> Let's consider the article is true and words were being deleted as he wrote them. How ridiculous is that? Some surveillers do that type of thing because they

> Let's consider the article is true and words were being deleted as he wrote them. How ridiculous is that? Some surveillers do that type of thing because they not only want the target to know they're being watched but also to make it appear the surveillers have far more control than they really do. They'll intricately set up a single incident like that, and leave the target thinking it's just an easily pulled of run-of-the-mill prank. The target then paranoidly thinks the next 10 or 100 coincidences are also part of the surveillance. Chances are that that particular incident was just a stuck key or something, but the chances are also that there was some similar incident weeks or months before caused by a surveiller that made the writer paranoid. The most difficult situations are when there's more than one surveiller out there, which is quite common if you're worth surveilling. It can take years to disentangle roughly what's going on, and in the meantime if you say something plenty of people will call you names from a psychiatry textbook.