The tags {PLAIN} and {/PLAIN}, with curly brackets, have been placed at the start and end of text intended to be read as it is written. The tags {IRONY} and {/IRONY} have been placed at the start and end of passages that are intended ironically, and should not be taken literally. The tags {JOKE} and {/JOKE} have been placed at the start and end of passages which are to be taken as jokes. Jokes which have to be explained are not funny, so I haven't tried to explain any of them. If you don't get something labeled "Joke", you can ignore it.

Message 134 
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 00:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"  View Contact Details
Subject: Re: [ifachat] Re: Disconnection
To: ifachat@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
> > Yep. Welcome to the FZ. Nick and Ralph do not want anyone
> > who really knows anything to make any noise at all. Plus, fzaoint
> > in its current form is riddled with OSA.
>
>
> Details, please. Time, place, form, event... you got the idea.

{PLAIN}
I like a statement Rich made a few weeks ago on Richfriends. Someone
had suggested that there be a private very restricted list, where the
participants were *sure* that there were no external influences on the
list. Rich's response was no, keep it an open list, as that way
everyone "knows" that the neighbors are looking in. It's not as if
anything illegal or even sensitive was ever being discussed. The
problem with having a "safe" list, he said, was that one becomes
careless and assumes that it *is* completely secure, and might say
something inappropriate. When it might not be secure at all.

{JOKE}It's not like we are plotting the overthrow of the government pro tem
on Marcab IV and revealing our strategy will lead to failure of the
impending coup there, is it? {/JOKE}

Since then I've viewed these relatively open lists in that light, and
it seems a sensible viewpoint to me to assume that the lists are under
constant surveillance by the neighbors. {/PLAIN}

Paul


 








Message 092
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 00:50:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Lucky Duck"  Add to Address Book
Subject: Re: [fzelma] UL_list; OT_List; OT List (no underscore).
To: fzelma@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
> New list for those who have started OT III or above. UL is upper
> levels. I went to find the OT_list and it was gone:) So, we do need
>
> a list where can can communicate about something if we want to.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UL-list
>
> XXXX

{PLAIN}
That's great, XXXX. I wrote to Ralph but I'm not going to fart around
begging to please not get thrown off his list again on some whim. I
contributed far more to that list than I took from it.

I started my own Yahoo OT list. No underscore. Just "OTList". I have
no way of enforcing case level requirements on members, but anyone who
hasn't started auditing on an honest OT3 would be a complete idiot to
go visiting. Sometime in the next couple of days I will re-post to it
all the new OT2/OT3 stuff that I sent to Ralph's list. I will also be
posting the other OT2 and OT3 stuff there that I promised in my last
post to that list but haven't written yet.

I'll post list guidelines when I have worked them out. Maybe your list
guidelines and mine could be complementary. I'm more interested in the
hard nuts and bolt OT Level delivery-type stuff and not so much the
friendly chat.
{/PLAIN}
Paul
 
 









Message 135 
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 00:57:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"  View Contact Details
Subject: Yet another OT List
To: ifachat@yahoogroups.com

{PLAIN}
It's list season.

I wrote to Ralph but I'm not going to fart around begging to please not
get thrown off his list again on some whim. I contributed far more to
that list than I took from it.

I started my own Yahoo OT list. No underscore. Just "OTList". I have
no way of enforcing case level requirements on members, but anyone who
hasn't started auditing on an honest OT3 would be a complete idiot to
go visiting. Sometime in the next couple of days I will re-post to it
all the new OT2/OT3 stuff that I sent to Ralph's list. I will also be
posting the other OT2 and OT3 stuff I promised in my last post to that
list but haven't written yet.

I'll post list guidelines when I have worked them out. Maybe Pat's
list guidelines and mine could be complementary. I'm more interested
in the hard nuts and bolt OT Level delivery-type stuff and not so much
the friendly chat.
{/PLAIN}
Paul

 




 








Message 093
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 11:24:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Lucky Duck"  Add to Address Book
Subject: Re: [fzelma] UL_list; OT_List; OT List (no underscore).
To: fzelma@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> > That's great, XXXX. I wrote to Ralph but I'm not going to fart
> around
> > begging to please not get thrown off his list again on some whim.
> I
> > contributed far more to that list than I took from it.
>
> Which list are you referring to? Everyone was thrown off the fzaoint
> list
> and then XXXX invited those members they wanted to join a newly
> created
> list. You are on it. So am I. I do not take sides in disputes
> within the
> freezone. I do agree with
> standard application of standard ethics, tech and admin and plain
> old-fashioned honesty.
>
> If you are referring to the OT_l list: yes, XXXX and others who were
> either
> driven off the fzaoint list or expelled from it were removed from
> that list
> too. I was not (neither was XXXX) and according the the membership
> list neither
> were you under the addy you are using on this list and were posting
> under to
> that list as recently as 3 days ago. Your new addy was added to that
> list today.
>
>
> Please explain.
>
> XXXX's starting a new OT list is understandable for the reasons she
> has
> stated. Your starting such a list of your own is not and requires
> explanation.
> XXXX

{PLAIN}
Damn. I screwed up. My apologies. Comes from juggling two main
e-mail addresses. Thanks for adding [Paul's new ID] to the OT_list; Dee
has unsubbed from it.

I will continue to post to OT_List. I was going to anyway, apart from
the slight technicality that I thought I wasn't on it anymore. I don't
believe in taking sides in FZ disputes either.

I will keep OTList alive for now. If I think of a useful purpose for
it that isn't a duplicative function I will probably announce it; if
not I'll just kill it.
{/PLAIN}

All the best,
Paul










Message 136 
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 11:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"  View Contact Details
Subject: Re: [fzflame] Re: Flaming
To: fzflame@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
> What the fuck kind of bs is this? If you were even
> capable of understanding what the fuck I had written
> and pulled your head out of your arse for a moment,
>...

> But I suspect it will become people playing with each
> other.

{PLAIN}
Maybe. We'll have to wait and see. It would be funny if people don't
dare use FZFlame for genuine ranting because it is looked on as a kind
of playpit for gentlefolk with impeccable manners elsewhere. Maybe
someone should start an FZRealFlame group and the otherwise polite
people like thee and me and bb would get automatically unsubbed!

>It's kinda nice to be able to write something
> outrageous without worrying about people taking it
> the wrong way.

You're right. I laughed aloud for the first time in a day or two when
I read your opening salvo above. Nice to see "arse" too. I've been
swearing in American for the last 15 years or so.

Thanks, XXXX. More invective later....
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 
 










Message 137 
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 12:20:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"  View Contact Details
Subject: Re: [ifachat] toothpaste and lsd
To: ifachat@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
> Are you saying this really happened???
>
> I guess it would be pretty scary to ingest LSD without knowing it...
> I've never done it, but I don't think it's evil. It's something I
> want to try in my lifetime.
>
> It seems there would be far easier ways to cause someone to make a
> fool of themself, but then we've all become aware of some truly
> unbelievable things done by the COS. I appologize if this actually
> happened to someone... it's just such a bizzare accusation I found
> it amusing.

{PLAIN}
I took LSD a couple of dozen times over a period of six months or so
while I was at college in the late 60s. I got into Scn a year after I
left college. About five years later, when in the Sea Org, a
relatively minor "trip" turned on for a couple of hours. I recognised
it as being the influence of LSD and it was more interesting than
uncomfortable, but I was convinced someone has slipped me a tab of it,
as otherwise how could I be tripping? That was scary, being in the SO
and all. It wasn't until the Sweat Pgm/Purif data came out around 1980
that I realized for sure what had happened.

Giving another LSD without their knowledge is probably a heavy felony
punishable in law with years of jail time. If the person suffering the
effects did not realize what had happened, it would be really, really
unsettling.

But back in 1969, us "heads" looked on the effects of acid as
beneficial, and straight people ought to turn on and see the gentler
and hidden side of life, to "chill out" to use modern slang. The idea
of laying some acid on someone without their knowledge was a bit
naughty, but it was not considered in the same light as giving them
strychnine, say. I never did it, but considered it for a few people
who were overly uptight.

In the 70s, many people in the SO and GO had taken LSD prior to their
involvement with Scn. I could believe that someone in the GO who had
personally taken LSD might have covertly given LSD to a public figure
that they wanted to discredit, without considering it a big overt. But
this is purely conjecture on my part.
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 








 

Message 138 
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 12:45:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"  View Contact Details
Subject: Re: [ifachat] Charisma
To: ifachat@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
>
> I presume there are ways to increase one's charisma. There is a tech
> to everything. But to date I have not seen a useful text on the
> subject.
> You've got it or you don't.

{PLAIN}
When I worked at New World Corps around 1988 there was a pilot issue
called "Auditor Presence". It never got issued. It was basically some
quotes from a tape or two, Academy Levels I think. I always thought it
was a shame that this issue never appeared, as it made the point very
well and the tape quote by itself, as part of the tape, didn't impinge
to the same extent at all. I never forgot what was said, as I have
found it very useful in life.

It's all verbal tech for now. Maybe someone can find the original in
the tape somewhere and post it.

But this is how you can increase your charisma, Chloe. Here is the
tech.

TR-0. Doing what you're doing when you're doing it. It is having
one's attention units in present time and not scattered all over the
place. Many people have commented that when LRH spoke to them it was
as if they were the most important person in the Universe at that time,
as they commanded all of LRH's attention, and it made them feel very
special indeed. It is an important ability for an auditor in session.
But anyone can have increased charisma when they say hi to the checkout
lady at the supermarket too.

Try it!
{/PLAIN}

Paul

  









Message 139 
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 12:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"  View Contact Details
Subject: Re: [FreezoneOrg] UL_list
To: FreezoneOrg@yahoogroups.com

--- XXXX wrote:
> XXXX says he was going to put it up again, but hasn't announced it. If
> what you see belongs to ralph, do we want to ge there?

{PLAIN}
Sure. I don't like partisanship within the FZ. The FZ against "The
Enemy", yes. But I don't know of a real flesh-and-blood FZ enemy.
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 










Message 140 
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 13:11:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"   View Contact Details
Subject: Re: [FreezoneOrg] UL_list
To: FreezoneOrg@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
> The list has been there since it was set up by Ralph about 2 years
> ago so
> that there would be a place for upper level discussion off the main
> fzaoint list.
> Yes, Pat is missing and others who left or were forced off the
> fzaoint list,
> including Tommy. The rest of us are still on it and that includes
> bb. Paul
> Adams is on it as of today under his new addy. His old addy was not
> removed
> and that was what he was posting under as of three days ago. He
> said that he
> was writing to Ralph to ask why he was taken off. He wasn't taken
> off. His
> new addy may have been, but his new addy was added today.
>
> There are quite a few freezoners, most long-term, who are on several
> (recently becoming too many) lists. Membership on a group list
> entails agreeing with
> the stated purpose of the group and keeping within the published
> guidelines of
> the group. It does not entail being in agreement with the
> everything that
> the owner &/or moderator says or does.
>
> The vast majority of the members of freezone lists are lurkers. Some
> speak
> up once in a while. Only a few speak up regularly. There is no
> basis for
> presuming anything about them. It is also safest to presume that
> there is at
> least one OSA/CoS person
> on any freezone list who may or may not be just lurking.
> XXXX

{PLAIN}
Thanks, XXXX. Very sensible. I screwed up and thought I had been
bounced from the list--I was just looking at the wrong ID. I'm now
using the [Paul's earlier] ID only for the fztechrating (and fzadminrating) Yahoo
group as I can't see how to transfer ownership of the group over to the
[new ID] ID without nuking it and restarting from scratch.

I will continue to post my usual stuff to Ralph's OT_List. I might
send some old OT-type poetry to Pat's UL_List. I don't know what I'm
going to do with my fresh OTList, if anything. I know about the
too-many-lists phenomena, but haven't worked out what to do yet on
these OT lists.
{/PLAIN}

Paul










Message 141
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:09:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"  View Contact Details
Subject: Re: [ifachat] Charisma
To: ifachat@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
> LOL- I WASN'T asking how to increase my charisma, Paul.
>
> I've been lamenting the use of it in chosing our leaders, because
> you
> can get very stuck to it and follow the wrong leader into hell.
>
> I was asking, what SHOULD we look for in leadership?
>
> Try it again :)

{PLAIN}
You weren't? Oh.

The only thing worth looking at in the search for a leader is his/her
proven statistics on the ground under real conditions in the area under
consideration. And even then they get a probationary period.

There are LRH issues on leadership in the OEC volumes.

Note it is sometimes hard to view the real statistics if you have lies,
false PR, Black PR, and disinformation campaigns going on. Witness the
adulation for prominent figures in society and then the fallout when
the sordid truth hits the fan fifty years later.
{PLAIN}

Paul
 










Message 142 
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"  View Contact Details
Subject: Re: [FreezoneOrg] New website up all ready!
To: FreezoneOrg@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
> This site does not come up. msm comes up instead:
> http://www.microsoft.com/

{PLAIN}
I've noticed that the forwarding does not always work. I don't know
why. Maybe it has to do with an old browser, or something.

The URL of http://www.fzinternational.org forwards to the URL of
http://www.freewebs.com/fzinternational . I am not really promoting
either URL as the site is a mess right now and not something worth
promoting. The site may well get moved somewhere else soon. Give it a
week, say....
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 









Message 143
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:28:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"  View Contact Details
Subject: Re: [ifachat] Re: Yet another OT List
To: ifachat@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
>
> What hard nuts and bolt stuff would you be thinking of, Paul? And
> what are your proposed guidelines? Can you post them here when you've
>
> finished them? Thanks.


The way we used to deliver OT2 and OT3 at SH when I was there doing
that around 1982-1986 and later some in LA. It's all on Ralph's
OT_List.

If you're not on Ralph's OT_List for some reason and can't/don't want
to join, the same stuff is posted on my OTList. Anyone whose case
level is a genuine auditing-comfortably-on-OT3 or above is welcome
there.

I'll announce guidelines when I've worked them out. In the meantime,
there's no need to join both lists. I don't like the dev-t of
duplicative functions.
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 









Message 144 
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:32:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"  View Contact Details
Subject: Re: [ifachat] Boot from ICAUSE
To: ifachat@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
>
> Ahh, yes. That is correct. That IS why you were booted.

{PLAIN}
Thanks for clearing it up, Tom.
{/PLAIN}

All the best,
Paul










Message 145 
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:40:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"  View Contact Details
Subject: Re: [FreezoneOrg] UL_list
To: FreezoneOrg@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
> It needs to be kept.
>
> With so many people bounced from ralph's list, there is no place,
> really
> to discuss things.

{PLAIN}
Fair enough. Go ahead and join and bring your OT3-or-above friends and
discuss away. I'm not going to throw you out because you like a
different kind of pizza.
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 











Message 002
From: Paul Adams 
Date: Thu Jun 17, 2004 3:35 pm
Subject: Nowheresville Beach

{PLAIN}
NOWHERESVILLE BEACH

As you lie spread out on Nowheresville Beach
With your whole life in turmoil and no help in reach
On an unaware planet with no tech at all
No hope of salvation and you in its thrall
Recall that brief lifetime you wasted on Earth
When you lived in a goldmine and saw not its worth
That veriest eyeblink in aeons of being
And you blew it on trifles that blinded your seeing
And now when you know what you ought to have done
It's too late, old buddy, they've all upped and gone
--

Paul, ca. 1980
{/PLAIN}
 








 

Message 003 
From: Paul Adams 
Date: Thu Jun 17, 2004 3:39 pm
Subject: Paradise Plaza

{PLAIN}
PARADISE PLAZA

As you jauntily bounce across Paradise Plaza
Flowing good mornings to friends on the way
Wearing a body fresh out of the wardrobe
Which matches the mood you have picked for today
On a pink planet turning about a square sun
That a friend had just mocked up one weekend for fun
Recall that brief lifetime spent far off from here
When you cashed in the car and the social veneer
And traded the treadmill of nine-to-five
In favor of being forever and ever alive
--

Paul, around 1980
{/PLAIN}










Message 146 
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 17:03:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul Adams"  View Contact Details
Subject: Re: [ifachat] Re: toothpaste and lsd
To: ifachat@yahoogroups.com


--- XXXX wrote:
> Why? Well that's easy - I want to see what it's like. I'm curious.
> I've heard enough from people who have used it to know that it is
> something I want to experience for myself. I have no idea when the

{PLAIN}
I copied a chunk from www.streetdrugs.org below. They are pretty
negative about it, so I'll give my viewpoint on it. It would be
hypocritical of me to say don't take it. Overall, I would say I
benefited from taking it. Just. The plusses include lots of viewpoint
shifts from being kicked out of the head and experiencing exterior
perceptions as a thetan; total conviction of self as a spiritual being
and not as a meat body, although it was hard to interpret at the time;
and the wow! factor of the world dancing around with pretty colors and
patterns. The minuses for me include a certain *permanent* loss of
computational ability, like having a tenth of your brain permanently
fried and some rerouting of circuits subsequently occurs but it doesn't
fully compensate. Also a persistence of vison factor that wasn't there
before I ever took the stuff.

The report below says a typical street dose is 25 to 80 micrograms
(mcg.) The effects vary with dosage. These are all from my personal
experiences, and other published accounts may vary. At low dosage (25
to 80 mcg is low) you just see green/purple edges to things and maybe a
little bit of things moving around, like involved carpet patterns may
dance a bit. Colors seem extraordinarily vivid, as are other
perceptions. The dancing effect is caused by natural eye-movements
that normally one doesn't notice. Everyday objects and normal
perceptions are unusually fascinating and detailed. Conversation is
more or less possible. Other people's thoughts are much more visible
than usual.

At medium dosage, maybe 150 - 250 mcg, things heat up a bit. More
colors come into the mix, red and orange and blue maybe. Not different
shades of these colors, but always the exact same color. I grew to
look on these colors as "acid purple" or "acid green". Presumably they
come out of some specific body chemistry and not a thetan's imagination
or recall. There is more dancing around of objects. Things are very
vivid still, but perception is extended. Perceptics are just accepted
as perceptics, without the normal differentiation between them. This
was usually expressed as "hearing colors" or "seeing music", but it's
just a thetan observing his environment and there is no real need to
make a big deal about the different channels. Like you can watch a
person talking, and you see their lips moving, and you can hear the
words, but the sight and sound aren't cemented together. It's like
watching a movie where the sound and picture are out of sync, but when
you look really closely they aren't out of sync at all. Conversation
is difficult, not because of difficulty with the motor controls but
because it's not really worthwhile to communicate anything more than
"wow". You might become gradually aware of this strange feeling and
then cognite that your bladder has been telling you to pee for the past
three hours and you didn't recognise the signal.

And then there are high doses, maybe 300 "mikes" and up. The effects
come on quickly, like in 15 minutes instead of 40, and they ramp up
quickly, and the first time this happens you go, "Whoa! This is going
to be some ride." Exterior objects do their dancing so violently it
can be impossible to see what is really there. Exterior perception is
very pronounced, in that you can hear whispers hundreds of feet away.
Objects lost their normal appearance and are seen as merely energy
manifestations, with an awareness of a kind of very high-level
brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr buzz about them. On a couple of occasions I
couldn't move the body at all. I remember once lying there
contemplating the impossible enormity of the effort involved in
blinking an eyelid and I couldn't do it. An hour later I could open
and close my eyes but nothing more, and I found that I could see
exactly the same thing with my eyes open or shut, it made no difference
at all.

The experiences like that were profound, and I felt that some secrets
of the universe had been revealed. Some of them had in terms of
awareness of theta perceptics, others were probably illusory. Overall
though, it was like being mentally run over by a truck. Back and
forth, for hours.

Not once did I have a "bad trip". I was always fully aware of where I
was and who was with me, and the "hallucinations" were just seen as
what they were. I had no difficulty perceiving "reality", but an
underlying one rather than a superficial one. An example could be
given that, "He was on LSD and thought he could fly and jumped out of a
window and died." In reality, it could have been that he was on LSD,
realized for the first time that lifetime that he was a spiritual being
that would survive the death of his meat body, decided that was more
exciting than his future continued humdrum life as a normal human being
on planet Earth, and wanted out.

Overall, for me I would say that the rewards were intense, but the cost
was great.
{/PLAIN}

Paul


***START***

D-lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) is the most potent hallucinogenic
substance known to man. Dosages of LSD are measured in micrograms, or
millionths of a gram. By comparison, dosages of cocaine and heroin are
measured in milligrams, or thousandths of a gram. Compared to other
hallucinogenic substances, LSD is 100 times more potent than psilocybin
and psilocin and 4,000 times more potent than mescaline.

The dosage level that will produce an hallucinogenic effect in humans
generally is considered to be 25 micrograms. Over the past several
years, the potency of LSD obtained during drug law enforcement
operations has ranged between 20 and 80 micrograms per dosage unit. The
Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) recognizes 50 micrograms as the
standard dosage unit equivalency.

LSD is classified as a Schedule I drug in the Controlled Substances Act
of 1970. As a Schedule I drug, LSD meets the following three criteria:
it is deemed to have a high potential for abuse; it has no legitimate
medical use in treatment; and, there is a lack of accepted safety for
its use under medical supervision.

LSD tablets


LSD was synthesized in 1938 by a chemist working for Sandoz
Laboratories in Switzerland. It was developed initially as a
circulatory and respiratory stimulant. However, no extraordinary
benefits of the compound were identified and its study was
discontinued. In the 1940's, interest in the drug was revived when it
was thought to be a possible treatment for schizophrenia. Because of
LSD's structural relationship to a chemical that is present in the
brain and its similarity in effect to certain aspects of psychosis, LSD
was used as a research tool in studies of mental illness.

The effects of LSD are unpredictable. They depend on the amount taken,
the user's personality, mood and expectations, and the surroundings in
which the drug is used. Usually, the user feels the first effects of
the drug 30-90 minutes after taking it. These effects include dilated
pupils, higher body temperature, increased heart rate and blood
pressure, sweating, loss of appetite, sleeplessness, dry mouth, and
tremors. Sensations and feelings change much more dramatically than the
physical signs. The user may feel several different emotions at once or
swing rapidly from one emotion to another. Depending on the dose, the
drug can produce delusions and visual hallucinations, which can be
frightening and cause panic. Users refer to their experience with these
acute adverse reactions as a "bad trip," and the effects typically last
for about twelve hours. Terrifying thoughts and feelings, fear of
insanity and death, injuries, and fatal accidents have occurred during
states of LSD intoxication. Anyone can experience a bad trip and there
is no way to predict what your own experience will be.

***END***


 










Message 004
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Fri Jun 18, 2004  9:33 am 
Subject:  Re: [fzelma] UL_list; OT_List; OT List (no underscore).


--- XXXX wrote:
>
> Very good. Your postings are very interesting and
> making them available to those not on the OT_List is welcome.
> ...
>
> I'd forgotten that you are the "excess of multiplicity
> of sites" guy. :)
> XXXX

{/PLAIN}
In keeping with the above two paragraphs, last night I had already
created two more Yahoo groups. One is called "Paul's FZ Posts"
[paulsfzposts] and the other is called "Paul's FZ OT Posts"
[paulsfzotposts]. Assuming I remember, I will send a copy of any
future posts of general interest to the appropriate one of these two
lists. Neither is a discussion group--it's a one-way flow, me only to
anyone who cares to look in. I will be sending along maybe 50 posts to
various groups/lists from the past few weeks over the next few days.
The paulsfzotposts one is already up to date.

Membership requirements are obvious. Anyone can freely join the
paulsfzposts one; the paulsfzotposts is for OT3 and above.

I dislike having to belong to a dozen lists in case I miss anything
important. Maybe others feel the same way.

I know some people appreciate many of my posts. Making them available
as above is a mixture of genuine desire to help and profound conceit.
The ratio between the two changes daily depending on my attitude!
{/PLAIN}

Paul


 










Message 005
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Fri Jun 18, 2004  11:34 am 
Subject:  Re: [FreezoneOrg] Re: New website up all ready!


--- XXXX wrote:
> Sticking my hand up. I can help with a logo.
>
> XXXX

{PLAIN}
That's great, XXXX--thanks. Go for it. It's bb's final say-so as I'm
just the hired help.

Personally I hate most of the FZ Logos I've seen. Do we have to have
things like an ascending pentagram to show man's spiritual reach
upwards; above broken chains to show independence from the cruel yoke
of the oppressive Mother Church; clutching a well-worn double
interlocked triangle to show some familiar symbols to welcome in the
faithful?

I know that doesn't look like anything currently existing, but I'm
tired of the same old symbology.

Couldn't we have something refreshingly jaunty like the Toys 'R Us
logo?

Sacrilegiously,
Paul
{/PLAIN}
 










Message 006
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Fri Jun 18, 2004  2:24 pm 
Subject:  Re: [ifachat] Just an observation or inquiry . . .

 
--- XXXX wrote:
> Probably. However, pictures of Ron that are not copyright by the
> church
> are hard to get.
>
> XXXX

{PLAIN}
Go into an org with a camera and take a photograph of the bust of LRH.
The large bust is a good quality piece. I think you would then be the
owner of the image, but I wouldn't pay to argue it in court.
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 












Message 026
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Fri Jun 18, 2004  6:14 pm 
Subject:  [fzelma] Re: I wonder....hmmm

  
--- XXXX wrote:
>

{PLAIN}
Time for me to weigh in with a few choice words. Unless I
misunderstood something, the person who originally started this train
of thought should be having his attention directed onto the part of the
bridge designed to handle his case right here and now. Otherwise he
might just get the idea that two hundred hours of Objectives and
Expanded Grades -type auditing is not as worthwhile as the electrifying
fun of chasing angels with a butterfly net.

Remember he won't even be able to see the angels until all the lower
levels are fully and honestly completed.

The more his attention is placed on upper level concepts the more of a
disservice we do to him.
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 











Message 027
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Fri Jun 18, 2004  6:45 pm 
Subject:  Re: [formerscio] Paradise Plaza et al

 
--- XXXX wrote:
>> Thank you. Now post these two pomes and the one you put on the
> freezone list
> to yer poetry list.

{PLAIN}
I thought I had. I was about to unload some choice invective at you
better suited to the FZ Flame group (in order to promote some traffic
there) when I thought I'd better check just to be sure. And you got
the first poem in! Oh, the shame of it. And the second too.

I'll get there soon.

In the meantime here's a nice little out-of-ARC poem:


BODY

Worship not a lump of meat
It matters not as such
It magnifies sensation
Mere a crippled being's crutch
--
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 












Message 028
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Fri Jun 18, 2004  6:54 pm 
Subject:  Re: [FreezoneOrg] Re: New website up all ready!

 
--- XXXX wrote:
> How about a large rasberry?
>
> Maybe coming out of an angel horn.

{PLAIN}
That's very funny. And appropos.

Since bb is as irreverent as he should be and doesn't seem to be stuck
on staid logos either, how about we just have a logo du jour, and
change it when a better one comes along? Or just because we feel like
it. Or when the webmaster has hiccups.

{JOKE}When I get my thumb out of my ass{/JOKE} I'll just stick something funny in
there (the logo space, not my ass) and if someone's got something
better they can always let me know.

Scn used to be real fun in the 70's before it got all serious. We
don't have to dramatize the seriousness.

Let insouciance reign! We can still do what we need to.
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 











Message 029
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Fri Jun 18, 2004  7:19 pm 
Subject:  Re: [FreezoneFriends] Richfriends changed to FreezoneFriends

  
--- XXXX wrote:
> Hi guys, as you can see there have been some changes to Richfriends
> list. You may need to update your email preferences in case you lost
> it. Those that run other lists, if you would mention the new name and

{PLAIN}
Hi there,

Here is a good point. I run several lists and quite happily generate
new ones whenever the whim takes hold. I am well on the way to sorting
out in my own mind what each one of mine is for, and when I've got it
straight I'll make it known.

Some people complain about "too many lists". I do too, and I'm
apparently making it worse!

We need someone to sit down and list out the main lists and what their
function currently is. I don't count any of mine as main lists yet.
It's complete dev-t to have two or more separate lists which pretty
much do exactly the same thing, with pretty much the same people
subscribed to each. Especially when each gets the same post from
someone.

Apart from the FZ America board, all the ones I know about are on Yahoo
groups. Ones like FreezoneAOInt, FZElma, IFAchat, ICAUSE,
FreezoneFriends, OT_List, and that RO list somewhere that I have never
even looked for.

Once it gets straightened out, hopefully with all the group owners
participating, it can get published by each as an ongoing FAQ so that
new people to the scene--and even the oldies--aren't confused any more.

Any offers?
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 










Message 030
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Fri Jun 18, 2004  7:38 pm 
Subject:  Re: [FreezoneOrg] (title snipped to avoid perpetuating entheta)

 
--- XXXX wrote:
> My support goes to bb. He's the one being OT here.

{PLAIN}
I support bb too.

I also support Nick. I support Ralph. I support Pierre. I support
TT. I support RD. I even support almost all of the staff in the C of
S.

None of these people are our enemies.

One of the R/Ser HCOB's shows a laudable LRH attitude to SP's. It's
more compassionate than what he says in Science of Survival.

The bible has the well-known "Father forgive them, for they know not
what they do."

"What is Greatness" is one of my favorite LRH articles.
{/PLAIN}

Paul


 











Message 031
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Fri Jun 18, 2004  7:55 pm 
Subject:  The Caretakers
 

THE CARETAKERS

They came, you know, a few eras ago
When the Earth was all oceans and rock
They brought in some creatures with self-breeding features
And started to build up some stock

Computers and genes, life-changing machines
Stellar indeed were their talents
They came now and then to check up again
They ensured that it all stayed in balance

The dinosaurs rose on their armor-plate toes
And fell after many millenia
Not written in history it's really no mystery
The memory, you see, is still in ya

Be that as it may, look around you today
See whole species disappearing from view
When the caretakers come, as they always have done
Can you guess what they're going to do?
--

Paul, ca. 1989


 











Message 032
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Sat Jun 19, 2004  11:03 am 
Subject:  Re: [freezoneaoint] hello - first post
 
 
--- XXXX wrote:
> Cute. Some GAT auditor doesn't now how to handle a
> meter.

{PLAIN}
Varying the question would help. Also I could write a great sec check
for investigating whether a churchie had been frolicking around a bit
in the FZ! Not that I'm offering my services for that.
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 











Message 033
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Sat Jun 19, 2004  11:55 am 
Subject:  Re: [fzpoetry] Spectator sport

 
--- XXXX wrote:
> Hi guys, I'm here.
>
> Poetry is a spectator sport for me. Hope you don't mind if I become
> the designated lurker.
>
> XXXX

{PLAIN}
Welcome. {/PLAIN}  {JOKE}It is an evil plot on my part to see how many new, little
groups I can create and lure you to lurk on before you realize what I
am doing... {/JOKE}

{PLAIN}
Otherwise:

Picturing an aesthetic wreck later,
You shy from a rhyming dreck hater,
But at once you are shirking
Your job of just lurking--
You posted! You ain't no spectator.
{/PLAIN}

Paul
 











Message 034
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Sat Jun 19, 2004  12:05 pm 
Subject:  [FZ Flame]Welcome XXXX...
 
{JOKE} 
Hey XXXX!

What the fuck kind of social bullshit is this? You can't just sit
there on no fucking e-mail and wait to be entertained, you spineless
moron. Come join in!
{/JOKE}

Paul :)


 











Message 035
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Sat Jun 19, 2004  12:15 pm 
Subject:  Re: [ifachat] Re: Charisma

  
--- XXXX wrote:
> No thanks. I'm not into flaming, regardless of the reasons. And yes,
> I thought I sent that twice, but wasn't sure. Anyway, that's what I
> thought you were talking about. It does have a good section on
> auditor beingness.

{JOKE}
Spoilsport.{/JOKE} {PLAIN}Currently FZ Flame operates at 22.0 on the tone scale.{/PLAIN}

Paul

 











Message 036
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Sat Jun 19, 2004  3:49 pm 
Subject:  Re: [FreezoneOrg] New website up all ready!

 
--- XXXX wrote:
>
> Might I suggest something that does not attack or oppterm the C of S.
>
> Pointing out deficiencies of the C of S is fine but I would not be
> creating and displaying a logo that denigrates or attacks them. That,
> to my understanding, is not the purpose of the Freezone. Remember the
> C of S is composed of beings with only a few at the top with the
> wrong motivation. Most of them have the motivation of duty.
>
> The purpose of the freezone I believe is to expand the technology and
> free beings. Including those poor buggers working in the C of S.
>
> A Logo that demonstrates the true spirit of the freezone would be
> great. A logo should not be composed of the failings of one group
> mixed with the future success of another. It should express the
> Future of the group as a whole moving forward and expanding.
>
> Logos are Symbols. Therefore one would need to work out what the
> Purpose and the Spirit of the Freezone is and build a symbol to
> represent that.

{PLAIN}
I still like Roland's idea of the raspberry being blown out of the
cherub's horn, myself.

And since I'm the guy being the webmaster right now....
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 













Message 037
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Sat Jun 19, 2004  11:33 pm 
Subject:  Re: [FreezoneOrg] scooze me? old fart?

  
--- XXXX wrote:
> I know you werent talkin' bout me..were ya?..lol..speaking
> Sacrilegiously well somebody posted that..I wish to lay claim to the
> angel horn blowing a rasberry..I think Roland said it..I need a new
> logo for FreezoneFriends list..that would be perfect..anybody with
> art
> skills willing to do that?..if so let me know..3 bucks by paypal up
> for
> grabs..ARC XXXX

{PLAIN}
I own the domain name XXXX, and have an e-mail address
there. I posted about it a couple of weeks ago when I decided to shred
my anonymity. I assume that is where the original mention came from
here.

I looked up "cherub horn" (without the quote marks) on Google, and
looked at all that came up in the Images section. I stole the one that
seemed most suitable. I can hardly forbid you to steal it! It's
currently at www.fzinternational.org , but it might not be there for
long.

I didn't find any suitable raspberries on Google. I have a copy of
Photoshop laying around somewhere, but I haven't yet summoned up the
interest in cropping one of the raspberry images, resizing and rotating
it, layering it on to the horn, etc etc.

It's kinda tacky to have both of us with the same cheap-ass "logo".
Neither bb nor I seem interested in a permanent logo, so go ahead and
build your version of it and by the time you're ready to exhibit it bb
and I will have something else up there.

How's that?

Paul

P.S. How do you have a logo for a Yahoo group?
{/PLAIN}

 











Message 038
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Sun Jun 20, 2004  1:32 am 
Subject:  Re: [ifachat] Coffee and pasteries in the main lounge

 
> On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 16:40:46 -0700 XXXX
> wrote:
> >Regarding Ron's Org, I suggest that although censoring
> >people has a certain attraction to it, it does not
> >work in the long run. One should have nothing to fear
> >from competition - either Ron's Orgs have better
> >results or they don't. Open and clear communication
> >will eventually establish the truth of the matter, and
> >allow all to see.
> >
> >There is nothing to stop people from criticising
> >various techs on the group, and if it is not from a
> >"My way or the highway" point of view, the criticism
> >will be more or less convincing.
> >
> >My vote is to allow offshoots of LRH tech to
> >participate, but any such should clearly identify
> >themselves as what they are; and nobody should be
> >merely writing promo.

{PLAIN}
This is a real big deal, not just a "Do you want the cheese or the
sausage one, dear?" type question.

One thing that I think would be very useful before even starting a
discussion on what she or shouldn't be allowed in terms of
"variations", is a careful analysis of what the hell we would be
discussing. I've been wondering about doing it, but never have. Maybe
someone else could.

It is to make a long list of what is it that makes up what we generally
consider to be "Standard Tech". It would include things like the
auditors code, model session, auditing comm cycle, repetitive auditing
comm cycle, TR's, C/Sing tech, and on and on. There might be a hundred
things on the list.

Once we have these stable data all neatly listed out, we can then
analyze the different flavors of FZ activity, checking off which ones
apply to the one under consideration and which ones don't. Kind of
like those magazine reviews of a comparison between four different
brands/models of automobile or pop-up toaster, where you can see which
ones have which features, and which ones don't.

Once ALL the different features have been listed out, we then need to
NAME the different brands of FZ activity. There's RO--that's OK, that
is pretty clearly defined. But a list like IFAchat or FreezoneOrg or
whatever, sure it's a "Standard Tech List", but what does that mean
exactly? And if one goes into it very carefully, one will probably
find that most of it is very clear but there are some points that are
fuzzy around the edges. Like which OT 1 and why? Where does NOTs fit
in? Solo NOTs? OT VIII? What OT VIII? Original OT IV to VII? Which
version of the Non-Interference Area HCOB is being operated on? Etc
etc.

One thing that will fall out of the woodwork will be the realization
that one's own pet group and the bunch of FZ weirdos over there that
barely give each other the time of day all agree on 98% of the
fundamentals, and all the hoo-hah is based on disagreements over 2%.

The reason for the naming, the labels, is for recognition purposes.
"Ah yes, that new group over there is a Standard Tech Type 3A activity,
except for allowing the use of any audited mock-up process after OT
III, but the processes are restricted to those specifically mentioned
by LRH in issues, books or tapes." Such a label is more useful than
"gang of out-tech crazies".

Anyone willing to have a go at it?
{/PLAIN}

Paul


 












Message 039
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Sun Jun 20, 2004  1:53 am 
Subject:  Re: [ifachat] FLAMES, ATTACKS AND GAMES CONDITIONS

 
--- XXXX wrote:
>
>
> Ralph has done work for OSA and this other leader was so high up
> in the hierarchy that he probably has studied every checksheet in the
> world.
> I therefore conclude that there is some kind of secret policy that is
> used
> by OSA as well as Ralph and this other guy. Maybe some of you have
> seen it
> and can tell me about it.

{PLAIN}
I was OSA Int staff for a couple of years around 1988 or 9. I wasn't
privy to all the juicy stuff as I wasn't qualified to be a full member
of OSA Int, but I worked in Qual as a supervisor and doing tech
services type of stuff.

Once I did a project for a few weeks compiling hat packs for all the
OSA Int staff, and to be shipped out to lower level OSA units. These
hat packs included regular issues, as well as confidential OSA issues.
I forget the issue type--they were black ink on white paper--OSA
Network ED's maybe? I suppose I wasn't meant to read them, but it
wasn't like having someone at Grade 0 print OT III packs (which
actually did happen around the same time!). So I read every single
word of these OSA N/W issues the OSA Int staff had in their official
hat packs.

I also supervised these staff on studying their hat packs.

What were the instructions re reverse scientology and so on? None
whatsoever. There was nothing at all that would be really considered
out-tech or to do with caving people in. There was something about
using GPM words in lawsuits to confuse the opposing counsel, or
something, but it didn't look particularly effective to me. And I
don't recall if the practise of doing it was to cease, or was to
continue. Whatever it was, it didn't seem like a big deal to me,
whereas running reverse processes on someone would have.

Now, I know dirty tricks have occurred, and there were gang-bang sec
checks, and all kinds of crazy stuff. I'm just saying that it wasn't
covered in the OSA hat packs that I was involved in putting together at
that time.
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 












Message 040
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Sun Jun 20, 2004  4:58 pm 
Subject:  Re: [FreezoneOrg] Re: scooze me? old fart?

 
--- XXXX wrote:
> --- In FreezoneOrg@yahoogroups.com, XXXX wrote:
> > I know you werent talkin' bout me..were ya?..lol..speaking
> > Sacrilegiously well somebody posted that..I wish to lay claim to
> the
> > angel horn blowing a rasberry..I think XXXX said it..I need a new
> > logo for FreezoneFriends list..that would be perfect..anybody with
> art
> > skills willing to do that?..if so let me know..3 bucks by paypal
> up for
> > grabs..ARC XXXX
>
> Itza bit joker and degrader.

{PLAIN}
I joined the SO in late 1972. Life in the SO then was hard. If you
were really lucky, you'd get up at 7 or so, eat breakfast, go on post,
take a 30/45 minute break for lunch, work till 6, take an hour for
lunch, go on course for 2 1/2 hours, go back on post or maybe spend
some extra time on post, go home at 10:30 or 11:00. Seven days a week,
except Sunday morning you might do renovations or personal laundry etc.
Every other week you'd get a day off if your stats were up and it was
OK with your senior. You'd get paid four pounds ($10) a week most
weeks.

Now, any old SO members will read this with disbelief and say, "You've
gotta be kidding--it was NEVER that easy!"

Well sometimes it was. For a period of some months in the late 70's we
even got every Saturday night off to go to Brighton or something. A
Flag Mission came and bounced the CO off post and that was the end of
that, but it was nice while it lasted.

Intersperse the cushy life with periods like the infamous "Battle of
Britain" in January 1974. It was a Flag mission that was only around
for a couple of weeks, but the actions being done by the mission were
then dramatized by FOLO execs for months afterwards. The actions being
to keep the crew on about 3-4 hours sleep a night, every night, for two
months. This was at a period of the "3 day week", when it was ILLEGAL
to use electricity in England every other day. This was in England in
mid-winter. It was cold. We were on post in ratty overcoats and
scarves and gloves if we owned any. There was no power every other
day. Offices were lit with smelly, smoky, cheap kerosene lamps, that
covered the walls--and presumably one's lungs--with thick, black soot.
The diet was typically beans and rice three meals a day. No-one was
sessionable or studentable.

In short, there were times when it was downright miserable. Long
times.

Maybe once a year, someone produced a series of "skits" for the crew.
I took part in several of these, both writing and acting. What the
skits were about, for the most part, were periods of mutual anguish for
the crew. The situations we had all suffered heavily through were held
up for inspection for what they were, and the crew, viewing these, were
able to discharge enormous amounts of charge through laughter. The
local area seniors wisely either kept away or joined in the fun. They
didn't put a stop to the activity.

The only remotely similar activity that went on was a session or two of
Group Engram Running, where the Battle of Britain was the #1 candidate
for attention. At the start it looked very promising as a mechanism
for blowing the charge, just as it sounds great in theory when you read
about it. The minions at the bottom had their say, but that held no
surprises as we had all lived through the crap. Then it was the turn
of two local executives who had been paramount in perpetuating the
misery. And the cocksuckers just lied and PR'd their way through it
instead of coming clean. A golden opportunity for blowing all that
group charge was missed.

Then it was 1977 and the J&D HCOB came out. That was the end of the
skits. And that was the end of blowing the group charge.

A similar thing happened with me personally at ITO around 1992 or so.
I had written a couple of poems for the daily OODs (Orders of the Day).
There was a push on people getting enough sleep and attending staff
study instead of staying up all night on post and then continuing
through the next day. One poem I forget most of, but another one had a
last verse that ended off something like:

Izzy-Wizzy's always working
Izzy-Wizzy thinks he's hot
... oh! Oh! Where'd he go?
Izzy-Wizzy's just been shot.

My intention was to point out that if the people who stayed up all
night on post were to get fully hatted for their posts, they would
become more efficient and be knowledgeable enough to get rid of the
dev-t they were handling and then they wouldn't *have* to stay up all
night.

And the end result of being unhatted was being taken off post,
comm-ev'd, RPF'd, disgraced, whatever--the "being shot" in the poem.

A few staff complimented me on the poetry, including a senior exec in
one of the orgs concerned. I like to think more staff came to study as
a result.

Then it came down the lines that IG Admin had seen them and was not
pleased as it was "degrading" to the Flag Bureau and I had to bow and
scrape like shit to avoid getting taken off post for being a J&Der, and
I did "conditions" and ...

Suffice it to say that never again did I dare to try and blow group
charge like that. It wasn't worth the hassle.

So, back to the present.

This isn't an identical situation. I've already made my comments about
what I think of the usual symbology, and with this post too I have
nothing further to add.

There is more to the subject of "joking and degrading" than there
appears at first sight.
{/PLAIN}

Paul


 











Message 041
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Sun Jun 20, 2004  9:52 pm 
Subject:  Basic Elements of Standard Tech

{PLAIN} 
BASIC ELEMENTS OF STANDARD TECH

"Intelligence" can be defined as the ability to recognize differences,
similarities and identities.

There are different groups and individuals, both in the CofS and in the
FZ, saying the tech as delivered in one place is more standard than
another. This has lead to friction. It has never been clearly laid
out exactly what "Standard" means, except in terms of glib phrases.
These sound good, and might get you through a star-rate checkout, but
don't help in trying to understand how one flavor of FZ Scn differs
from another.

I have compiled the first draft of a list of the basic elements that
could be considered to make up Standard Tech. My intention, after
adequate discussion among intelligent and highly-trained FZ people on
various e-mail lists, is to end up with a list of "features" that could
be used as a checklist to differentiate among the different flavors of
tech available in the FZ.

As an example, those who have not been doing CBR tech, might think of
the RO people as a bunch of weirdos. But on inspection, it could be
that the two might have 98% of their points of standard tech in common,
and only differ on 2%, and that 2% is the cause of all the contention.

It could be that a new group, "Ronology", claims to be an offshoot of
standard LRH tech, but a closer inspection shows that Ronologists only
share 43% of the points in common with the guys who consider themselves
the most standard.

This list can also be used to rate the current C of S technical
standards against well-known LRH materials.

It could also be used by an individual practitioner to see how
"on-source" he is, although it is not really designed for that.

"Standard" is here empirically defined as "as is familiar to many from
observing what was generally considered as LRH standard in the C of S
when they were there."

Roland wanted to discuss "other techs" on a particular "Standard Tech"
list. I did this long list of basic elements as I don't really know
what is being considered as "Standard", and I can't sensibly discuss
"other" without being at square 1 first.

I would appreciate comments and suggestions so I can prepare a better
list. "It's too damned long" would not be a helpful comment!
{/PLAIN}

Thanks,
Paul

{PLAIN}
Here is the first rough draft in no particular order:

1. Source materials pre-1982 (books, issues, tapes) generally upheld
2. Materials issued since 1982 generally ignored [NOT CofS STD]
3. Auditor's Code, especially no inval/eval in session
4. No hypnotism, no drugs, all non-invasive and done with pc consent
5. TRs OT-TR0 to TR4
6. TRs 6-9
7. Assessment TRs
8. Communication Cycle
9. Auditing Communication Cycle
10. Repetitive Auditing Comm Cycle
11. Model Session per 1978 HCOB, including Hav where needed
12. Full Scn CS-1 is done on new Scn pc
13. Full Dn CS-1 is done on new NED pc
14. Full clearing of commands is done per the HCOB
15. Full clearing of word lists is done per the HCOB
16. Checklist for setting up a session is fully done
17. A person different to auditor does pc exam after session
18. A person different to auditor acts as C/S
19. Auditor or C/S do not do actions above their training levels
20. Grade Chart is basic pc program and dominant program
21. Grade Chart: Purification RD or equivalent
22. Grade Chart: Introductory/Basic
23. Grade Chart: Expanded Grades and NED/Alternate Clear Route
24. Grade Chart: State of Clear/Sun RD immediately follows
25. Grade Chart: Solo Course and OT 1, 2, 3 after Clear
26. Grade Chart: OT DRD after OT 3
27. Grade Chart: Audited NOTs after OT 3/4
28. Grade Chart: Solo NOTs after Audited NOTs
29. Grade Chart: An OT 8 after Solo NOTs, but variable/unspecified
30. Grade Chart: Original OT4 not run
31. Grade Chart: Original OT5 not run.
32. Grade Chart: Original OT6 not run
33. Grade Chart: Original OT7 not run
34. Case: Dianetics forbidden on Clears and OTs
35. Case: Actual GPM's never directly addressed
36. Case: Implant GPM's only run per regular tech on NED, CC/OT2
37. Case: Implant GPM's never addressed with 60s tech (R2-12 etc.)
38. Case: No gain attempted but for unburdening and entity deletion
39. Case: Pc attests to state obtained by ability gained, after C/S OK
40. Non-Interference Area between OT 1 and OT 3
41. Non-Interference Area while on OT DRD
42. Non-Interference Area while on Audited NOTs
43. Non-Interference Area while on Solo NOTs
44. Confidentiality of upper-level rundowns enforced
45. Pc Indicators taken note of in case programming and running
46. Don't mix rundowns or repairs
47. Dianetics: Run per Book 1, or
48. Dianetics: Run per R3RA on NED
49. Dianetics: R3R or variations [NOT CofS STD]
50. Various additional actions and repair actions available
51. Major actions never run twice [STUPID if missed the first time]
52. LRH processes not on Grades etc. not used (e.g. mock-up processes)
53. Super-Power is not yet released
54. Use of Auditing Prepared Lists
55. Use of Correction Prepared Lists
56. Light touch on rudiments
57. Use the major action to run the case
58. All major actions flattened to no Tone Arm Action
59. Auditing done in brackets/four (or more) flows
60. A single tech/policy issue authority
61. A C/S using the C/S Series
62. Use of a Qual, cramming etc.
63. Auditor audits one pc at a time in a formal session
64. In group auditing, several at a time, but still formal
65. Ethics--Tech--Admin
66. Auditor Admin Series for session admin/pc folders
67. Each level contains specific processes
68. Process commands are standardized and almost unvarying
69. Processes are never invented, but only taken from usual sources
70. Broad workability of tech
71. Different auditing styles for different levels
72. Assessment for what to run next by meter
73. Assessment for what to run next by pc interest
74. Don't run uncharged subjects/items (use buttons too)
75. F/N Everything (includes Rehab Tech)
76. Run as many processes as needed to reach the stated EP.
77. The stated EP is attainable by all. [NOT ALWAYS TRUE]
78. ARC and the Tone Scale
79. Axioms/Logics accepted as-is
80. Regular skin galvanometer-type meter and cans
81. Usual meter reads
82. Study Tech
83. Student Hat a pre-requisite to major courses
84. Courses run per WIAC PL
85. Course Sup expert in Sup Tech, not subject being taught
86. Instructor expert in Sup Tech AND subject taught [NOT CofS STD]
87. Drilling done pre-GAT [NOT current CofS STD]
88. Rote drilling done post-GAT [NOT LRH STD]
89. Word Clearing Tech per W/C Series
90. Auditor learns mostly by auditing and cramming
91. Verbal Tech is tromped on hard
92. Short runway into the chair [NOT CofS STD]
93. Unmetered auditor courses: Self-Analysis, Objectives etc.
94. Non-level metered courses, Method 1 Co-audit etc.
95. Standalone Hard TRs course
96. Standalone metering course
97. Academy Levels = Short practical courses [NOT CofS STD]
98. SHSBC theory = All the theory and philosophic background
99. BC prac. = Enough auditing to get superb, all actions below Clear
100. Class VIII = True Auditing Basics; OT Level repair
101. Voluntary internships after courses
102. Auditor certs expire after 1 year if no internship
103. Unmetered auditing for some actions
104. Qual corrective actions like False Data Stripping
105. Co-Audits possible below Clear
106. Non-professional co-audits not possible above OT3
107. Field auditing is encouraged [NOT CofS STD]
108. LRH materials as available as publishing tech allows[NOT CofS STD]
109. Confessionals part of Grade 2, not followed by Ethics
110. Miscellaneous confessionals where needed, no ethics
111. Miscellaneous confessionals, followed by Ethics [NOT LRH STD]
112. Mandated 6-month checks on Solo NOTs [NOT LRH STD]
113. Confessionals done for the group, not the pc [NOT LRH STD]
114. O/W write-ups are OK, but followed by Ethics is not mandatory
115. PTS handling as needed
116. PTSness to CofS terminals not allowed [NOT LRH STD]
117. Real SP defined by case study of TA action and 12-points behavior
118. [False] SP defined as big annoyance to Management [NOT LRH STD]
119. SP declared and broadly published
120. Someone intimately connected to real SP not allowed auditing
121. Enforced disconnection from a False SP [NOT LRH STD]
122. Actions normally audited by another are not done Solo
123. Clear adjudication is only done by a very qualified C/S
124. Solo Auditing is done under a competent C/S
125. Actions are not completed until student/pc is satisfied
126. Auditor studies/drills any action before running it
127. Adequate theory backs any auditing action
128. The philosophy of the subject is fairly self-consistent
129. Org-type Admin: Exists but not delineated here
130. Pc folder data strictly confidential [NOT CofS STD]
131. Pc discouraged/forbidden to discuss own case
132. Pc does not view own folder except separate solo folder on solo
133. KSW = Tech considered complete and no further research necessary
134. Other tech (Revenius etc.) banned even though on solid grounding
135. Discussion of subject forbidden! [NOT LRH STD]
136. Rightness of organization asserted and enforced [NOT LRH STD]
137. Perceived enemies of organization attacked relentlessly [STUPID]
138. No off-line case actions; doctor etc. needs C/S OK
139. No mixing practices
140. No other practices while on-lines
141. No self-auditing of processes but for correctly C/S'd OT Levels
142. Org enforces mores on public that don't affect case [NOT LRH STD]
143. Coffee-shop auditing of intro/demo type processes OK on new people
144. Scn is targeted towards making the able more able
145. Reward upstats and penalize downstats
146. Decency and compassion are subordinated to 144 and 145 [STUPID]
147. No-one other than LRH is an authority on anything [STUPID]
148. LRH is never wrong about anything, ever [STUPID]
149. LRH tech/policy subordinated to Int Mgmt orders [NOT LRH STD]
150. Real illegal pc's ("IP") are not accepted for processing
151. False IP (e.g. guy who spoke to a psych once) banned [NOT LRH STD]
**********
{/PLAIN}













Message 042
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Sun Jun 20, 2004  10:48 pm 
Subject:  Re: Basic Elements of Standard Tech

 
--- XXXX wrote:
> Actually I didn't want to restrict communication about
> "other techs", not quite the same thing, and out of
> concern for the fundamantalist attitude people tend to
> get.

{PLAIN}
Sorry, I missed the nice difference.


>I think that Scn tech speaks for itself, and
> doesn't really need to fear other ideas.

The problem comes in when you get things like the below. I'll take a
fairly safe example, the Revenius Super-Power materials. I was hiding
when these first came out, and didn't follow any real-time discussions
going on anywhere.

These would not be considered as regular LRH tech, as they were
published in no HCOB or tape.

They come from a highly-thought-of source, and they appear to be based
on LRH materials, and they look like they could be very beneficial if
run properly.

A discussion about whether the Revenius materials could be considered
to be Standard Tech right now would be premature, as there aren't
voluminous reports as to the workability in real life of the processes.
But let's say it is two years down the road, and thirty people have
been run on them. Of those 30, 8 were not yet clear and 20 were
through Solo NOTs, say. The 8 didn't really get a whole lot out of
them; 19/20 Solo NOTs people were blown away, and 1 was sick and
shouldn't really have been running them as he wasn't set up. It would
be reasonable to say, "OK, great bunch of processes, they result in the
ability of ___, pre-req is through Solo NOTs." Per AN INTRODUCTION TO
STANDARD TECH, "Standard Tech isn't what I say it is. It's what
works." (LRH)

So what now? We're two years down the road. We have some tech that
wasn't written in LRH's lifetime that works wonderfully, and is fully
deserving of being called "Standard Tech" per the LRH definition just
above.

A Standard Tech fundamentalist might be having problems right around
now ...
{/PLAIN}

Paul









Message 043
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Mon Jun 21, 2004  1:56 am 
Subject:  Course Supervision and Misunderstoods

{PLAIN}
COURSE SUPERVISION AND MISUNDERSTOODS

Don't read this if you're not well-rested and well-fed. And if you get
to the end when you weren't, don't say I didn't warn you.

Around 1988, I was posted in New World Corps as the "Sec-Checker School
Theory Supervisor."

I had been supervising for a while, and had been idly wondering about
the attestations at the end of the course. They varied slightly from
checksheet to checksheet, but were usually something like:

Student: "I attest that I have no misunderstoods on the course
materials, and can fully apply them."

Supervisor: "I attest that this student has fully completed the
checksheet, has no misunderstoods, and knows and can apply the course
materials."

All fairly routine. Everyone is familiar with these attest lines as we
have all signed them off without too much thought.

I had been doing a minute study of the word-clearing series, just to
make sure it actually said what I thought it said. I had been reading
those issues very carefully. Very, very, very, VERY carefully. And
yes, they did say, without equivocation, that one should not go by ANY
misunderstoods. I had heard gruesome stories about how the occasional
student in the International Training School across the hallway had
been discovered to have gone past a misunderstood, and it was a big
deal, and he had to go back to the beginning of {/PLAIN} {JOKE}his existence as a
thetan or something....{/JOKE} {PLAIN}Terrible stuff.

Well, that's what it said. Did I dare to actually apply what it said?
I was kind of a wimp at the time, and not at all happy to be up at that
level of the org board, with inspections every month from the Senior
C/S Office and so on. But I figured I couldn't get into too much
trouble for exactly applying what a whole slew of HCOBs said. It's not
even as if it was a questionable tech point--no-one at all was arguing
that it was OK to go by a misunderstood word in anything you were
studying. It's an "everybody knows" kind of thing.

OK, so with some trepidation, off I went.

I told my existing students that I was going to apply something
exactly, and I showed them the attest lines at the end of the
checksheet, and I said that since I had to attest that the student had
no misunderstoods, I was going to do my best to make sure it was true.
Just to make it finite, I said that the way I was going to implement
the new regime was this: I would give the student a check on KSW1. I
was going to ask him to define up to ten words in a row on KSW1 (i.e.
pass ten words in a row and he's done with me). If the student passed
the ten words, I would assume he could clear words properly and I
wouldn't hound him after that. I would give spot checks later on in
the course, but it wouldn't be in the same manner. I gave the same
R-factor to new students too.

No complaints, that all seemed very reasonable, and they'd all been
passing star-rates and M4's and even M9's on KSW1 for years, so what
the hell was the big deal.

First student. I didn't even hide the issue from him. I pointed to
the word in the first paragraph, so he could see it in context. I
wanted the definition of the word I was pointing at in the way it was
being used right there and then.

Sup: "OK, what is the definition of the word 'type' right here
[pointing at "corrections in this type style"].

Student: "Oh, it means, er, "kind".

Sup: "Flunk. Look it up. Restudy the first page of the issue."
I wasn't even bothering to flunk a one- or two-second comm lag.

Student comes back ten minutes later.

Sup: What's the definition of the word 'type' here?
Student: (Gives the correct printing definition).

Sup: "Good. Sentence... Good. What is the definition of the word
'has' here? [Pointing at "Neglect...has caused great hardship"].

Student: "Um, it means 'possesses'".

Sup: "Flunk. Look it up. Restudy the first paragraph."

Student comes back half an hour later looking a little bit less cocky
this time.

Sup: "What's the definition of the word 'has' here?
Student: (Fumbles through the definition involving the grammatical
construction of the perfect tense).

Sup: "Good. Sentence... Good. What's the definition of the word 'on'
here? [Pointing at "...great hardship on staffs" four words after the
last flunk.]

Student, with some relief as he always passes this one on a star-rate
checkout: "It means 'having to do with'".

Sup: Flunk. Look it up. Restudy the rest of the sentence.

Student comes back one minute later with a dictionary, pointing to the
definition that he gave me, to protest. "See, look, that's what I told
you."

Sup: "Yeah, but it doesn't mean that the way it is being used there in
that sentence. Look at it again."

Student looks, and eventually he realizes that it doesn't and the flunk
was completely valid. Usually he caves in somewhere around here, on
realizing that "on" has twenty definitions, and there are probably at
least twenty words, maybe fifty, on that page that he can't exactly
define in context. And maybe his confront is up to realizing that it
has been the same on every single page of every issue he has ever
studied in his entire life. And nobody ever caught it before.
Everyone's been glibbing their way through every single damn course
they have ever done.

So he has the cognition.

He comes back for the next check from me, just on the first paragraph,
a day or three later, looking very hunted indeed, and not at all
confident.

We repeat the procedure. Maybe he will get one word right and have a
win before the next flunk.

I deliberately didn't choose easy words. I deliberately chose the
hardest words there, usually small common English words, often used in
one of their less common usages. I hadn't done Key to Life, but I was
fairly literate, and I looked up the words myself beforehand just to
make sure. I don't think I incorrectly flunked anyone. Once it was
questionable if the student had the right definition, and I took back
the flunk after he showed me that his definition could fit although it
wasn't what I had in mind.

I had people on KSW1 for three weeks or more. Some routed off course
because they couldn't hack it. Many were in tears, including long-term
excellent HGC auditors. But they couldn't argue with the references
showing that they weren't supposed to go by misunderstoods.

I continually felt terrible, almost in tears myself. It seemed to me
that what I was doing was suppressive.

I was sure that there was a confidential bulletin on the Key to Life
Course, which was being piloted across the hall at that time, that said
that it was impossible for people who hadn't done the Key to Life
Course to fully define these small words, and one should turn a blind
eye to their failure to pass a thorough checkout on them. Years later,
after I did the KTL Course and the KTL Delivery course, I found to my
surprise that there was no such issue.

My seniors at New World Corps knew what I was doing, but none of them
told me to knock it off.

Several students got through KSW1 eventually. I let them continue with
the checksheet, and didn't push so hard after that. I figured if they
could get through my checkout on those words, then they deserved to get
through the rest of the course unhassled to the same extent. I was
full of admiration for those who got through. I was one tough
son-of-a-bitch on those checkouts, even ignoring a short comm-lag.

After a month I had an inspection from Jeff Walker. I think he was
Deputy Senior C/S Int at the time. He had inspected my course room
before, but not since I had started my new kick. He looked over the
checksheets and at the student progress, like on the same issue for a
month. He had probably heard reports of what was going on. He just
said to me gently, "Get them through the checksheets, Paul" and walked
out.

Now, I have had about four tech correction type things from Jeff
Walker. Each of them has been spot-on, and I have been very impressed
with his tech and his dealings with me personally.

So he said that to me, and I said, "Screw it." I was having a big
problem for a couple of days, because I knew I should get the students
through their checksheets, but also I knew they weren't supposed to go
by misunderstoods, and the only way to get anywhere remotely near to
doing that was something like what I had been doing.

There were only two students who got through my KSW1 checkout on the
first or second try. They were both Key to Life grads. Craig Wright
and Rick Siegel, if anyone knows them. I was impressed!

I resolved my dilemma thus:

1. It is probably impossible for a student who has not done KTL to
study anything without going past at least 20 misunderstoods per page.

2. I am going to use as a benchmark, "Can he apply the materials?" If
he can't, I will clear up mu's to the point at which he *can* apply the
materials and leave it at that. To find and clear mu's just for the
sake of it is soulless and almost suppressive.

3. The people who write checksheets are just as glib as the students
who went through my course room, and the attestation section is
impossible as stated and no-one except me realizes it.

And that is what I used for the rest of my supervisor life. I didn't
make a big deal out of it. What was the point?

It was just amusing to sometimes supervise in the OEC/FEBC courseroom
downstairs at ITO. There it's a real big deal if a student went past a
misunderstood. A real big deal. Back to the beginning of the OEC
volume under study at least, maybe previous volumes as well. Weeks of
Method 2 word-clearing. Very serious. And most of these guys didn't
even have English as a native language!

The whole scene is unbelievably, fucking crazy.

And you thought you were a good student?
{/PLAIN}

Paul
 









Message 044
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Mon Jun 21, 2004  11:10 am 
Subject:  Re: [formerscio] Course Supervision and Misunderstoods
 
 
--- XXXX wrote:
>
> I suppose what you were doing was essentially what KTL
> and M-1 w/cing are supposed to do (though the latter
> mostly doesn't), and what really one's education is
> supposed to provide.

{PLAIN}
M1 W/C originally, per "Talk on a Basic Qual" tape, was designed to get
the whole track E/S's out of the way, so that the student doesn't spend
25 hours trying to clear the word "the" because it is hung up on the
word "glpfg" a million years ago. Maybe someone who has the tape or a
transcript could supply the actual quote as I don't have it.

Somehow this got twisted into a hundred or two hundred hour marathon
where the student clears up mu's at great length in this lifetime's
subjects studied. The EP is stated as "Recovery of one's education" or
something. That latter is in an issue published as an LRH issue, but I
have my doubts as it looks like a PR/Marketing thing now whereas it
originally wasn't. Just my opinion.

KTL is a long, hard slog and is often quickied. I found that most KTL
graduates, like those who hadn't done KTL, couldn't define the "of" in
"Church of Scientology", for example, some months after graduation,
although their general comprehension level was vastly improved. (Hint:
it isn't really "having to do with" although you could probably get
away with that in a normal checkout).


> One clear example to me is the expression "no joy"
> which LRH uses as part of the instructions in some
> correction list (L3RH, maybe?). He says, "If no joy,
> (do something else)". In my youth, this expression
> was fairly common, and means "if that doesn't work".
> But getting Americans to beleive that rather than "If
> not deliriously happy" was a definite uphill struggle.

I laughed at that one, as an old Brit supervising mostly American kids.
I used to use the Concise Oxford dictionary a lot, as it contains a
very large selection of English idioms. Under "joy", for instance, it
says, "3. Brit. colloq. satisfaction, success (got no joy)".


> When one is in fact educated, has long been interested
> in words and derivations and their history, has had
> hundreds of hours of M-1, it still takes quite a bit
> of awareness to realize that others just don't know
> things to the same depth, and this can leave one at
> the effect of others' misunderstandings.

Yes. A useful reference on this is W/C Series 66, CONCEPTUAL
UNDERSTANDING. Part of it is, "People who have no idea of concept get
bogged into terms and mechanics. They can't operate at the level of
concept and are extremely literal...People who are literal rather than
literate simply haven't achieved conceptual understanding."

The origin of the "Ronbot" problem.


> BTW, what does "had" mean in that last sentence, and
> why did I use it? What is that grammatical
> construction called? Paul knows, I'm sure.

One of my favorite questions, not in the course room, but to people
outside who fancy themselves as being very literate in English, is:

"What part of speech is the word "No" on that "No Smoking" sign over
there?"
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 








Message 045
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Mon Jun 21, 2004  2:11 pm 
Subject:  Re: [ifachat] Re: Coffee and pasteries in the main lounge

  
--- XXXX wrote:
> But if you look at Paul's long list it is clear it isn't all
> assimilated in a minute and many less trained people are still
> struggling with what they really mean or talking about.
>
> XXXX

{PLAIN}
Partly my doing as I wanted to compress each point to fit onto one
line.

If anyone is too confused about any particular points, and is
interested enough to open their mouth about them, I'll happily amplify
on anything. Just one request: if there is a question, please ask it on
the "Basic Elements..." thread and not this one.
{/PLAIN}

Thanks,
Paul
 











Message 046
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Mon Jun 21, 2004  2:31 pm 
Subject:  Re: [FreezoneOrg] HCO Bring Order!!

 
--- XXXX wrote:
>
> I think its time for friends of Ralph and Pierre to step in!

{PLAIN}
Oh, I don't know about that. If you know about a huge bomb blast
coming your way in time to do something about it, you open all the
doors and windows of the house, put the china on the floor and wait.

W--H--O--O--S--H!!!!! The air rushes through.

You wait a bit.

W--H--O--O--S--H!!!!!! The air rushes back through the other way.

You wait a bit more for things to settle down. Then you put the china
back on the shelves, pick up the few bits and pieces that blew around,
do a bit of dusting, then get back to reading your book.

Of course, if the bomb lands directly on you, that handling won't work.

But very few people actually sustain a direct hit.

It's like a hurricane. You don't try and stop a hurricane, or change
its course. If you're human you shelter underground. If you're a tree
you bend. Stuff that can't bend or shelter gets trashed, unless it is
very robust.

When the hurricane blows out, you yawn and go back to fishing.

If you try to move the hurricane somewhere else, you're toast.
{/PLAIN}

Paul












Message 047
 From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Mon Jun 21, 2004  2:49 pm 
Subject:  Bye and thanks for all the fish
 
{PLAIN} 
Hi guys,

I'm withdrawing from FZ Elma about five minutes after I send this.
I'll still be on other groups.
{/PLAIN}

All the best,
Paul
 











Message 048
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Mon Jun 21, 2004  2:50 pm 
Subject:  Bye and thanks for all the fish
 
{PLAIN} 
Hi guys,

I'm withdrawing from FreezoneFriends about five minutes after I send
this. I'll still be on other groups.
{/PLAIN}

All the best,
Paul
 












Message 049
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Mon Jun 21, 2004  6:19 pm 
Subject:  Re: [formerscio] Course Supervision and Misunderstoods
 
 
--- XXXX wrote:
>
> Well, the phrase is clearly short for "There is no
> smoking allowed in this here place."

{PLAIN}
All that you said--and I snipped--is perfectly true, Roland.

But I think that in the phrase, "No Smoking", "No" is a verb. Whatever
the dictionary says.

Imperative mood. With the meaning of, "Don't engage in".

If it can even be separated out from the phrase. I think it can, as
above. The KTL Sup at ITO, John McGurk, who lived and breathed this
stuff all day every day for five years or so, thought the phrase could
not be chopped up like I did.

I just checked in my trusty Concise OED and it agrees with John, giving
an action definition similar to the ones Roland mentioned.
{/PLAIN}

Paul
 











Message 050
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Mon Jun 21, 2004  8:14 pm 
Subject:  Re: [ifachat] FLAMES, ATTACKS AND GAMES CONDITIONS

  
--- XXXX wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 01:53:56 -0700 (PDT), Paul Adams wrote in
> <20040620085356.17401.qmail@web53310.mail.yahoo.com>:
>
> >Now, I know dirty tricks have occurred, and there were gang-bang sec
> >checks, and all kinds of crazy stuff. I'm just saying that it
> wasn't
> >covered in the OSA hat packs that I was involved in putting together
> at
> >that time.
> >
>
>
> So we just have to do with lowtoned individuals screwing up,
> with or without going into a bank agreement. Probably emulating a
> "winning valence" they have perceived.
>
> No destructive LRH policy.
>
> This is a beautiful information to have and a big relief.

{PLAIN}
I must add something to correct any false impression.

The infamous Fair Game cancelation policy merely canceled the practise
of using the label "Fair Game", and that is all. It was a PR move,
nothing more. The same actions that had been being done against
"enemies" were allowed to continue to be done.

There were not really additional issues in the hat packs I saw that
went into greater detail than what is covered in well-known LRH
policies. At least, they are well-known to critics. The hat packs for
guys in the Legal, PR, and Intel Bureaus also contained two books, Sun
Tzu's "Art of War" and Clausewitz's "On War". Both well-known texts on
warfare, and very useful in life too, I might add. Even for little old
gentle me.

There is more information on all this than anyone could possibly want
available on the Web via any search engine, so I won't elaborate.
"Ruin him utterly" as a search term works well, if you must wade
through the garbage.
{/PLAIN}

Paul













Message 051
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Mon Jun 21, 2004  10:18 pm 
Subject:  Re: [FreezoneOrg] Re: scooze me? old fart?

 
--- XXXX wrote:
> Hey Paul-still got any of those skits around?
>
> Probably would blow staff [stuff?--Paul] for some people here! :)
> Chloe

{PLAIN}
All I can remember clearly that is worth reporting is this.

On Sea Org Day in 1974 or '75 we had the whole day off. Remarkable at
the time. We put on a whole costume musical called "Treasury Island".
It took place at Stonelands, a large stone Elizabethan mansion where
the SO crew lived, about four miles from SH. There was a large
ballroom there, with oak-panel walls and a large stone fireplace, which
normally was a mens' dorm. I slept in there with about twenty other
guys for seven years.

All the furniture was removed; a stage was built about two feet off the
ground with rudimentary stage lighting installed; Alex Smith painted a
large backdrop; chairs were imported; and we had a show for a couple of
hours with an audience of about 100. There were some other items in
addition to Treasury Island.

There were also games and a roast pig barbecue and soccer and other
goodies to pretty much fill up the day with fun.

This was the best SO Day I experienced in 23 years.

Treasury Island was a take-off of Treasure Island. It was basically
about a Sea Org reg tour to a remote Pacific island to collect some
money from a prospect and get it counted on the Gross Income stat for
that week before 2 PM.

I arrived late on the scene, about a week before the event. Someone
had just discovered that I could write, and asked me to contribute.
Things grew from there and come the night I ended up directing and
performing six original songs that I had written. Oh, I sing too. Or
I did.

My character was the Head Cannibal. My costume consisted of some
leaves sewn onto a pair of brief shorts, so it looked like I was
wearing only leaves about my loins. And make-up to darken the skin all
over. And a large circular-ish metal object on a chain around my neck,
that went well with the native mock-up. I had hair then too.

Sitting in the front seats of the audience were all the senior execs
from the GOWW, as well as from FOLO UK and AOSHUK and SH FDN. My post
at the time was Flag Banking Officer AOSHUK, and almost everyone knew
me as a strait-laced kind of guy. It made for an interesting first
appearance on stage.

There were about ten characters total. The songs were performed mostly
offstage with me directing, with me as lead and a chorus of four or
five. There was a piano and a piano-player, but we had had no
rehearsal, and the guy didn't really know the tunes ahead of time. So
we sang them a cappella. Rehearsal was very skimpy! None of us were
professional or even very experienced singers, but it all went over
very well indeed.

The first song was an introduction. To make it all simple, with very
limited rehearsal time, and because I was lousy at writing melodies, I
used well-known tunes and just wrote fresh words. What follows is just
a few fragments from memory--I never kept a copy of the script. I
think we managed to mimeo it off at the time. I'm sure there's one
floating around somewhere in someone's treasured memorabilia.

Song 1. Sung to the tune of "The British Grenadiers", one of the most
recognizable regimental marches and still a much-loved patriotic
British song (as some web-site says about it).

We came out here on a Rush P.O.*
To get GI** uptrending
If we go home with the GI down
We'll be had for over-spending
Whatever may occur today
We'll have to see it through
(forgotten)...
We're a loyal Sea Org crew

(another three or four verses, now forgotten)
(some syllables have to be extended to fit the music but I haven't
bothered to reproduce that)
*Rush PO = Rush Purchase Order, a basically-illegal way of spending
next week's income
**GI = Gross Income

Part of the accompaniment was some people singing "bom...bom...bom" to
simulate a drum beating in time with the music. Now that I think of
it, the first verse was me bom-bomming my way through the melody to
simulate a marching band. A bit of a skimpy marching band.

At the end of the song, the rhythmic beat kept going, but segued into a
"chhhsh" kind of noise, like a snare drum. It would have been better
with real drums, but what the hell!

Once this was going ahead and I was confident the rest of the chorus
could keep it going, I left the group at the side of the stage (and
off-stage), and crept around the back. My intent was to stick my head
up over the back of the stage and make an appearance that way. I stuck
my head up, but no-one could see me, so I gradually stuck my head and
shoulders up until I got an audience reaction. I looked left and right
in an exaggerated fashion to make sure the coast was clear, then stood
up. I had to stand there for about a minute until the laughter had
almost died away, then I thumped loudly on the stage with a big stick I
was carrying. More laughter... Thump! Quiet. Then the rest of the
cannibal band came on stage, equally sillily made-up. One cannibal
(Dave Flood) was wearing dark glasses. {IRONY}Very authentic.{/IRONY}  More
laughter... Thump!

The snare drum was still going, so I used that for rhythm and launched
straight into my introductory song.

It was "I'm a Cannibal", sung to the tune of Monty Python's "I'm a
Lumberjack". I would sing a line or two, then the Cannibal Chorus
would repeat them, just like in the Lumberjack song, or as best as I
remembered it.

I'm a cannibal, and I'm OK
I eat human bodies
Nicely cooked o'er a big log fire
With lovely bloody toddies

(Chorus)

(Another few verses I forget).

Later there were another four songs, but I sang them offstage and I
don't remember them now.

I have a photograph in front of me, with some of the cast of cannibals,
taken during the performance: Me, Floodie, Peter Hill, Hazel Grafton,
Carol Beatty, Anna Angel?. And another one of me and Peter taken
outside earlier in the day on the front steps of the imposing main
entrance to Stonelands, me in costume apart from the make-up, and Peter
in regular clothing. My scanner is down right now--I'll post them
somewhere one day.

Other cast members I recall were Chris Burton as Ben Gun, and Mark
Gardner. I don't remember Mark's character, but he distinguished
himself by performing drunk and falling off the back of the stage. It
wasn't scripted, but no-one seemed to notice. Except Mark.

I had all my attention on the songs, and others had written the
dialogue anyway, and I don't remember a single line of it apart from
Hazel Grafton running on-stage shouting, "Help, help, I've been
GRAPED." Someone said, "Surely, madam, you mean 'raped'?" "No, no
there was a BUNCH of them." It's not even particularly funny, but
since it's all I remember after thirty years I added it to this
historical record.

The whole day went very well. We put the beds back into the ballroom
that night so we could sleep, then completed the move back the next
morning. It was Sunday, so we didn't have to be on post until noon.

And that was my introduction as a performer to the world. And to me
too, astonishingly. I had never done anything remotely similar this
lifetime, except to sing a few quiet songs with a guitar in front of
three people at most a few times.
{/PLAIN}

Paul










Message 052
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Tue Jun 22, 2004  12:26 am 
Subject:  Re: [freezoneaoint] Course Supervision and Misunderstoods/M3

 --- XXXX wrote:
> You commented in reply to another post that you hadn't
> had wins out of M-9's or 4's. In fact almost all the
> M-4's I've ever seen or had were utter bullshit. A
> fair number of M-9's were too, I admit.

{PLAIN}
I never found M-4 useful and was really shocked once when I got a read
on the question! I wasn't good at M-4. Maybe others were, but not me.
M-9 was OK, but slow. I would never, ever use M-9 to debug a student.
Spot-checking was only useful in finding out that a student had mu's,
not in finding out where he was really hung up. I found M-2
impossible, and not for use at all. The only time I did M-2 was when I
was forced to by another; never on my own determinism. My favorite
method of word-clearing on students as a debug tool was M-3. In
competent hands, it is complete dynamite. Yes, lowly Method 3.

Example:

Student looks dopey. It's an hour into course time and I've just now
got to him. I noticed he was dopey earlier, but I gave him a bit of
time to see if he could dig himself out. Besides--maybe I've got 30
other students!

Sup: "Hi--how's it going?"

Student: "Fine. (Social answer)"

Since my question wasn't a social question, I would vary it. Usually I
would just cut to the chase.

Sup: "I noticed you were falling off your chair, and you had been
looking fine earlier. Getting enough sleep? How many hours? Well
fed?"

That would be a few comm cycles, but I'm just short-handing writing it
down here. I ask about the sleep as staff would sometimes sneak into
course after getting two hours sleep the night before and because they
were "tough", they figured they could make it on course. Similarly I
would [ask for and] get how many hours, or they might say they slept enough and if
you accept that answer you don't find out they only got two hours. In
this example, let's assume that he's had enough sleep and food, and
he's not wildly out-ruds over being RPF'd tomorrow or something.

Sup: "Where were you doing well?'

NOT NOT NOT "Where were you LAST doing well?" "Where were you last
doing well" is TWO questions in one, and it is too much for a student
to answer accurately while in the anaten from some mu(s).

Student: (Dully) "I was doing OK at the beginning of this issue here,
but I've been on it all morning. I've looked up eight words in it so
far."

Sup: "OK. But where were you doing *well*?"

Student: (Brightens up quite a bit) "Oh, this area was fine."

Let's say he's stuck on the first page of an issue, and he is pointing
to the last few issues on his checksheet. He got through two inches of
checksheet yesterday. Normally this guy studies fine, say.

Sometimes you find out he has *never* done well. If that is the case,
he's off to Qual but usually he gets to do study tech and maybe a
grammar course, and maybe even KTL, until he can finally get to the
point where he is doing well on study. For however long it lasts, at
least in the future he can find a point this lifetime where he was
doing well on course. ("On course" includes school etc.)

Sup: "OK. We're going to come forward and find out where you started
to run into trouble."

I would then fairly rapidly come forward, depending on how far we had
to go back to find where he was doing well. Sometimes it's the
previous paragraph, sometimes it's ten years ago.

I am watching the guy *very* sharply to see the first point he goes a
bit anaten, whether he notices it or not.

Let's say he gets to the end of the last thing he studied yesterday,
and he was doing great.

We then get onto this issue he's been looking at all morning. Student
suddenly looks dull again.

Student: (Looks slightly less dull)" You know, I'm not really sure what
"Remimeo" means. I've looked it up before, but I should probably look
it up again."

Sup: "OK, you can look it up later if you want, but let's finish off
what we're doing. We're going to find the point where you started to
have trouble."

It's phrased like I'm asking his OK or something, but that *is* what we
are going to do whether he likes it or not. But it is very, very rare
that anyone complains if you're doing it right.

I would put his attention on the issue paragraph by paragraph, or line
by line (I would usually do this by covering up the issue with a piece
of paper below the paragraph I was directing his attention to. In
extreme cases, I would cover up the text above the paragraph too). In
this way, in this example, we might find out that he wasn't doing well
from the first word in the issue.

He might offer up five genuine m/u's. Note them if you like, but it
would be a God-awful Q&A to stop what you are doing to clear them. You
don't give a flying freak that he's noticed an m/u, or even a hundred.
You are only looking for one thing--the exact point where he ceased to
do well. It isn't a page. It isn't a paragraph. It isn't usually a
line. It's almost always a word or a short idiomatic phrase.

The datum here, that everyone knows, is that you find out where the
student was doing well; then where he started to do not so well; and
the m/u lies at the exact tail end of the point where he was doing
well.

So, we have a student who was doing great right up to the last moment
of course yesterday; and was doing badly from the very first moment of
course today. No m/u.

Well, maybe he's got an m/u on the typist's initials at the end of
yesterday. Or it's something about "Hubbard". Even though he's
already looked those up as he knows how to do M3 too.

Well, maybe M-3's missing something....

NO, NO, NO, NO, NO! There have been 10 hours of life between the end
of course yesterday and the start of course today. When you enquire
carefully, you find out that he went to a one-hour staff LRH tape play
last night after course; he talked to his friends about a basketball
match in the dorm last night; there was a long speech from the CO at
muster that morning about how the uniforms were looking sloppy and more
attention had to be put on them. And he was eavesdropping on a pretty
girl's conversation at breakfast just before course.

So you look over all this stuff, still using the the basic M3 concepts
(two of them, not one) of where were you doing well, and where did you
cease to do well.

Sup: "OK, tape play, how was that? (I am inwardly wincing as I went
to the tape play too, and there were words in there I knew hardly
anyone would duplicate, and I'm half working out how I can clear them
up as they are pigs to clear on the average student).

Student: (Looking bright) "It was fine, actually."

And we would poke around for a bit, and finally come up with the point
where he was on the bus riding in to the org that morning and he picked
up an m/u from an advertising billboard. That is the point he really
brightens up on, VGI's on spotting it.

So I'd dig up a definition for him of whatever it was, he'd clear that,
I'd make sure there wasn't anything else after (not before) that point,
then back to the issue. I would check the other stuff as simply as,
"How was the CO's briefing this morning--any attention on that?" (I'm
looking *very* carefully to make sure there is no flicker of anaten or
concern or confusion). "No, it's fine" he says and I can see that it
is, not just because the words "it's fine" come out of his mouth.

If the m/u was in his materials, he would just come lightly forward
from there. But you can't do that with a ten minute staff briefing, so
you have to improvise.

The pretty girl's conversation was fine too.

If it hadn't been, I always found I could pull the exact m/u out of the
guy's head, as long as he was genuinely doing fine up to the point he
got it. If you're directing his attention too late in time, in the fog
after an m/u, you won't get the *subsequent* m/u's out of his head
because he's anaten to a certain extent, but I found you can always get
the earliest one. Then when that's cleared up, the next one suddenly
becomes visible. And so on.

Now he's in PT.

He has forgotten that he wanted to look up "Remimeo" again, and doesn't
notice as he flies through the rest of the issue and the next few
issues.

And that is how M-3 is *really* done. None of all I described above is
anything other than finding out where he was doing well, and then
finding out where he ceased to do well.

It took a long time to describe it in minute detail. But the whole
cycle above of locating the word could be done in maybe ten minutes.
Sometimes it takes two minutes. The one above was an extreme example.
He clears the words after that by himself, and he does it just fine.

Now, what would have happened if he had gone to a rote word-clearer,
who would have given him 5 hours of Method 4, 2, 9 ... and still would
never have found the m/u that was causing all the trouble?

Any failed students reading?
{/PLAIN}

Paul
 








Message 098
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Tue Jun 22, 2004  12:52 pm 
Subject:  Re: [FreezoneOrg] Course Supervision and Misunderstoods/M3

  
--- XXXX wrote:
>
> There's a plethora of tools that a supe can use. That's what makes an
> excellent supe - she/he knows them all and uses the one that cuts to
> the quick, locating the source of a student bog, just as an auditor
> should know his/her tools and be able to dig the pc out of any bog
> with the right action or correction list. There's even the Remedies
> and other metered supervisor actions that are fantastic when properly

{PLAIN}
Agreed. I wasn't trying to denigrate the other tools, and the other
W/C methods. They all do have their place, but not for use by a sup on
post in a courseroom with more than a couple of students. I also did
hundreds of hours of FDSing on others, but not while sup'ing.

One of Al Baker's favorite tools in the OEC/FEBC courseroom was the
Hubbard Study Stress Analysis. Basically just sticking the guy on the
meter and poking around to find out what was the scoop. He was very
good at it. I wasn't totally happy with my metering, and since I got
rave results with M-3, I could survive well without it. Al Baker
was--and still is as far as I know--a famous sup. Good guy, too.

In meter checks, and in M4, I got the odd read on the question about
going past mu's, and tracked down the word that read, but since I knew
the guy was going past twenty mu's a page anyway, I didn't get all
excited about it, all by itself. If the question read on the meter
check, then the full procedure had to be followed per the HCOB. If on
M4, then that procedure was followed.

I don't recall any student, who had reasonable study skills, and was
able to come to course well-fed and rested, that I couldn't debug with
M3.

There were lots who could only manage 5 hours sleep a night, who never
made it.

There were some who had never ever studied well in their entire lives.
They bounced around in and out of Qual and then KTL came out and I
never saw them again in my courseroom.

I've found lots of mu's using M9 and properly done, it is very useful
in its place. KTL and LOC are all done M9, of course. I have
supervised a dozen students on the Art Course, and that is all M9 (or
it was--I don't know if it still is). At SH, sometimes in the AO
Courseroom the only students we had were on the Art Course. The day of
the first IAS event at Saint Hill, the Int Mgmt execs came into the
courseroom to look around. Fortunately I was helping the sole student
at the time, rather than sitting at my desk doing some admin. I assume
they didn't know she was doing the Art Course and not Solo Part II or
the Philadelphia Doctorate Course, as we never heard about it. Chris,
the AO D of T, met the execs. DM already knew Chris from when he had
been studying at SH earlier.

M2 assumes that if you get a read while reading an issue, it indicates
an m/u. "What was the word you just read?" The student says "XXXX",
whatever the word he just read was. If there is supposed to be a
duplicative read, I never saw one. The RTRC HCOB says the W/C "finds
the word that read." How the hell do you do that? If you're flying a
rud, and the question reads, and the pc gives an answer, you accept the
pc's answer and F/N the rud. You don't say, "Just a minute, I want to
check that what you're telling me is the exact thing that gave me the
read I saw." So the student says, "XXXX", and you "clear" it, and
reread the sentence and continue. If no more reads in that sentence,
you assume you got it.

Both of you usually know what the procedure is, and the student usually
is approaching the M2 with gritted teeth anyway. Random reads, as in
the student thinking, "Jesus, I hope we get through this crap in time
to catch the last bus"(instant LF), are assumed to be mu's. If you try
and be clever, as in, "Did you think of something just then?" "Yeah, I
thought "Jesus, I hope we get through this crap in time to catch the
last bus'"(instant LF VGI's), now you're screwed. Obviously the read
came from that random thought, but the HCOB says you have to find the
word that read! Either you falsify the work-sheets (BIG NO-NO), or you
do something screwball. In reality, you usually end up picking some
word that's easy to clear, and pay lip-service to it. Both the W/C and
the student know the game, at least if he's a seasoned SO member in
cramming he does.

M1 was fairly clear, although sometimes it was mis-C/S'd into an
overkill. M3 I've covered very thoroughly. A bit more....

Learning M3 is part of the Student Hat. There was a drill on doing M3
that required a sup pass, and I used to put students through the
wringer on that drill. But I can't say I ever trusted students to
debug each other. M9, FDS each other, yes. Debug, no.

M4 is pretty clear, although in practice it suffers from being too
rote.

M5 is considered to be really obvious, although I am convinced there is
a typo in the last line of the issue. It says, "This method is the
method used to clear words or auditing commands or auditing lists." I
think it should say, "This method is the method used to clear words
*of* auditing commands or auditing lists," as that is what it is used
for. It's kinda dumb to say that M5 is the method used to clear words;
or it is the method used to clear auditing commands; or it is the
method used to clear auditing lists. I e-mailed RTRC once on this, and
got back a distempered response that the guy had checked the original
and the issue IS what was on the original and I should go to cramming.
He probably had to dig through some old files at 2 AM to find the
original. Or maybe he lied about it--who knows? I just remember he
was pissed, and I remember my sadness at the fact that this stupid
wording--that not one other person ever queried that I heard of--would
remain intact until the end of time.

It's not really M5, but sometimes if I had a new student, I would
fairly arbitrarily take the first sentence of what he was studying, and
ask him to define one by one each of the first ten words, big ones,
little ones, whatever. No-one got ten out of ten. But it gave me a
pretty good idea of where the guy was at as a student. I would have
him clear the ones he missed on the check, but I wouldn't make a big
deal of it.

I found M6 interesting and theoretically extremely useful, but not used
very much except for a "Key Word List" section on a checksheet. I
think I only used it once apart from when it was required as an M6
drill on a checksheet I was doing. It's a shame--it's a lost tech.

M7 is abused horribly. It gets corrupted into, "Oh, I can't be
bothered to look that up, would you just 'M7' me on it?" In other
words, the fact that there is a standard W/C method where one explains
the definition rather than having the student use the dictionary, gets
completely alter-ised into a justification for using verbal tech.
There is also the tacit assumption that the phenomena at work in doing
M9 (the student goes past an m/u and at some later point reacts) are
somehow magically different to the phenomena at work while doing M7
(the mistaken idea that the student hits an m/u and reacts at that
exact point).

I think that the Reading-Aloud tech was not fully developed until M9
was researched, and up to that point it had just been used on children
or foreign-language students. The M7 HCOB just says, "Correct it by
looking it up for him or explaining it to him" without going over
exactly what "it" is. Looking over the M7 HCOB as a Professional
WordClearer, with the hindsight of knowing all the tech of M9, gives a
vastly different viewpoint to the viewpoint one would have had back in
1971.

Of course, applying the precision tech of M9 doesn't work on an M7 on a
child or foreign-language student either, as he can't normally spot the
m/u that caused him to stumble.

So there is always this conflict if you are trying to understand rather
than just rotely doing the procedure--the kid stumbles on something and
it isn't necessarily the word he mangled that is the one he
misunderstood, but he's usually not able to find the one he didn't get.
Besides, there is no post-M9 HCOB that adds more to the M7 procedure
than what is in the M7 HCOB.

I resolved the conflict for myself by doing this. When the kid/foreign
student stumbled, I would ask him if there was anything there he didn't
get. If he couldn't rapidly spot something, I just explained the word
(or idiom) at the point of reaction or fairly close before it that I
considered him most likely to have misunderstood, checked his
indicators and if OK then I carried on. It's not the same as debugging
a once-flying student, where you work with BI's and VGI's, not just
GI's. It seems that the M7 student's best indicators come in on just
getting through the issue.

I didn't have much to do with M-8. I didn't personally do the PRD. I
supervised a couple of students on it, one in particular. He was on it
for several months full-time. (This is Sea Org "cushy" full-time, i.e.
8:30 AM to 10:30 PM, 6 1/2 days a week). He wasn't bogged, or slow,
and was just chewing through it by himself without quickying it. Some
years later some issue came out saying that all the W/Cing on M-8 had
to be done *with a twin*. I figured that would extend the PRD from
four months to six months on a super-fulltime schedule, and completely
lost any interest I had in doing the PRD personally at that point.

And that's all for now.
{/PLAIN}

Paul
 









Message 099
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Tue Jun 22, 2004  1:19 pm 
Subject:  Re: [FreezoneOrg] Course Supervision and Misunderstoods/M3

[THIS POST HAS BEEN DELETED.  IT IS AN EXACT DUPLICATE OF MESSAGE 098]














Message 124
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Tue Jun 22, 2004  4:11 pm 
Subject:  Re: [freezoneaoint] Course Supervision and Misunderstoods

 
--- XXXX wrote:
> Hi XXXX,
>
> Please read the many posts carefully. Nobody is
> saying that w/cing doesn't work. What we are saying
> is that mis-applied wordclearing doesn't!!!
>
> Paul never found that M-4 was much use: this was
> because it wasn't appropriate to use, very often, and
> simply didn't do something it was never going to do
> anyway. What did work was M-3, because it was the
> right method to use most of the time in his
> experience.
>
> I posted that M-4's in particular done for form's sake
> are a pure waste of time, as indeed they are. I also
> posted that M-4's done correctly when they are needed
> give absolutely wonderful results.
>
> What the tech people on this list are mostly trying to
> do is to get real about it all. Starry eyed
> "everything is perfect, just apply KSW1 and all will
> be well" doesn't cut it. Applying the tech correctly
> is part of KSW1!!! when you don't, it doesn't work.
> Paul in particular was pointing out how not to apply
> tech incorrectly, and how to apply it correctly. That
> is how to read his posts.
>
> Roland

{PLAIN}
Thank you. Well said.
{/PLAIN}

Paul










Message 147
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Tue Jun 22, 2004  5:05 pm 
Subject:  RE: [freezoneaoint] Course Supervision and Misunderstoods

  
--- XXXX wrote:
>
> While it can be some use to point out what did not work, I can only
> find it
> useful here, if the reason and solution is also given.

{PLAIN}
If you are referring to something that I wrote, I'm glad to oblige if I
can. I like to think I don't have a misguided sense of my own
importance or ability--some things I do well and some things I don't.
As an example, like I said, I was never totally happy with my metering.

If you consider the error(s) to be in one or more of my posts, please
point out the exact specifics and I'll try to fix it all up. I'm not
above correction. If, after reflection, I wish to let my statements
stand as-is, I will say so and why.
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 









Message 148
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Tue Jun 22, 2004  5:12 pm 
Subject:  Re: [fzflame] Re: Hey XXXX-

--- XXXX wrote:
> I know this and have read this stuff already. If I do have a
> problem I know how to leave.

{JOKE}
Have it your way, bitch. Just don't talk anymore about those goddamn
fucking kittens.
{/JOKE}

Paul

 









Message 149
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Tue Jun 22, 2004  6:06 pm 
Subject:  Re: [fzflame] Re: Hey XXXX-

 
--- XXXX wrote:
> >
> > Have it your way, bitch. Just don't talk anymore
> > about those goddamn
> > fucking kittens.
> >
> I had a pc once who was a very wonderful lady, very
> ballsy and so forth, but very keyed in. I was doing a
> repair cycle which ended up very well indeed, but in
> the course of it she came in one day all broken up and
> miserable.
>
> My DTS (who was herself pretty ballsy and no dewy
> flower) got all sympathetic and worried, so I took her
> aside and told ther that sympathy was the last thing
> this pc needed, and would she go back out there and
> treat her like she usually did - so she went back to
> the pc and said, "What the hell do you want, bitch?"
> and the pc brightened right up and was just fine.

{PLAIN}
Wonderful story, XXXX. I have found that you can say the most
outrageous things to people, and if the tone level communicates, and
they can see no malice, they come right uptone and are not in the least
offended.

But that was not my intent with dear XXXX. It is my opinion that she
doesn't belong on this list and will get hurt, but I am not going to
forbid her to stay if she wants to. I'm not going to throw her off.
The best way to win a fight is to so completely overwhelm your opponent
at the outset that he goes instantly into apathy and gives up. If you
drag it out he gets tougher and tougher and more and more defiant. You
might still win the fight after a long battle, but the damage is much
greater, the wounds taking longer to heal.

I figured one vicious riposte should work. I prefer the foil to the
baseball bat.

We'll see....
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 








Message 150
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Tue Jun 22, 2004  7:10 pm 
Subject:  RE: [freezoneaoint] Course Supervision and Misunderstoods

  
--- XXXX wrote:
> What I did not agree with was this statement:
> " I never found M-4 useful and was really shocked once when I got a
> read on
> the question! I wasn't good at M-4. Maybe others were, but not me.
> M-9 was
> OK, but slow. I would never, ever use M-9 to debug a student."

{PLAIN}
I will just address my statements, and the others can do as they wish.

"I never found M-4 useful...": You can't really disagree with that as
stated without accusing me of falsifying my experiences. On
reflection, I'll leave it as-is.

"...and was really shocked once when I got a read on the question!" It
was hyperbole, but I suppose it could have been taken literally. But
that incident is vivid in my mind to this day. I was so surprised by
the LF that I didn't take up the read. A more accurate figure would
probably be that out of 500 M4 questions asked personally by me, maybe
5 or 7 read.

Why such a low read rate? I suspect that there are several factors.
My assessment TR's maybe sucked. My regular TRs are usually very good.
I didn't *want* the meter to read. Also, there is a normal
expectation on the part of both the W/Cer and the W/Cee that most times
it *won't read*, so both tend to go through the motions only.

In addition to all this, there is the factor of what the student's
attention is being directed to. I'll give an example using M3, as I am
better at it. My probing on M3 is basically exactly the same as an M4
question, "Is there anything in your materials there that you didn't
fully get?", with the W/Cee's attention directed to a part of the
materials. Except I used my own perception rather than looking at a
meter. I would start off putting his attention on a large area, and
then narrow the target bit by bit.

How's bulletin A? (Me directing his attention to the exact bulletin).
It's all right.

OK. How's issue B?
It's fine.

OK. How's issue C?
Well, not so hot.

All right. How's the first page of issue C?
Fine.

OK. Page 2?
No problem.

OK. Page 3? (Page 3 is open and he's looking at it while I ask the
question).
Not so good.

Fair enough. How's the first paragraph?
It's fine.

How's the second paragraph?
It's cool.

How's that illustration that appears next?
I found that a bit tricky. I don't understand why they used blue ink
instead of green.

OK, let's backtrack to the last paragraph. How's the first half of the
paragraph? (I might be using a sheet of paper to cover up the bits of
the issue I didn't want his attention on. It would depend on how
confident I was of his ability to focus his attention.)
It's fine.

OK. Second half?
Something in there that's not good.

OK, how's this first sentence in the second half of the paragraph here?
It's fine.

OK. Next sentence?
Something fuzzy in there.

--Maybe along around now he'll spot the word and go VGI's on spotting
it (not after clearing it up, but on *spotting it*). Or maybe not.

How's the first half of the sentence?
It's fine?

OK. How about this phrase here?
That's fine.

OK. Next few words?
You know, (all bright now) there's something about "Wurzels". I know
what it means, but there's something about it my attention hangs up on.

Very good. Clear it up and study forward from there, and I'll be back
in a bit to see how you're doing.

I'd check back and he'd be doing fine, say, with no problem on the
illustration after all.

NOW, you could do all of that with Method 4, using meter reads (or lack
of), instead of itsa and spotting indicators. Isn't there an issue
called "Meter Use in Qual" that mandates such, in fact?

Let's continue.

"I wasn't good at M-4. Maybe others were, but not me.": Again, you
can't really challenge that statement.

"M-9 was OK, but slow." I would leave that as-is. Personally I would
whizz through M9's. The first time I M9'd KSW1 it took me 6 hours. It
was an unwarranted RTC cram on a correct application of LRH policy, and
I was protesting doing it a bit. But hell, one doesn't argue with the
local RTC rep if one is interested in one's continued survival.
Subsequent M9's were shorter. Now I could probably get through the
entire issue without stopping once. And that would be with *me* on the
other side of the table looking for a hesitation or stumble!

But with others it is generally laborious. Remember, I found almost
everyone is completely riddled with mu's. If anyone here thinks they
aren't, meet me for coffee sometime with an issue of a page or so you
think is clean and we'll check it out. M9 picks up some of these
m/u's.

Why is the person doing the M9? Usually because it says so on the
checksheet or cram.

If I wanted to thoroughly word-clear someone on a short issue, I would
personally ask him to define every single word on the issue in the
context it is used in right there. Once that was done, only then would
I be satisfied that he had no mu's on the issue. We're being
theoretical here, as it never happened in reality, but it could be
done. Probably another could do it as well, but I wouldn't trust
another to unless I had personally checked out that he himself knew
every single word.

As an aside, I'm not saying that I instantly know the meaning of every
single word in every issue I handle, with no comm lag, in the exact
sense as used right there. But at least I know that I don't!

Anyway, why the M9? I found it too slow for debug purposes, as long as
I had time to personally debug the student.

If it was part of a cram, go ahead and do it. It the mu's picked up
resulted in the desired improvement, great. If not, then they didn't.
M9 doesn't necessarily pick up all the mu's. For proof, come meet me
for a cup of coffee and bring along an issue you've M9'd a dozen times
(and a good dictionary) and we'll see if I can't find some mu's that
you missed.

"I would never, ever use M-9 to debug a student." I think I covered
that. I'm not saying another isn't welcome to try a debug using M9.

I must have given and received over a thousand hours of M9, more given
than received. It does find mu's in a high-ARC manner that the
word-clearee doesn't protest, as long as it's done right. He knows he
stumbled, and he knows per the HCOB he must find an m/u.

Anyway, I hope all this satisfies you.
{/PLAIN}

Paul
 









Message 151
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Tue Jun 22, 2004  7:21 pm 
Subject:  Re: [ifachat] Re: Sp building

 --- XXXX wrote:
> Does anyone know if any PART of it is being used? Maybe a back door
> that goes up to an area that only admin use, maybe?
{PLAIN}
Well, the IDEA of it is being used heavily....
{/PLAIN}

Paul












Message 152
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Tue Jun 22, 2004  7:32 pm 
Subject:  Re: [fzflame] Re: Flaming

  
--- XXXX wrote:
>
> what makes ya think we don't mean all of this?

{PLAIN}
It's like bull-baiting. Bull-baiting is most effective when it's based
on truth. Tell a female auditor in session that you masturbated in the
shower last night thinking about her walking around flaunting her large
nipples--when she *does* walk around flaunting her large nipples, and
shouldn't--and just watch her try to keep her TR's in. Not that one
should be so out of session as to bullbait the auditor, but sometimes
such things come up naturally in the course of the session and there is
no way to avoid them.

So it is expected that there will be an undercurrent of truth here.
It's just kinda pointless to accuse someone's mother of having being
rejected by a Bedouin camel-trader when there's no truth in it and the
other person has no buttons anywhere close.
{/PLAIN}

Paul


 










Message 153
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Tue Jun 22, 2004  8:54 pm 
Subject:  Re: [fzflame] Re: Hey XXXX-
 
 
--- XXXX> wrote:
> I think XXXX needs some bull baiting , Paul. *GET HER!~*
{JOKE}
Sure.

Hey XXXX! Are you such a lousy judge of character that you can't do
any better than choosing a slimy friend like XXXX?

How's that?
{/JOKE}

Paul


 










Message 154
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Tue Jun 22, 2004  9:20 pm 
Subject:  Re: [fzflame] Re: Flaming

 
--- XXXX wrote:
> XXXX
>
> BTW. let's come up with some original invective.
{PLAIN}
Sure.

> And has anyone invited Ralph and Pierre?

Not directly, although I have mentioned the group in lists they are
each on.

Ralph posted recently about fz_warfare, a very similar idea to the
original conception for fzflame. I didn't check at the time, but I
checked a minute ago and no such group exists. I don't know if he
created one and later nuked it or if it never existed for real in the
first place.

It might be useful to have an fzwarfare for real. fzflame has turned
into an upscale play-pit, and now I don't want it to be used for *real*
disputes.

I just created fz-warfare for real between this paragraph and the last.

Now fzflame can remain the friendly place it has been since the outset.

You can invite them to fz_warfare if you wish. I doubt if either would
come.
{/PLAIN}

Paul

 










Message 155
From:  Paul Adams  
Date:  Wed Jun 23, 2004  12:54 am 
Subject:  Too Many Lists: Hello and Goodbye
 
{PLAIN}
Hi Guys,

I am posting this message to each of the formerscio, ifachat,
FreezoneOrg and freezoneaoint lists.

There have been opinions voiced recently about too many lists.

Some problems:

1. Not knowing who is on what list.

2. Choosing to send the same message to more than one list with the
intention of reaching "everyone" with something one considers
important.

3. Receiving the same message several times, but not being sure as
different messages can look identical before they are opened, so having
to open it before deleting it.

4. Some people like to engage in small-talk with their on-line
friends. Such people possibly feel uncomfortable doing so in the
presence of others who post voluminously on more weighty matters. In a
real-life room, the Class VIII's can gather together and chat about
whatever Class VIII's chat about; and the people with less experience
can chat with people they feel more comfortable with. With one group
online, this is not possible.

5. 75% of the members don't post much, if at all. Who knows what they
need or want?


The lists I have been familiar with, and my opinions about them follow:

A.C.T. on Usenet: Too many crazies--there may be some good stuff
available, but the high Noise-to-Signal ratio makes it discouraging to
find.

FreezoneAmerica (not Yahoo): Very wide range of subject matter
covered, with a mixture of sane comment and otherwise. One major
advantage is that it is a place to float wild ideas that would never be
acceptable on a "Standard Tech" (ST) list.

fzaoint: A ST list, now in disuse.

freezoneaoint: A ST List overseen by Nick and Ralph, with people who
feel comfortable there. A venue for major discussion. 86 members, 61
messages in past 7 days.

FreezoneOrg: A ST List overseen by bb, with a lighter touch, with
people who feel comfortable there. 89 members, 185 messages in last 7
days.

ifachat: A ST list overseen by Michael at IFA, with people who feel
comfortable there. 57 members, 313 messages in the past seven days.

FZElma: A ST list based around the Kreniks, some stuff of local
interest, some major discussion. 76 members; 123 messages so far in
the past 7 days.

Richfriends: Renamed to FreezoneFriends.

FreezoneFriends: A ST list, originally for the friends of Rich
Hernandez. He chatted a lot. Some serious discussion. He turned the
group over recently. 57 members; 77 messages in the past 7 days.

formerscio: A ST list started in 1999. 156 members, 37 messages in
the past 7 days. There were only 236 messages for the whole of 2003.
I don't know who the members are as the member list is restricted.

OT_List: A ST list for discussion of topics above Clear/OT3. 47
members; 6 messages in last 7 days.

UL_List: A FZ Elma upper-level confidential list, presumably ST. 10
members; 12 messages in the past 7 days.

OTList: A Paul Adams list. ST upper-level confidential matters; 7
members; 12 messages in the past 7 days.

fzinternational: A Paul Adams list. One member. Purpose not yet
defined.

fzglobal: A Paul Adams list. One member. Purpose not yet defined.

fzflame: A Paul Adams list. Basically a play-pit for people with
otherwise impeccable manners who sometimes get tired of being polite
and want to have some fun. 6 members; 31 messages in the past 7 days.
The original purpose was a place to send people crapping all over one's
otherwise genteel list, but it changed.

fz_warfare: A Paul Adams list now. Mentioned by Ralph a couple of days
ago but it didn't exist earlier today. Earmarked now for the crapper
that fzflame never was.

fztechrating: A Paul Adams list. Not a discussion group, but a place
for people who have personally received service from a FZ tech
practitioner to send their reports and have them made available for
general viewing. 22 members; no traffic in the last 7 days, but 40
messages in May.

fzadminrating: A Paul Adams list. Same as fztechrating, but for
admin. No members or traffic yet.

paulsfzposts: A Paul Adams list. A list to collect together all my
non-confidential messages to various FZ lists. I know that I was
sometimes very interested in reading all the posts from a single
individual. Ralph was one once. Just in case someone else is
interested in reading all *my* scattered posts, I've made it easy. 152
posts so far in the past week; no members.

paulsfzotposts: A Paul Adams list. As above but for confidential
posts. No members; 7 messages in the past 7 days.

No doubt I'll make up some more lists as the urge takes me.

****************


The main OT List is OT_List. I don't know what goes on at Pat Krenik's
UL_List. I will leave my OTList up for now and will post anything
there than I post to the main OT_List. I have my OTList open for now
as much as a service for anyone of OT3 case level kicked off the
OT_List as for anything else.

I have been posting to, and have just looked over, four main "Standard
Tech" lists: ifachat, FreezoneOrg, freezoneaoint, and formerscio. I
haven't included ICAUSE, as I don't know what goes on there. These
four lists each seem to cover the same kind of topic, and each have
many of the same people posting to them. The formerscio list has been
going longer and is twice the size of each of the others. The
freezoneaoint guys don't seem to be oozing with affinity for ifachat
and FreezoneOrg.

There isn't a Yahoo group that I can see for NON-Standard Tech Scn,
which would allow for various off-shoots still based largely on LRH
tech, but with more permissiveness. Such a list is covered on the FZA
board, but not on a Yahoo group. I don't know how much of an interest
there would be in such a list, but I think a heckler-free one should be
made available. Accordingly, I now designate fzglobal to be such a
list. It is open for business as of this writing. Its address is
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/fzglobal .

At the bottom of this post is a list of who made a post to one of the
four main groups above in the last three screens of posts recorded in
Yahoo groups. You will see that many people posted to more than one of
these lists.

To cut down on a lot of duplicated effort, I am withdrawing forthwith
from ifachat, FreezoneOrg, and freezoneaoint. I will post on
formerscio, OT_List, and OTList only of the main groups. I will
continue to post to my own groups, those listed as Paul Adams groups
above, as before.

If you want to see my posts, either join formerscio or join
paulsfzposts. I can't stop you cutting and pasting my posts on
formerscio to another group, but I will not be seeing any responses
posted there.
{PLAIN}

{JOKE}If I don't see you again for a while, goodbye and thanks for all the
fish. {/JOKE}

Paul

{PLAIN}
ADDENDUM


List of who posted to the four main Standard Tech lists recently:

[deleted]
{/PLAIN}