I don't really have a very clear picture of the demographics of the current Vraja Journal readership. Obviously a great many are — or were — practitioners or observers of traditional Gaudiya Vaisnavism on one level or another.

The Buddhist ethics I embrace don't allow for pushing or proselytizing of teachings. When there is an expressed interest, it is appropriate to speak or to write. These issues become a bit more complicated online. Hence this blog entry and a question to the readers on what's welcome.

There is obviously a class of people who would like to see me shut up and dig myself six feet under. For them, I have written the disclaimer and encouraged them to cease from reading this journal.

As this is a free journal and I have no agenda for writing to an external purpose, I have no reason to keep my writings unslanted by my inner views. My current mood regarding the journal is keeping it as a natural continuation of its history, featuring reflections on issues relevant to an audience that on one level or another relates to Gaudiya Vaisnavism, content that will be of interest to practicing Gaudiya Vaisnavas (assuming broad-mindedness and ability to handle contrasting and unconventional views) and outsiders exploring the GV tradition.

I wouldn't want to write directly on Buddhist teachings, independent of the above context, unless there was a specific interest among the readers for the same. Then, let's hear the vox populi:

Please share your thoughts on the future direction of the journal: What kind of content is welcome, what should be avoided? What would be of interest, what would you pass by without reading?

Please use the link below this post to send feedback. You can also do it anonymously if you wish. If there's a great deal of division in the feedback I receive, labeling content under different identifiable headings is also an option (as you presently see with the ad posts): "Straight GV ", "GV Revisited", "General Hinduism", "Buddhism" and so on.