinite state which I myself enjoy." His method of accomplishing this is cryptic yet reassuring. "Let God flood the soul. What I am, you are."
- "God Man Still Silent". Time Magazine. 1932-05-25. Retrieved 2008-06-26.
With an alphabet board under his arm and adroit publicity before him, Shri Sadguru Meher Baba, Parsee "God Man," arrived in the U. S. last May (TIME, May 2). Though long-haired, silky-mustached Meher Baba indicated he had spoken no word for nearly seven years, he was willing to be interviewed by pointing to his little board, and to be photographed while doing it. Not every one was aware that this was not the God Man's first arrival in the U. S. Last December he quietly terminated an unpublicized stayin Harmon, N. Y., returned unostentatiously to India while his sponsor, a retired bookseller named Malcolm Schloss, began making plans for a triumphal reentry. Meher Baba, said Sponsor Schloss, would bring to the U. S. an "infinite state." In July he would break his silence with an internationally broadcast talk. What Meher Baba did was eat, play ping pong and cricket with his followers, many of them socialites, at Harmon. Still keeping mum, the God Man visited San Francisco, suddenly went to Shanghai where he stayed one day, "for spiritual reasons." Last week Meher Baba was to have spoken. But he changed his mind, announced through his secretary that "conditions are not yet ripe." He indicated they would be ripe next February.
- "Men, Masters & Messiahs". Time Magazine. 1936-04-20. Retrieved 2008-06-26.
Baba. The U. S. four years ago was fascinated by the arrival of a long-haired, silky-mustached Parsee named Shri Sadgaru Meher Baba (TIME, May 2, 1932). Called the "God Man," the "Messiah," the "Perfect Master," Meher Baba never speaks. The God Man claims to have been strictly silent since 1925, carries a little alphabet board on which he deftly spells his mute revelations (see cut, p. 37), among which is the declaration that he is in an "infinite state." He became that way, he says, after kissing an ancient holy woman named Hazrat Babajan, remaining in a coma for nine months.
From his London interview with Meher Baba, Author Landau got little. But a female disciple in Manhattan gave Landau a graphic description of the holy man's entourage: "He gets up very early. . . . He takes a very hot bath, and his hair is attended to with the greatest care. . . . He then goes from room to room, stops for a while in front of every bed, looks at the sleeping person, and, no doubt, directs in his own way the life of the disciple for the rest of the day. . . . He never reads books, but he knows everything. . . . Baba does not read a paper. He just goes over the headlines."
- The chapter on Meher Baba is on pages 105-118. No apparent way to direct link.
I thought this information might help some people. User:Cowalert Incidentally the Time Magazine articles are included in Lord Meher. Cowalert (talk) 16:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- You left out "82 Family Letters" and some memoirs: http://www.lovestreetbookstore.com/memoirs-biographies.htm#82%20Family%20Letters Maybe they're not technically biographies but still worth noting. Dffiles (talk) 22:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
From an op-ed in the New York Times today
Even when a lie is presented with a disclaimer, people often later remember it as true.
With time, this misremembering only gets worse. A false statement from a noncredible source that is at first not believed can gain credibility [emphasis mine] during the months it takes to reprocess memories from short-term hippocampal storage to longer-term cortical storage. As the source is forgotten, the message and its implications gain strength. This could explain why, during the 2004 presidential campaign, it took some weeks for the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign against Senator John Kerry to have an effect on his standing in the polls.
See the full piece here. --Nemonoman (talk) 12:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
See here.
I have removed the {{refimprove}} and placed {{fact}} in these portions lacking sources for easy identification. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 21:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Still looking for some cites for 2 lines, but it's a lot cleaner now, sort of.--Nemonoman (talk) 23:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
To make the sourcing easier and more compliant with WP's guidelines, this would be a good effort:
- Move all References in alphapbetical order to a section named "References" in this format:
- Purdom, Charles B.: "The God-Man: The Life, Journeys & Work of Meher Baba with an Interpretation of His Silence & Spiritual Teaching", George Allen & Unwin, London, 1964
- In each paragraph sourced to the above book, use this markup: <ref> Purdom (1964); p 52</ref>
- Create a new section "Notes" using the {{reflist}} to list these
... and so on for the other sources. This will make the current reference section tighter and provide a better way for readers to see the sourcing used in the article. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:52, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- What's wrong with these references? They don't work after 62. 72.204.46.220 (talk) 20:21, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
I have completed the listing of all book sources, now listed at Meher Baba#References. Now there is a need to convert all the <ref> tags to the format as explained above. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:42, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
(actually this should be Breaking (lots and lots) of promise(s) to speak....)--Nemonoman (talk) 20:51, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
There is information available related to a declared intention to break the vow of silence, but the article only touches on this lightly and without following in up on the reasons he did not. It would be very pertinent to expand on that. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- He never gave a reason; never apologized; never explained. Consider the sad state of Princess Norina Matchebelli and her friends who had already bought their gowns for the Silence-Breaking Gala at the Hollywood Bowl, when he hopped on a slow boat to China without any explanation. --Nemonoman (talk) 20:42, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
His decision (all one line of it, after a 10-page buildup) is found here. (note -- keep looking -- it's in there! about the middle of the page)
Also Lord Meher quotes the AP:'
- Upon Quentin Tod's return to California, the following account was published in the newspapers on July 14th. The headline read:
- Silent Hindu Defers Radio Talk
- Los Angeles, July 13, 1932 (Associated Press):
- Shri Meher Baba, who came here recently heralded as the East Indian holy man, and who supposedly has not uttered a word for seven years, will not deliver his "message" to the world tomorrow over a national broadcast from Hollywood. Quentin Tod, the mystic's secretary, telegraphed from Santa Barbara that Baba had decided to postpone the word-fast breaking until next February because "conditions are not yet ripe."
I don't know how reaonable it is to quote Lord Meher quoting the AP
- It is fine to quote that. You can cite it like this: AP, July 13, 1932 , as cited in Lord Meher p.XX ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 20:55, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
PS MB promised to break his silence on several occasions, and broke them all. Lord Meher quotes devotee Quinten Tod thinking but his faith in Baba deepened. Tod thought to himself: "No ordinary man would behave like this." Faith is a wonderful thing.
Recently one or two accounts have surfaced from devotees who claim that they heard MB speak a word or two a few hours before his death. Some editor made a fuss about it here --Nemonoman (talk) 20:51, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- I think Baba actually started his silence saying it would be only for one year, then kept making dates and breaking them. This is no isolated incident in Hollywood, only the most public. 72.204.46.220 (talk) 23:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- What Nemo says is true. I think there is even a diary by Meher Baba's best childhood friend named Baily. Several of his childhood friends gave long detailed accounts and his sister Mani Irani even wrote a memoir of her childhood with Meher Baba. It's more than just some report in a book. His childhood was really normal in that nothing very out of the ordinary or miraculous or religious occurred. In contrast to one such as Krishnamurti who had a very unusual childhood with the Theosophical Society. 72.204.46.220 (talk) 02:12, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I still believe that more material about this is needed. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 19:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Enough with the big speeches and the giant rallies...Whoa, that was LAST season.
What I MEANT to say was: Enough with the "It is reported" and the [citation needed] entries. This article has at least one reference in every paragraph, and most have several. If there are competing or contradictory sources, they have not made themselves apparent. There is nothing to suggest in anyway that any of the material in the article is false or is original research.
I know that this is an article (a) written mainly by persons with an affection for Meher Baba, and (b) referenced mainly by books written by persons with an affection for Meher Baba. It is the nature of the subject that this is the case. Meher Baba was inspired hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of people, and is a well known spiritual and cultural figure. For the most part there are two kinds of people; those who have never heard of MB or just don't care at all, and those who like him with considerable fondness. There are very few who dislike him, or have a 'debunking' agenda typical of some other recent spiritual figures. There just isn't much literature of the debunking variety.
For my own part, I was sent to Meher Baba by Swami Muktananda. About Muktananda, by contrast, there's practically a debunking industry. You can scarcely look up the name without seeing a half-dozen nasty-pages seeking to put him down. This just isn't the case with Meher Baba.
I believe in fair, accurate, NPOV reporting, and have made every effort to turn the prose into NPOV-safe phrasing. If there are credible alternate points of view available and not represented, PLEASE POINT TO THEM, and I will PERSONALLY Put them in.
That said, it DOES NO GOOD AT ALL to add "it is reported that..." to statements in this article. OF COURSE it is reported that...That's what the article IS, a compilation of reports. The phrase suggests that the information to follow is not credible. Yet virtually every matter of fact has been referenced to a reasonable source.
Next, let's lay off the [citation needed] entries, shall we? Minimum 1 reference per paragraph is COMPLETELY overdoing it if you ask me. Many times a reference here[1] has continued application to the rest of the paragraph. Should one reference[2] the same book[3], the same page[4], every couple of words[5]? TRY LOOKING UP THE REFERENCE in the paragraph FIRST and see if the matter is covered. ALL the books in the REFERENCES are available on line. Leave me a message if you need help finding it. --Nemonoman (talk) 02:54, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- What happened? Why the reaction to simple requests? Material that is stated as facts need to be attributed to a source. That is not that much to ask. I believe that since I became active on this article, it has improved considerably. Rather than shoot the one that is helping make this article one that we WP can be proud of, I would expect a bit of appreciation instead. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes the article is now more consistent with the now current view of what consitutes a good wikipedia article. Yes the article has been refined and reshaped. Now it will be harder for half-baked, agenda-filled editors to find fault. I don't like it very much however. It has been 'fixed', much like a dog that has been fixed. All the personality, vibrancy and fun has been replaced with these[6][7][8][9].
I temporarily ended my wiki retirement because whether I like it or not, this article will be the first point of reference for many web surfers. To keep the article free of distractions like [citation needed] this, and to assure that the 'soft bigotry' of phrases like 'it is reported that...' do not interfere with that initial experience, I have taken a reasonable and pleasant-enough article written in good faith, mostly, by a very diligent and honest editor ( Sharnak ), and left behind an article that is hard to read, overly referenced, and free of grace. But it is, I believe, protected from editors who will chase it with [citation needed].
It is not protected, I am sorry to say, from editors who will tack NPOV tags on it. Since it is essentially a positive portrait of a good man, it must be wrong. It must be POV. This is where the next attack will come from. Instead of "It is reported that..." the article will be crammed with "His followers claim that...", etc.
I'm bracing for it. But for now, I have 'fixed' this article as much as I mean to, and I am again leaving active WP editing.
Thank you, Jossi.--Nemonoman (talk) 12:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- I understand your viewpoint, but note that after all, this is an encyclopedia, and as such, the tone of structure is expected to be dry and devoid of "grace". For those of us that love to read books that have that "grace" in it, we can always follow the citations and get some of these. Don't get me wrong: brilliant prose can still be achieved in WP articles, but we cannot cross the line into having an article that is to obviously at odds with encyclopedic content. As for your dislike of "it is reported", or "according to", I can also understand that, but note that unless it is a fact, there is no harm in attributing an opinion to those that hold it. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
The phrase in the opening that he appeared "unhinged" misrepresents the context. The source says, "He had no food; he did not sleep; his parents thought his mind to be unhinged. He was given food, but gave it to the dogs..." I mean my parents still think I'm unhinged. Does it follow that I appear unhinged to everyone like my clients? By using the word alone and in quotes in that way without giving the broader context a much more general claim is being made. Which might be true, but the citation as used is misleading. Also "much of that time" is written to appear to refer to the 7 years, but actually refers to the 9 months of fasting and sleeplessness, not the 7 years. Actually he was working and even began a couple businesses during that 7 years. There are pictures of him in a business suit -- though admittedly his eyes and demeanor are strange. He even applied for a liquor license with a business partner. So he could not have appeared "unhinged" to everyeone for most of seven years. I think this refers to his parents appraisal of his sudden fasting and hiding food and not sleeping that lasted for nine months at the start of the 7 years and prior to meeting Upasni Maharaj after which he started normalizing. 72.204.46.220 (talk) 23:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
It's been two weeks:
Score so far:
- Keep - 1
- Delist - 1
- Endless unproductive discussion about the GA process, whether someone who listed this article as a GA had authority to list it as a GA, whether an old version of this article is the same as the current version of this article, etc., etc. - Lots and lots.
End result: a reasonably good article is now in limbo as to its status, and unlikely ever to be settled. Not a lot different than being an "enemy combatant" in Guantanamo. Once the "process" has been initiated, there's no clear way to resolve it.
Note to Wiki editors. The GA process is essentially broken. --Nemonoman (talk) 20:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
For a better understanding of the so-called "Good Article Reassessment Project", see this edit, and the 2 comments that follow it: this and this. --Nemonoman (talk) 21:29, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
There was a Wikipedia:Peer_review/Meher_Baba/archive1 with good comments. I took a shot at implementing some of the suggestions.--Nemonoman (talk) 18:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
The Main drive, motivation must be to be true to the spirit of Baba's work as we understand it. We are here on the gross plane and have limited function BUT we should not put our critical intellect into abeyance. There will be differences BUT we need to work toward light and service to others not service to self which can manifest as ego: This is essentially dark. The article has improved over the years it may be 3 steps forward 1 back BUT its not lopsided and strange anymore i.e. Townsend dominated. Keep going forward. I believe Baba would approve of more truth being expressed. OK. GA may be a medium that is flawed. It too will evolve and some friction is OK when moving forward. . --Liamjones4477 (talk) 01:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone know how to archive the peer review template at the very top of this page like the older peer review was archived in the "Show" pull down part of the lower template? It would make the page look more tidy and clear what has all occurred. 72.204.46.220 (talk) 11:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
