Persistence of Freezone public?

[Student of Trinity]

I am sure that the answer to this question could be found by reading through this forum, but I'm afraid I'd really like to not have to take that much time; since it seems not to be a question the forum is really intended to address, I think it would take a lot of digging to find. So I apologize profusely for asking for other people's time just to save me time, but I'm hoping that what might take me hours to discover, somebody could answer for me in a few seconds. In exchange I could offer answers about physics questions, say, that I can give easily and might take longer to find out by reading.

My question is, How long do people keep up with auditing outside the Church, if they are not themselves working as auditors? Does one see lots of people happily moving steadily on with the program over many years? Or do clients (to use a secular term) tend to have gotten what they wanted after a year or two, and quit?

Or, to ask the question in terms of Scientology progress rather than years (though I'd like to know both): What proportion of people go Clear or OT in the Freezone, compared to those who just audit for a while and drop out? What proportion of people become auditors themselves, if they weren't already trained in the Church?

I'm sure there are some cases all over the spectrum; but I'd like to know what the common patterns are, and how common.

A similar question I have is, what proportion of Freezone or independent pre-clears come through the Church of Scientology, as opposed to those who get into Scientology as independents from the beginning?

I admit that I tend to take a dim view of Scientology in all forms, and so my default imagined picture is that unless people have really made Scientology their life, they would tend only to pass through the Freezone briefly as a half-way house on the way out of the CofS. But I do not actually want to just hold my preconceptions, and I'd be happy to hear any answer from someone who actually knows the subject. I have no knowledge of this myself, so I'm not going to argue or criticize on this point, just listen.

[Zinjifar]

A similar question I have is, what proportion of Freezone or independent pre-clears come through the Church of Scientology, as opposed to those who get into Scientology as independents from the beginning?

First; the Free Zone (and Independent Field) are no more forthcoming with their 'stats' than the 'Church'. And, there's a similar amount of hype and 'great things happening somewhere else'.

But, as to your question, and difficult as it is to say for sure, my experience says that the Zone and Independent Field are almost exclusively populated by 'Church' escapees, and, of course, their children. Far more than 90%, although, there *are* some never-been dabblers. I have no idea what their persistence is. I doubt longer than a few months for most.

All of this has suggested and supported my own pet theory that the Scientology Mindfuck *requires* the kind of authoritarian 'heavy ethical presence and enforcement' that's only available in the 'Church' itself. Once a person is sufficiently MindFucked, however, the state can be maintained with 'Independent Scientology'.

Zinj

[Voltaire's Child]

Everything Zinj has said is misleading.

The thing about the Free Zone and Independent scene is that there is no centraized point, unlik in CofS. So they don't LIE or mislead, but they don't have a central stat publishing facility.

Terril Park is ED of a large segment of the FZ and he is extremely forthcoming and posts a lot of information. He often gets negative feedback for having done so.

[Mark A. Baker]

My question is, How long do people keep up with auditing outside the Church, if they are not themselves working as auditors? Does one see lots of people happily moving steadily on with the program over many years? Or do clients (to use a secular term) tend to have gotten what they wanted after a year or two, and quit?


The answer is: depends.

Some are in for the long haul. Some come & go & come & go & come & .... Some are shoppers, or merely curious.

The point of the freezone is it exists as an unstructured community for cooperative collaboration among willing participants. Some groups are more deliberately structured. Others eschew any formal organization.

The freezone is not attempting to build some sort of unified institution to exist in perpetuity, although some individual freezoner's may have such as a personal goal. An individual's participation within the freezone may wax & wane. Membership in the freezone reflects individual's self-identification and whatever the current state of participation is overall.


Mark A. Baker

[Mark A. Baker]

First; the Free Zone (and Independent Field) are no more forthcoming with their 'stats' than the 'Church'. And, there's a similar amount of hype and 'great things happening somewhere else'.

But, as to your question, and difficult as it is to say for sure, my experience says that the Zone and Independent Field are almost exclusively populated by 'Church' escapees, and, of course, their children. Far more than 90%, although, there *are* some never-been dabblers. I have no idea what their persistence is. I doubt longer than a few months for most.

All of this has suggested and supported my own pet theory that the Scientology Mindfuck *requires* the kind of authoritarian 'heavy ethical presence and enforcement' that's only available in the 'Church' itself. Once a person is sufficiently MindFucked, however, the state can be maintained with 'Independent Scientology'.

Zinj

This post by you Z reminds me of Shakespeare's immortal lines in Macbeth, Act V, Scene V, l.25-28. :eyeroll:

You would be better off commenting on a topic on which you actually possess some knowledge. :)


Mark A. Baker

[RogerB]

Yes,

I concur with Mark here . . . Zinj would be well advised to learn about the subjects he chooses to comment on.

I am personally aware of some dozens of folks who were never in Scn who are routinely co-processing and regularly going to the Kn Ranch to pursue what they have gotten gains from and found valuable.

I have three such folks on my personal lines.

When one finds workable answers to the things of life one wants to pursue (or handle), then good sense dictates one continues on with it . . . and that is the way it is when there is no abuse involved with trying to do what you want (as there is in the CofS).


RogerB

[Zinjifar]

Sorry Roger; I'm just not buying 'some dozens'. Naturally, I'm in no position to know what's gone on in the past 10 years, but, especially considering how *important* the 'Field' and FZ seem to find the question, I'm skeptical. I do know of 'some'.

Zinj

[Mark A. Baker]

Terril Park is ED of a large segment of the FZ and he is extremely forthcoming and posts a lot of information. He often gets negative feedback for having done so.

This is misleading also, Fluff.

Terril owns a chat board and has taken it upon himself to promote the freezone on a fairly unrestricted basis. For his efforts on behalf of promoting the scientology freezone he has become much loved & appreciated by MANY and concomitantly disliked & abused by the few who would prefer that he took no such pains. I count BB among my friends and thank him for his efforts.

But to call BB an "ED" is definitely stretching things beyond recognition of the terms meaning. If BB WANTED to be an ED he certainly could be. There is no shortage of people who rely on him for all sorts of assistance, not to mention groups who would be happy to have him as an ED. However, I suspect that most of us simply view him as "Mr. Div VI". :coolwink:


Mark A. Baker

[Veda]

Yes,

I concur with Mark here . . . Zinj would be well advised to learn about the subjects he chooses to comment on.

I am personally aware of some dozens of folks who were never in Scn who are routinely co-processing and regularly going to the Kn Ranch to pursue what they have gotten gains from and found valuable.

I have three such folks on my personal lines.

When one finds workable answers to the things of life one wants to pursue (or handle), then good sense dictates one continues on with it . . . and that is the way it is when there is no abuse involved with trying to do what you want (as there is in the CofS).


RogerB

Are you saying that Kn was and is part of the Scientology Freezone?

When did that happen?

I know there has been an effort by some Scientology Freezone PR people to co-opt groups and subjects such as Kn, Idenics, and Metapsychology, and make them part of "greater Scientology," where they would serve a function not unlike front groups do in corporate $cientology, but I don't recall Alan Walter consenting that Kn be classified as such.

[Terril park]

I am sure that the answer to this question could be found by reading through this forum, but I'm afraid I'd really like to not have to take that much time; since it seems not to be a question the forum is really intended to address, I think it would take a lot of digging to find. So I apologize profusely for asking for other people's time just to save me time, but I'm hoping that what might take me hours to discover, somebody could answer for me in a few seconds. In exchange I could offer answers about physics questions, say, that I can give easily and might take longer to find out by reading.

My question is, How long do people keep up with auditing outside the Church, if they are not themselves working as auditors? Does one see lots of people happily moving steadily on with the program over many years? Or do clients (to use a secular term) tend to have gotten what they wanted after a year or two, and quit?

Or, to ask the question in terms of Scientology progress rather than years (though I'd like to know both): What proportion of people go Clear or OT in the Freezone, compared to those who just audit for a while and drop out? What proportion of people become auditors themselves, if they weren't already trained in the Church?

I'm sure there are some cases all over the spectrum; but I'd like to know what the common patterns are, and how common.

A similar question I have is, what proportion of Freezone or independent pre-clears come through the Church of Scientology, as opposed to those who get into Scientology as independents from the beginning?

I admit that I tend to take a dim view of Scientology in all forms, and so my default imagined picture is that unless people have really made Scientology their life, they would tend only to pass through the Freezone briefly as a half-way house on the way out of the CofS. But I do not actually want to just hold my preconceptions, and I'd be happy to hear any answer from someone who actually knows the subject. I have no knowledge of this myself, so I'm not going to argue or criticize on this point, just listen.

Good questions. More later.

[Voltaire's Child]

This is misleading also, Fluff.

Terril owns a chat board and has taken it upon himself to promote the freezone on a fairly unrestricted basis. For his efforts on behalf of promoting the scientology freezone he has become much loved & appreciated by MANY and concomitantly disliked & abused by the few who would prefer that he took no such pains. I count BB among my friends and thank him for his efforts.

But to call BB an "ED" is definitely stretching things beyond recognition of the terms meaning. If BB WANTED to be an ED he certainly could be. There is no shortage of people who rely on him for all sorts of assistance, not to mention groups who would be happy to have him as an ED. However, I suspect that most of us simply view him as "Mr. Div VI". :coolwink:


Mark A. Baker

Ah, but he is ED of a segment of it. He's mentioned this.

[Terril park]

First; the Free Zone (and Independent Field) are no more forthcoming with their 'stats' than the 'Church'. And, there's a similar amount of hype and 'great things happening somewhere else'.

But, as to your question, and difficult as it is to say for sure, my experience says that the Zone and Independent Field are almost exclusively populated by 'Church' escapees, and, of course, their children. Far more than 90%, although, there *are* some never-been dabblers. I have no idea what their persistence is. I doubt longer than a few months for most.

All of this has suggested and supported my own pet theory that the Scientology Mindfuck *requires* the kind of authoritarian 'heavy ethical presence and enforcement' that's only available in the 'Church' itself. Once a person is sufficiently MindFucked, however, the state can be maintained with 'Independent Scientology'.

Zinj

Utter nonsense! Thouight you were friends with Alan.

[Zinjifar]

Utter nonsense! Thouight you were friends with Alan.

?
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Zinj

[Terril park]

This is misleading also, Fluff.

Terril owns a chat board and has taken it upon himself to promote the freezone on a fairly unrestricted basis. For his efforts on behalf of promoting the scientology freezone he has become much loved & appreciated by MANY and concomitantly disliked & abused by the few who would prefer that he took no such pains. I count BB among my friends and thank him for his efforts.

But to call BB an "ED" is definitely stretching things beyond recognition of the terms meaning. If BB WANTED to be an ED he certainly could be. There is no shortage of people who rely on him for all sorts of assistance, not to mention groups who would be happy to have him as an ED. However, I suspect that most of us simply view him as "Mr. Div VI". :coolwink:


Mark A. Baker

Correct IMO. The initiation of Freezone Forums took the org board
as a reference, and made and gave posts. I was in fact referred to as an "ED" in at least one earlier forum. No big problem. However the FZ
is a grass roots and by pressure of OSA a guerilla activity.

Yes, I just promote that one can do tech outside COS :) A div 6 activity
for sure.

[AnonKat]

?
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Zinj

Zinj when you state something work on your argumentation.

[Veda]

?
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Zinj

It's an attempt to confuse the "enemy" and the "wogs." - Very Scientological.

And there already is some confusion re. terminology. On ESMB, "Independent Field" is not Scientology, yet there are also people who call themselves "Independent Scientologists." Two different meanings.

Years ago, the "Independent Field" was the term used by Independent Scientologists. Then many - over time - evolved, and out grew Scientology, and no longer wished to call themselves Scientologists, as they were not. On ESMB, these people sometimes posted in the "Independent Field" section for that reason, as they were no longer Scientologists but had evolved.

Now, the term Independent Scientology and Independent Scientologist are being used (re-popularized by Marty Rathbun), and it's somewhat confusing.

Still, Kn is not Scientology, not Independent Scientology, nor FZ Scientology.

[Zinjifar]

Zinj when you state something work on your argumentation.

Huh? I've stated my observations and some opinions. Nothing I've said has anything to do with Alan Walter or my friendship with him and I haven't even mentioned Knowledgism, although I would describe it as 'derivative' of Scientology, even if Alan would not. I realize that Zonies and 'Independents' tend to have a bit of a button on their 'stats' and claims for 'great expansion', but, I haven't seen anything here that qualifies as an 'argument' to counter.

Zinj

[AnonKat]

Huh? I've stated my observations and some opinions. Nothing I've said has anything to do with Alan Walter or my friendship with him and I haven't even mentioned Knowledgism, although I would describe it as 'derivative' of Scientology, even if Alan would not. I realize that Zonies and 'Independents' tend to have a bit of a button on their 'stats' and claims for 'great expansion', but, I haven't seen anything here that qualifies as an 'argument' to counter.

Zinj

sorry I had your comments about freezone stats in mind

Comparing Apples and Oranges

[Zinjifar]

sorry I had your comments about freezone stats in mind

Comparing Apples and Oranges

Which 'stats' did you have in mind? :whistling:

Zinj

[AnonKat]

Which 'stats' did you have in mind? :whistling:

Zinj

Well no stats beat false stats everyday. better that than a lie

[AnonKat]

Huh? I've stated my observations and some opinions. Nothing I've said has anything to do with Alan Walter or my friendship with him and I haven't even mentioned Knowledgism, although I would describe it as 'derivative' of Scientology, even if Alan would not. I realize that Zonies and 'Independents' tend to have a bit of a button on their 'stats' and claims for 'great expansion', but, I haven't seen anything here that qualifies as an 'argument' to counter.

Zinj

Point taken. I see a shipload of "wins"going by everyday posted by Terril

[Terril park]

Huh? I've stated my observations and some opinions. Nothing I've said has anything to do with Alan Walter or my friendship with him and I haven't even mentioned Knowledgism, although I would describe it as 'derivative' of Scientology, even if Alan would not. I realize that Zonies and 'Independents' tend to have a bit of a button on their 'stats' and claims for 'great expansion', but, I haven't seen anything here that qualifies as an 'argument' to counter.

Zinj

I consider you an honest commentator. But perhaps with less than full knowledge re FZ , independants. I myself have to devote considerable time to keep up.

If you consider a " button re stats" for the FZ, and claims of "great expansion", its probably best addressed to me.

I'm the one who posts successes of the FZ broadly. Its a labour of love and somewhat ordinary reporting of what is reported to me.

I'm not so interested in stats. I put the results out there. Don't posts stats per se. Or often make great claims for expansion. I do concede I may have done the latter at times. Not sure.

I will do here and will post elsewhere :-

--------------

Ron’s Org Vladivostok



Hello from Ron’s Org Vladivostok ! The org was established in the beginning of FZ Russian Project in 1998. Irina andRon’s Org Vladivostok



Hello from Ron’s Org Vladivostok ! The org was established in the beginning of FZ Russian Project in 1998. Irina and Andrey Nor started to study in the Russian studying camps in Moscow and opened a delivery unit including a courseroom in Vladivostok .



You must know that Vladivostok is in the far east of Russia , at the Pacific coast, and it was the first Ron’s Org in Asia . If you travel from Moscow by train, which we usually did in the beginning, it takes 7 days non-stop traveling!



Now, in 2010, Irina audit the level of OT-48 and Andrey are on SOL-3. We have 45 Clears and 40 men, started OT-8 in our Org. We have a classroom for 10 hours, 6 days every week. All in all there are more than 50 active students and pcs, every evening about 15 students in the courseroom. On our main Board of Progress we drew the picture of our Bridge and we mark every step for every public with red pen! There are marks for all people who get our services – some of them come from far away, e.g. the staffs of Ron’s Org Excalibur in Krasnodar (near Caucasus) and two Pre-OTs from Nishniy Tagil, one from Omsk and a lot of other cities.



We established a good base and we try to help to the beginners. We set up few discounts – for staff, for twins, for quick students. We built a house for our org, and all our students can work on this building in exchange for studying and auditing.



All this rules and possibilities are very interesting for many scientologists. They don’t worry for distance and this years in our org live and study guys from: Moscow, Saratov, Khabarovsk, Magnitogorsk, Omsk, Nishniy Tagil, Irkutsk, Temirtau, Cherepovets, Karaganda, Tumen, Barnaul, Bratsk, Chelabinsk, Ekaterinburg, Kherson and Krasnodar. If you want to get an impression about Scientology in Russia , take a map and look those cities up! Some of them will be future “branch orgs” of RO Vladivostok.



We have also a few other projects, e.g. the Sea Project and the Ecodom. I’ll tell you about it in my other articles.



Andrey Nor //newronsorg@ mail.ru//

[Zinjifar]

My impression is that *all* of the Scn derivative or 'field' Technologies rely to higher than 90% on people trained in the 'Church' of Scientology. My analysis is based on that observation.

I haven't seen any reason to change that impression, despite repeated claims to 'new' people. And, no, I'm not counting the Russian 'expansion'. Because I tend to doubt it. Success Stories are not 'stats' and they never include 'unsuccess stories' (for some reason)

Zinj

[Terril park]

I am sure that the answer to this question could be found by reading through this forum, but I'm afraid I'd really like to not have to take that much time; since it seems not to be a question the forum is really intended to address, I think it would take a lot of digging to find. So I apologize profusely for asking for other people's time just to save me time, but I'm hoping that what might take me hours to discover, somebody could answer for me in a few seconds. In exchange I could offer answers about physics questions, say, that I can give easily and might take longer to find out by reading.

My question is, How long do people keep up with auditing outside the Church, if they are not themselves working as auditors?

How long is a piece of string.

Been involved since 1965. No longer did services since 1991, went FZ in
around 1999. Did OT 2-3 twice since.



Does one see lots of people happily moving steadily on with the program over many years? Or do clients (to use a secular term) tend to have gotten what they wanted after a year or two, and quit?

I know many who have steadily progressed. Have little data on those who
left. Or why. Or even if they did.



Or, to ask the question in terms of Scientology progress rather than years (though I'd like to know both): What proportion of people go Clear or OT in the Freezone, compared to those who just audit for a while and drop out? What proportion of people become auditors themselves, if they weren't already trained in the Church?

There is a large measure of those who clear, progressed on OT levels in the FZ. In COS there are many barriers. I expect you are aware of them.

Training is a problem. Russians under the auspices of European
Rons Org train more than COS and the english speaking FZ.



I'm sure there are some cases all over the spectrum; but I'd like to know what the common patterns are, and how common.

A similar question I have is, what proportion of Freezone or independent pre-clears come through the Church of Scientology, as opposed to those who get into Scientology as independents from the beginning?

In the english speaking world, most are escapees from COS.

In Russian states most were never in COS.



I admit that I tend to take a dim view of Scientology in all forms, and so my default imagined picture is that unless people have really made Scientology their life, they would tend only to pass through the Freezone briefly as a half-way house on the way out of the CofS. But I do not actually want to just hold my preconceptions, and I'd be happy to hear any answer from someone who actually knows the subject. I have no knowledge of this myself, so I'm not going to argue or criticize on this point, just listen.

You ask good questions.

Gave my best answers.

You seem to be a materialist. Yet are fascinated by this subject related to spirituality. Been a pleasure to communicate.

You in the UK we could meet, or I could phone you for free
just about anywhere.

basic2basic@yahoo.com

0208-864-4940

07903 849 519

[Mark A. Baker]

You in the UK we could meet, or I could phone you for free
just about anywhere.

basic2basic@yahoo.com

0208-864-4940

07903 849 519


FWIW, BB is reputed to know all the good curry houses in London. :coolwink:


Mark A. Baker

[Vinaire]

I am sure that the answer to this question could be found by reading through this forum, but I'm afraid I'd really like to not have to take that much time; since it seems not to be a question the forum is really intended to address, I think it would take a lot of digging to find. So I apologize profusely for asking for other people's time just to save me time, but I'm hoping that what might take me hours to discover, somebody could answer for me in a few seconds. In exchange I could offer answers about physics questions, say, that I can give easily and might take longer to find out by reading.

My question is, How long do people keep up with auditing outside the Church, if they are not themselves working as auditors? Does one see lots of people happily moving steadily on with the program over many years? Or do clients (to use a secular term) tend to have gotten what they wanted after a year or two, and quit?

Or, to ask the question in terms of Scientology progress rather than years (though I'd like to know both): What proportion of people go Clear or OT in the Freezone, compared to those who just audit for a while and drop out? What proportion of people become auditors themselves, if they weren't already trained in the Church?

I'm sure there are some cases all over the spectrum; but I'd like to know what the common patterns are, and how common.

A similar question I have is, what proportion of Freezone or independent pre-clears come through the Church of Scientology, as opposed to those who get into Scientology as independents from the beginning?

I admit that I tend to take a dim view of Scientology in all forms, and so my default imagined picture is that unless people have really made Scientology their life, they would tend only to pass through the Freezone briefly as a half-way house on the way out of the CofS. But I do not actually want to just hold my preconceptions, and I'd be happy to hear any answer from someone who actually knows the subject. I have no knowledge of this myself, so I'm not going to argue or criticize on this point, just listen.


I can speak only for myself. I didn’t feel much need for auditing after leaving the Church. I never went to any Freezone practitioner for auditing.

IMO, when there is no pressure to get audited, a person would simply continue auditing as long as some unwanted condition exists. Once an unwanted condition is handled, one may go away for a while as the need for more auditing is no longer felt. There is something wrong with the scene of continually needing auditing. To me it would mean that some condition is not being handled.

Again there is something wrong with the idea of wanting to become Clear and OT as this reeks of status seeking. There should be well-defined unwanted condition(s) that one wants to get rid of, and abilities that one wants to gain. If one is running after status then one is running in the wrong direction, away from spirituality.

I would say that seeking a simplification of knowledge would be a desirable goal. Hubbard did an okay job of systematizing existing data in the early fifties. But then he went off making it more complicated by adding his own speculations, thinking, etc.

People will go where they find some promise of getting their questions answered. The Church is becoming less and less of a friendly place. The freezone is not that well organized. The current scene is that of increasing confusion where Scientology as a philosophy is concerned.

There seems be some concern among people, who benefited from Scientology, to isolate what is really beneficial and organize it to deliver to populace at large. My contribution in this area is the following,

KHTK #1 LOOKING (http://www.mathfundamentals.com/Personal/Looking.pdf)
KHTK #2 EXPERIENCING (http://www.mathfundamentals.com/Personal/Experience.pdf)
KHTK #3 NON-OPTIMUM ATTENTION (http://www.mathfundamentals.com/Personal/Attention.pdf)
KHTK #4 VIEWPOINT (http://www.mathfundamentals.com/Personal/Viewpoint.pdf)

I would like to see a GLOBAL GUIDANCE CENTER organized on Internet where help is the motivation and not money or any other vested interest. One truly helps oneself by helping others.

I believe that Buddha really got it 2500 years ago. Buddhism was very successful in bringing civilization to about 75% of the world. We need to present Buddhism in a form that it can easily be practiced today. I think that Scientology started out well with a similar attempt. But then it lost it.

.

[Veda]

"Scientology outside the C of S" is a statement that the Scientology Bridge - whether the Bridge of the 1970s, or the Ron's Org Bridge - is available outside the C of S. These Bridges have in common that they go to OT 3, with some variation afterwards.

Current Scientology Grade Chart:

http://www.carolineletkeman.org/c/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/grdchart1.gif

Couldn't locate a link to a 1970s Grade Chart.

Ron's Org Grade Chart (same up to OT 3):

http://www.galac-patra.org/Image3.gif

Some other data from Ron's org:

http://galac-patra.narod.ru/index.html

http://www.freezone.org/cbr/sector9/e_sob19.htm

http://www.freezone.org/cbr/sector9/e_sob20.htm

Whether Freezone Scientology or Independent Scientology, what these groups/subjects have in common is the Grade Chart up to OT 3, in other words the Bridge to Xenu. Those subjects/groups that reject the Bridge to Xenu are classified differently. This is only fair to possible consumers or clients, to avoid confusion.

It's not that complicated.

[Terril park]

"Scientology outside the C of S" is a statement that the Scientology Bridge - whether the Bridge of the 1970s, or the Ron's Org Bridge - is available outside the C of S. All these Bridges have in common that they go to OT 3, with some slight variations afterwards.

Current Scientology Grade Chart:

http://www.carolineletkeman.org/c/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/grdchart1.gif

Ron's Org Grade Chart (same up to OT 3):

http://www.galac-patra.org/Image3.gif

Some other data from Ron's org:

http://galac-patra.narod.ru/index.html

http://www.freezone.org/cbr/sector9/e_sob19.htm

http://www.freezone.org/cbr/sector9/e_sob20.htm

Whether Freezone Scientology or Independent Scientology, what these groups/subjects have in common is the Grade Chart up to OT 3, in other words the Bridge to Xenu. Those subjects/groups that reject the Bridge to Xenu are classified differently. This is only fair to possible consumers or clients, to avoid confusion.

It's not that complicated.

You done OT 2 and 3?

[nw2394]

FWIW, BB is reputed to know all the good curry houses in London. :coolwink:

He knows a good Turkish place - I know that.

Nick

[Veda]

You done OT 2 and 3?

Yes. But I've answered that before.

Offering the Scientology Grade Chart outside the C of S actually means something. It's a definite and honest statement, and you have been honest in promoting the Scientology Grade Chart outside the C of S and calling it the Scientology FZ.

Some people want the "Scientology Bridge." You offer that or connect others to people who do - that has some integrity.

Kn, Idenics, meta-psychology, etc., do not recommend the Scientology Bridge to Xenu, and are not part of the Scientology FZ or Independent Scientology.

They are - per the categorization on ESMB - included under the term "Independent [not Scientology] Field" - see my earlier posts on this thread for clarification, if needed.

Why not have the terms clearly defined so people can talk or write and understand each other?

[AnonLover]

My question is, How long do people keep up with auditing outside the Church, if they are not themselves working as auditors? Does one see lots of people happily moving steadily on with the program over many years? Or do clients (to use a secular term) tend to have gotten what they wanted after a year or two, and quit?

fwiw - one of the questions in the CoS Exit Survey (http://tinyurl.com/CofSExitWiki) is in a similar vein of your query above:

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_131bG1PFxSQ/S7d8ByxVaCI/AAAAAAAABhg/Id8uMwJJLN8/s800/SurveySnap17.png

Altho i readily admit that this survey is just a straw poll w/ limited data collected so far, and it doesnt currently benefit from a wide diversity of respondents (i havent had much luck getting broader support for participation in the dedicated freezone fora)

See the related thread link in my sig for more info. And if by chance any indies want to help balance out the above chart, please take the time to submit your survey results at http://tinyurl.com/CofSExit (scroll right to get started if your older version of IE appears to dump you at blank page)

[Veda]

By Independent Field I take it you mean Independent Scientology and FZ Scientology, not the Independent [not Scientology] Field as the term is used on ESMB (before it was hopelessly confused when Rathbun started using Independent Scientology again.)

I would have worded the questions differently to avoid confusion.

[AnonLover]

By Independent Field I take it you mean Independent Scientology and FZ Scientology, not the Independent [not Scientology] Field as the term is used on ESMB (before it was hopelessly confused when Rathbun started using Independent Scientology again.)

I would have worded the questions differently to avoid confusion.

ummm, my bad - i didnt realize there was such confusion. my use of independent scientology and freezone scientology were both meant to be "outside the official church" in a generic sense.

[Veda]

Here's part of the reason for the confusion (excerpted from prior posts on this thread) -

There has been an effort by some Scientology Freezone PR people to co-opt groups and subjects such as Kn, Idenics, and Metapsychology, and make them part of "greater Scientology," where they would serve a function not unlike front groups do in corporate $cientology.

And there already was some confusion re. terminology. On ESMB, "Independent Field" is not Scientology, yet there are also people who call themselves "Independent Scientologists." Two different meanings.

Years ago, the "Independent Field" was a term used by Independent Scientologists. Then many - over time - evolved, and out grew Scientology, and no longer wished to call themselves Scientologists, as they were not. On ESMB, these people sometimes posted in the "Independent Field" section for that reason, as they were no longer Scientologists but had evolved.

Now, the term Independent Scientology and Independent Scientologist are being used (re-popularized by Marty Rathbun), and it's somewhat confusing.


ummm, my bad - i didnt realize there was such confusion. my use of independent scientology and freezone scientology were both meant to be "outside the official church" in a generic sense.

That's cool, but the thing is the term "independent field" is used in your survey, and that's (particularly after the re-popularization of "Independent Scientologist" by Marty Rathbun) a term with an ambiguous meaning, unless specified or clarified.

There's "outside the C of S Scientology," which uses the Scientology Grade Chart, Scientology OT levels, etc., and there's "still does counseling stuff but *not* Scientology," no Scientology Grade Chart, no Scientology OT levels where the person is told the contents of his own mind and space, and no Xenu.

If you don't intend intend, in your survey, "independent field" to mean those who've rejected so much of Scientology that they no longer call themselves Scientology or Scientologists, such as KN, Idenics, and Metapsychology, and Paul's Rub and Yawn Robot Auditor, then the resultant confusion re. the meanings of "independent field" will render the results ambiguous - which is one reason I haven't answered it.

In the Human Potential/"New Age" etc. movement, there are quite a few people who've had some experience with Scientology, in one way or another, and may have taken a few pieces from it, but have rejected Scientology. On ESMB these would also be in the category of "Independent Field."

IRL, the sequence is often: Person is a member of the Church of Scientology, then leaves the Church of Scientology and briefly becomes involved with Freezone or Independent Scientology (still has "Xenu Bridge"), then rejects that but maintains an interest in "human potential."

For example, if takes up Yoga or Zen, that certainly couldn't be called "Scientology outside the C of S." Similarly, if one where to take up Crowleyan Magick or Korzybski's General Semantics, then that also couldn't be called "outside the C of S Scientology." It would be silly to do so.

Yet all of these share some roots with Scientology, and Scientology could be called a derivative of these subjects.

I do appreciate that honest and realistic Scientology Freezoners and Scientology Independents, who offer the Scientology Bridge outside the C of S, describe themselves as such, and don't attempt to blur the issues.

It annoys me slightly when a few PR types seek to manipulate well-meaning people into going back into the fold, with the so called "big tent" idea of "greater Scientology," where even practitioners of Za Zen and Yoga are encouraged to call themselves Scientologists. That's just more Scientological shenanigans.

[Student of Trinity]

Thanks for the information about 'independent' terminology, Veda. I didn't know there was this possible confusion, though I find the terminology perfectly reasonable. I did mean Scientology with the Bridge, and not the whole possible spectrum of movements that might have some tenuous link to Hubbard.

And thanks to AnonLover for the snippet from the exit survey. I had seen this before it had many responses — I didn't answer myself, of course, never having exited because I never entered — but then I forgot about it. If the FZ public were mostly from outside the Church, then this exit survey would say very little about them; but if as Terril says most of the FZ people in the English-speaking world are ex-CofS, then columns 3 to 9 of this survey really are (a sampling of) answers to my questions. And though the numbers in these columns only total 18, making it a rather small sample, the story they tell for what it's worth is that around half of FZ public leave within a couple of years, but about a quarter stick around for many years.

The main thing this exit poll says about the FZ — insofar as it says anything, because of limited sample size and possible selection effects because the sample is all from ESMB — is that if Terril is right about almost all FZ public being ex-CofS in the English world, then the English-speaking FZ is small. I'm surprised that so few exiters who answered this poll spent much time doing Scn outside the Church afterwards. I would have thought to see a much more gradual fall off, instead of the plunge from 60 and 17 into low single-digits.

Because of the small sample and selection issues, this exit poll data is not conclusive evidence — though it's a lot better and more quantitative than I thought we could get. Is there any more information to be had? Can we say anything useful about how the exit poll might be misleading? Does it for instance represent trends from years past, when current ESMBer got out, rather than the present day?

For the present I see no reason to change my guess that Scientology isn't nearly as effective at attracting people when stripped of the Church's deception and coercion; but this notion still has a big question mark over it in my mind, as being a hypothesis without much solid data behind it. The question mark has gotten a bit smaller because of the exit poll and some other answers here, but it's still there and still pretty large, so I'm not going to be going around declaring it as a fact that Scientology fails to attract without coercion.

[Veda]

Unfortunately the survey uses the term "independent field," which on ESMB has meant "not Scientology or the Freezone." Yet, for some, it's taken to mean equivalent to the Freezone, so who knows what the responders mean?

It could mean that people, after having been involved with the Church of Scientology, who then become involved with any kind of "Human Potential" activity with any - no matter how tenuous - link to Scientology, fairly quickly lose interest in that too, but who knows, since the term "independent field" used in the survey has no definite meaning in that survey.

From my experience, most people leaving the "Church" spend some time in Scientology outside the C of S, then drift further, becoming involved in Human Potential, then drift further to any number of places.

However, there are the "lifers," those who are "Scientologists for the duration of the universe" types, and then there are the con men or sharks who feed off the steady stream of people leaving the C of S who still "want their (Xenu) Bridge."

Scientology does succeed best as a cult, and the most successful outside the C of S Scientology group, and the most successful FZ group, is Ron's Orgs. http://galac-patra.narod.ru/index.html

[Vinaire]

The Scientology phenomenon simply proves that there is a great interest out there in human potential, and it would flourish if the demands are properly met.

Scientology exploited that demand, and it is now seen more and more in a negative light.

My opinion is that there has always been a great demand for increasing human potential. Scientology became popular because it offered the alternative of non-drug approach by offering experiences similar to the temporary experiences on drugs but promising them to be more permanent and lasting. Scientology was also attractive because it did not carry all the health liabilities of drug addiction.

I think Scientology is destroying itself because of its greed for money and craving for winning MEST games. This is just another form of addiction. This is what OT is all about.

.

[RogerB]

Are you saying that Kn was and is part of the Scientology Freezone?

When did that happen?

I know there has been an effort by some Scientology Freezone PR people to co-opt groups and subjects such as Kn, Idenics, and Metapsychology, and make them part of "greater Scientology," where they would serve a function not unlike front groups do in corporate $cientology, but I don't recall Alan Walter consenting that Kn be classified as such.

NO . . . . Kn is not, definitely not, Scn . . . but Zinj used the term "independent field" to lump all of what ex scienos were doing and had developed outside of and distinct from Scn together with the FZ Scn endeavor.

Here in Post #2:

First; the Free Zone (and Independent Field) are no more forthcoming with their 'stats' than the 'Church'. And, there's a similar amount of hype and 'great things happening somewhere else'.

But, as to your question, and difficult as it is to say for sure, my experience says that the Zone and Independent Field are almost exclusively populated by 'Church' escapees, and, of course, their children. Far more than 90%, although, there *are* some never-been dabblers. I have no idea what their persistence is. I doubt longer than a few months for most.

All of this has suggested and supported my own pet theory that the Scientology Mindfuck *requires* the kind of authoritarian 'heavy ethical presence and enforcement' that's only available in the 'Church' itself. Once a person is sufficiently MindFucked, however, the state can be maintained with 'Independent Scientology'.

That is why I chirped in to point out that there are many in Kn that are very happily continuing to progress their cases by regular attendance to both processing and training. And it is to be noted that these folks do so without any duress of "ethics" . . . they simply do so out of the personal recognition that they want to advance themselves.

Rog

[Terril park]

The three FZ forums I promote have a combined total of 1268
members. The CF is about twice that roughly. There will be some
overlap in that some are members of more than one forum.

There are three other main forums with around 600 members in total.
Less overlap here.

On facebook I have 138 friends, the majority of which are not on these forums, but appear to be interested in scientology.

Marty's forum is used mostly by people not on our forums. He is accessing
people I havn't. Recently someone pointed out that his forum had 12,000
hits in one day.

Not sure re Geir's forum and " Old auditors" forum, many there are not on the usual FZ forums, but I believe quite a few are on Marty's forum.

These people are nearly all native english speakers. 95% at least I'd guess.

Rons Org Europe and Russia have about 3000 people on the senior C/S lines. There are probably more studying, doing comm courses and not being audited yet, or being audited on maybe objectives under local C/S's and not nessesarily on senior C/S lines. and there are also others not connected to the Rons Org Committee. I have no idea how many of those there are.


One can go to yahoo groups and look at all forums connected to scientology.

There are 4010 of them!! I'm not familiar with more than around 10.

[AnonLover]

Thank you Veda, I've been schooled well. I'm due to compile & publish the latest survey results today which takes a couple hours, so i wont have time to go back thru the questions and doctor my ambiguous wording but i will definitely do so in order to clear up the confusion before the next batch of results are published.

[Mark A. Baker]

Thanks for the information about 'independent' terminology, Veda. I didn't know there was this possible confusion, though I find the terminology perfectly reasonable. I did mean Scientology with the Bridge, and not the whole possible spectrum of movements that might have some tenuous link to Hubbard.


The terms are confused & confusing because different people have different opinions, attitudes, & preferences about such things. Furthermore these change as attitudes change with time. People have been leaving off involvement with the Co$ for going on 60 years. Many who left relatively early have broadened their views far beyond "strictly scientology standard tech" since that time. Some of these still identify to some degree with scientology, some do not. Thus boundaries are often indistinct. Many of the derivative practices share similarities as well as possessing significant differences. This also makes for interesting one on one discussions at get togethers between former church members whose interests have diverged since their disassociation with the church.

Further complicating the issue is the fact that ESMB is somewhat self-selective and there are many posters here with strong personal biases. Additionally relatively few independent scientologists or freezoners post here. However, short of taking samples from all the variety of scientologist & offshoot websites & fora on the internet of which there are many, ESMB provides one of the broader spectrum single sample pools around. Be aware though that it is limited in this regard and doesn't accurately represent all direct scientology subgroups much less its many diverse offshoots.

The answer to your question depends very much upon EXACTLY WHAT you ask and of WHOM you ask it. :yes:


Mark A. Baker

[uniquemand]

It's also true that a lot of the practices that are being characterized as derivative of scientology, because the person or people who developed them had been involved with scientology, can also be seen as having nothing to do with scientology, other than that their founders had something to do with it. I played soccer as a kid on a variety of teams. Does this mean that those teams shaped my ideas about politics? Perhaps tangentially, in some manner. Perhaps I met someone on those teams with whom I developed a relationship, and that relationship was the basis of my views on politics.

Many people will say that any philosophy developed by people who were practitioners or students of scientology is necessarily a derivative of Scientology, and I think this is an oversimplification and often totally a mis-statement of the facts. Additionally, the reason many students may have looked into scientology was that they hoped to find something there, and then DID NOT FIND IT, or found something LIKE what they were looking for that inspired them. In other words, Scientology was not the genesis of their ideas, but a product they examined to see if it conformed to their ideas. Later developments by them may share the GOAL of understanding that they had while looking at scientology, without actually bearing much relationship to scientology, other than STATED aims.

[Zinjifar]

I think there's some confusion on a couple of levels. Since some of the confusion seems to be my fault, I'm going to try to clarify.

SoT's original question addressed how long people leaving the 'Church' of Scientology pursue Scientology practices once out.

The poll given actually does address that question, although, naturally it's going to be far from adequate, since there's no way to get a reliable sample of people who've left the 'Church', especially since many just leave entirely and never look back (including here) and others may continue with the practices, but, with self-insulated 'groups' (like Marty's) that won't ever even see the poll.

In my answer, I expanded on SoT's original question, by adding a new variable; people who 'join' or participate in Scientology (and Scientology related or derivative) practices *without* ever being in the 'Church' of Scientology. Beyond the questions of 'What is the Free Zone' and 'What is Scientology' this even further complicates the question, since many 'post- Church' related groups at least claim to be attracting *new* Raw Meat/never-been-Scientologists. Although there are certainly *some* examples of this, I don't think it's common at all. That's my observation and opinion and it's something even harder to get solid data on than what the poll addressed.

And, to address Roger's comments, I'm certainly not saying that non-'Church' groups engage in 'Church' typical fraud and deception (although, some may) or the kind of abuse involved in 'heavy ethics enforcement' (because they can't, even if they wanted to.) Which is specifically *why* I suggest that such groups fail to attract and keep new and never-'Church' practitioners. Of course, some groups claim different.

Zinj

[uniquemand]

Some "Post" groups certainly have attracted new members: I'm one of such (members of such a group, who knows several people that were NEVER scientologists, and would never want to be). The founding members were ALL ex-scientologists, the new members are OCCASIONALLY ex-scientologists, and more often psychologists and social workers. Getting DATA on this would require a survey of members, to answer a question like "were you ever a scientologist" truthfully. I doubt the organization would want to do this survey, as most of the people who WERE scientologists consider that to be both private and irrelevant, and the others would probably be like "what the fuck"?

[Zinjifar]

Two observations:

The further a group or individual distances himself/itself from Scientology, the saner it is.

The further a group distances itself from Scientology including hiding any previous connection to it, the more likely it is to attract adherents.

Whether it *keeps* any is something else.

Zinj

[uniquemand]

there's a difference between hiding the connection (metapsychology does not) and advertising it (metapsychology does not). :)

[AnonLover]

Here's the latest tally on the relevant CofS Exit Survey question (with badly worded answers made clearer) from the soon-to-be-released Monthly Update of published survey results.

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_131bG1PFxSQ/S-W65QPDu7I/AAAAAAAABqI/0zxxBkcPJcY/s800/SurveySnap17.png

[Mark A. Baker]

Two observations:

The further a group or individual distances himself/itself from Scientology, the saner it is.

The further a group distances itself from Scientology including hiding any previous connection to it, the more likely it is to attract adherents.

Whether it *keeps* any is something else.

Zinj


A Third Observation: there are no sane groups. :whistling:


Mark A. Baker

[Terril park]

Beyond the questions of 'What is the Free Zone' and 'What is Scientology' this even further complicates the question, since many 'post- Church' related groups at least claim to be attracting *new* Raw Meat/never-been-Scientologists. Although there are certainly *some* examples of this, I don't think it's common at all. That's my observation and opinion and it's something even harder to get solid data on than what the poll addressed.


Zinj

I don't particularly make " claims" that I attract " New" people to the FZ.

I have occasionally said that most arriving to FZ forums are quite new to the subject. Mostly they never post, and stay on the forums. I don't know what private comm they enter in unless its with me.

I am really the world's foremost expert here.

What data do you base your observations on?

[AnonLover]

Because of the small sample and selection issues, this exit poll data is not conclusive evidence — though it's a lot better and more quantitative than I thought we could get. Is there any more information to be had?

There is abit more information from the latest batch of published survey results (as of May8) to be had in relation to the participation in freezone question.

Some of the expanded reporting documents i release include "crosstab" reports where I can select two questions from the survey and a comparison table is generated for cross tabulating the answers. While compiling the latest batch of reports I discovered I had crosstab setup for "years in" the official church(Q02) vs. time spent actively participating in the freezone(Q17).

You can see the detail level data for the Q02 vs. Q17 crosstab table in the Survey Results Advanced Report on pages 19-21, that's available for online viewing here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/23636010/Scientology-Exit-Survey-Results-Advanced-Reports

And since there's been a spark of interest in this vein, I added an extra summary chart to this month's batch of reports thats based on this particular crosstab in order to provide a higher level comparison of the data for your viewing pleasure:
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_131bG1PFxSQ/S-YtHQvSwaI/AAAAAAAABr8/oyP-O8qXozo/s800/SummaryChart7.jpg

Fwiw - i think a trend is appearing here where the longer a person was a member of the Church, the more likely they are to be active the freezone for atleast a little while. But as stated before, the survey results are still fairly limited in number of responses & the diversity of the participants such that it's likely still early yet for trending analysis. But I thought it was interesting to look at nonetheless.

If your interested in seeing more of the latest results chk out the Cof Exit Survey thread link in my sig, or stop by the project's micro blog here: http://cofsexit.blogspot.com/

[Zinjifar]

A Third Observation: there are no sane groups. :whistling:


Mark A. Baker

I think that's overstated, but, you might be surprised at how far I would agree with you. I think there are 'sane' ad-hoc groups formed to address a specific problem/issue but that once the problem/issue is resolved, they tend to persist and become self-perpetuating. That doesn't necessarily lead to 'group insanity', but the tendency is there.

Zinj

[Terril park]

There is abit more information from the latest batch of published survey results (as of May8) to be had in relation to the participation in freezone question.

Some of the expanded reporting documents i release include "crosstab" reports where I can select two questions from the survey and a comparison table is generated for cross tabulating the answers. While compiling the latest batch of reports I discovered I had crosstab setup for "years in" the official church(Q02) vs. time spent actively participating in the freezone(Q17).

You can see the detail level data for the Q02 vs. Q17 crosstab table in the Survey Results Advanced Report on pages 19-21, that's available for online viewing here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/23636010/Scientology-Exit-Survey-Results-Advanced-Reports

And since there's been a spark of interest in this vein, I added an extra summary chart to this month's batch of reports thats based on this particular crosstab in order to provide a higher level comparison of the data for your viewing pleasure:
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_131bG1PFxSQ/S-YtHQvSwaI/AAAAAAAABr8/oyP-O8qXozo/s800/SummaryChart7.jpg

Fwiw - i think a trend is appearing here where the longer a person was a member of the Church, the more likely they are to be active the freezone for atleast a little while. But as stated before, the survey results are still fairly limited in number of responses & the diversity of the participants such that it's likely still early yet for trending analysis. But I thought it was interesting to look at nonetheless.

If your interested in seeing more of the latest results chk out the Cof Exit Survey thread link in my sig, or stop by the project's micro blog here: http://cofsexit.blogspot.com/

Hi,
Your results are clearly very skewed. Stats are slippery. Your original post cited 250 responders. There are thousands of FZers. I consider you are trying to do an honest research here.

You are welcome to join my forum and give a survey. I'll post something
nice about this.

This won't be definitive at all as one would assume those who left the FZ are no longer there to reply.

ESMB would probably be your most accurate info source as there are critics, exes, and just a few FZers who actually post here. Not a statitician, but some combining of FZ survey and ESMB survey may get you closer to
an accurate summation.

[Veda]

A Third Observation: there are no sane groups.






-snip-

There are thousands of FZers.

-snip-



Looks like an admission of failure.

Indeed, with so much information and analysis available re. Hubbard and Scientology, anyone - beyond the most naive novice - who identifies as a Scientologist, C of S, Freezone or Independent, is more and more likely to be regarded as suffering from a form of mental illness, or at least a specialized type of obtuseness.

Thousands of Scientologists and not one sane group...

[AnonLover]

Hi,
Your results are clearly very skewed. Stats are slippery. Your original post cited 250 responders. There are thousands of FZers. I consider you are trying to do an honest research here.

You are welcome to join my forum and give a survey. I'll post something
nice about this.



i just published fresh results that the latest charts are based w/ 267 total respondents (last month's results were at 250). And you have to keep in mind when looking at individual pieces, most questions are optional and since the summary chart isa crosstab comparison of two questions - that individual graph is based on only respondents who answered both.

and Terril methinks your absent minded, you and I already went thru that unfruitful merry-go-around ride of me trying to get you to spread help me this project to you forum several months back but it never seemed to go anywhere aside from PM tag and a sting of confusing posts. :confused2:

So as already stated - its not a conclusive poll at this stage. and the results is what it is for time being, until I can figure out how to beg, grovel, and plead enough to get some help in the Indie/FZ circles to get it disseminated it further :prettyplease:

http://tinyurl.com/CofSExit
http://cofsexit.blogspot.com/
:idhitit::dance3:

[Terril park]

Looks like an admission of failure.

Indeed, with so much information and analysis available re. Hubbard and Scientology, anyone - beyond the most naive novice - who identifies as a Scientologist, C of S, Freezone or Independent, is more and more likely to be regarded as suffering from a form of mental illness, or at least a specialized type of obtuseness.

Thousands of Scientologists and not one sane group...

Your usual ad hom bullshit.

Your usual PR spin.

People may identify as whatever they wish.

They can be free.

Someone denying that possibility is far more likely to have
mental problems. Or a hidden agenda.

Or both.

You used to work for the GO. Looks like you still do.

You spend much more time attacking independant/FZ than
abuses of COS.

[Terril park]

i just published fresh results that the latest charts are based w/ 267 total respondents (last month's results were at 250). And you have to keep in mind when looking at individual pieces, most questions are optional and since the summary chart isa crosstab comparison of two questions - that individual graph is based on only respondents who answered both.

and Terril methinks your absent minded, you and I already went thru that unfruitful merry-go-around ride of me trying to get you to spread help me this project to you forum several months back but it never seemed to go anywhere aside from PM tag and a sting of confusing posts. :confused2:

So as already stated - its not a conclusive poll at this stage. and the results is what it is for time being, until I can figure out how to beg, grovel, and plead enough to get some help in the Indie/FZ circles to get it disseminated it further :prettyplease:

http://tinyurl.com/CofSExit
http://cofsexit.blogspot.com/
:idhitit::dance3:


Yes I'm awfully busy and can't recall past efforts in detail.
Maybe no one was interested in answering. My best guess.

So join my forum and do your thang. :)

[AnonLover]

Yes I'm awfully busy and can't recall past efforts in detail.
Maybe no one was interested in answering. My best guess.

So join my forum and do your thang. :)

ok will do in the near future, and thanks for the invite.

[Veda]

Your usual ad hom bullshit.

-snip-



Here's another charismatic cult leader for you to follow. Does some of his "philosophy" sound familiar?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xioCGmZVoqw

Of course, Hubbard only had a dozen teenyboppers servicing him: http://www.studytech.org/img/messengers2.jpg

[PeterMan]

I think it is a question this forum is intended to address. The name is Ex Scientologist, and someone who has transitioned from $, to Freakzone to walking away from it all is truly an Ex $.

This last step is truly the milestone for the ex-$ as it is the hardest step to literally lose one's religion.

Luckily, it is also a valuable lesson - a two-sided coin.

What is the lesson? It is too much of a challenge to put into words in this forum post.

[Smilla]

A Third Observation: there are no sane groups. :whistling:


Mark A. Baker
I know you where speaking tongue in cheek, but you're not far wrong :omg:

[Smilla]

Here's another charismatic cult leader for you to follow. Does some of his "philosophy" sound familiar?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xioCGmZVoqw

Of course, Hubbard only had a dozen teenyboppers servicing him: http://www.studytech.org/img/messengers2.jpg
He had some interesting comments to make about Scientology - worth the reading.

[Veda]

He had some interesting comments to make about Scientology - worth the reading.

Manson did TRs in prison, and also had some Scientology processing from a cell mate. He showed up at a Scientology org in Los Angeles wanting to attest to Theta Clear.

Here he still had his fixed glare: http://www.myptsmail.com/hotdog256/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/charles_manson.jpg

[Smilla]

Manson did TRs in prison, and also had some Scientology processing from a cell mate. He showed up at a Scientology org in Los Angeles wanting to attest to Theta Clear.

Here he still had his fixed glare: http://www.myptsmail.com/hotdog256/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/charles_manson.jpg
He had an e-meter at the Spahn ranch and liked to put people on the cans too.

[Terril park]

Manson did TRs in prison, and also had some Scientology processing from a cell mate. He showed up at a Scientology org in Los Angeles wanting to attest to Theta Clear.

Here he still had his fixed glare: http://www.myptsmail.com/hotdog256/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/charles_manson.jpg

More GO style PR positioning of crazy.

[Smilla]

More GO style PR positioning of crazy.
It's just the facts Terril. Maybe a bit off topic, though.

[Type4_PTS]

It's just the facts Terril. Maybe a bit off topic, though.

This topic is of interest to me so I'm going to start another thread:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=414376#post414376

[Gottabrain]

Everything Zinj has said is misleading.

The thing about the Free Zone and Independent scene is that there is no centraized point, unlik in CofS. So they don't LIE or mislead, but they don't have a central stat publishing facility.

Terril Park is ED of a large segment of the FZ and he is extremely forthcoming and posts a lot of information. He often gets negative feedback for having done so.

With all respect, Voltaire - this IS the EXScn message board. I would expect I would get similar criticism if I posted on a Church of Scientology forum.

I have friends in the FZ. Good friends, close friends. Anyone can practice whatever they believe as long as they are not violating human rights or having their own rights violated by their practices.

But I really hate when certain FZers get on here trying to shove their beliefs down my throat and misrepresent their "beliefs" as "science" or "fact".

Okay, I had my say for the month... carry on. ;)

[Veda]

It's just the facts Terril. Maybe a bit off topic though.

It is off-topic for this thread and I apologize for that.

It began with an observation that I've found to be consistently true.




-snip-

The further a group or individual distances himself/itself from Scientology, the saner it is.

-snip-

Zinj

Then came an attempt at "handling" this statement with the assertion that




-snip-

...there are no sane groups.

-snip-

Reminiscent of the counter to "Scientology lies," with "Oh well, every one's lied," etc. (Page 42 of the PR damage control handbook).

That was followed by the statement


-snip-

There are thousands of FZers.

-snip-



So I stepped on Mark A. Baker's tale to see if his associate Terril would squeak, and he did. My bad.

Then I came across the above posted video of Charlie Manson, and noticed the similarity of attitude and philosophy between himself and Hubbard, and probably any abusive cult leader. I posted that, indulging further the stream-of-consciousness mischief-making.

However it did inspire another thread:


This topic is of interest to me so I'm going to start another thread:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=414376



Nonetheless, my apologies.

[AnonKat]

Do not attribute the same atrocities to people who are clearly free to believe whatever the hell they want. Freedom of Religion is right up their with Freedom of Speech.

[uniquemand]

I'm not sure what the point is. Manson did TRs and had a meter... okay! The guy who sold out Jesus was a Jew...

I guess I don't see the point, still. <shrug>

[Veda]

Do not attribute the same atrocities to people who are clearly free to believe whatever the hell they want. Freedom of Religion is right up their with Freedom of Speech.

I don't buy Hubbard's "religion angle" and don't regard Scientology as a religion.

[Voltaire's Child]

With all respect, Voltaire - this IS the EXScn message board.


Ah, I don't deserve to be called Voltaire. I can only aspire to be his humble child. (aka Fluffy aka Claire)... :)

But, with all due respect, Gottabrain, this IS the Free Zone SECTION of the EXScn message board. Got it? Good.

[Challenge]

The Scientology phenomenon simply proves that there is a great interest out there in human potential, and it would flourish if the demands are properly met.

Scientology exploited that demand, and it is now seen more and more in a negative light.

My opinion is that there has always been a great demand for increasing human potential. Scientology became popular because it offered the alternative of non-drug approach by offering experiences similar to the temporary experiences on drugs but promising them to be more permanent and lasting. Scientology was also attractive because it did not carry all the health liabilities of drug addiction.

I think Scientology is destroying itself because of its greed for money and craving for winning MEST games. This is just another form of addiction. This is what OT is all about.

.

My Brother!

challenge

[Rene Descartes]

I think the telling stat as to whether the Freezone has the mind**** that the Church has would be to examine whether or not the Freezone has all hands call-in.

Or any kind of call-in for that matter.

I have an unlisted phone number but somehow the Church of Scientology has obtained it.

Rd00

[Mark A. Baker]

With all respect, Voltaire - this IS the EXScn message board. I would expect I would get similar criticism if I posted on a Church of Scientology forum.

...

But I really hate when certain FZers get on here trying to shove their beliefs down my throat {ed. emphasis added} and misrepresent their "beliefs" as "science" or "fact".

Okay, I had my say for the month... carry on. ;)



...
But, with all due respect, Gottabrain, this IS the Free Zone SECTION of the EXScn message board. Got it? Good.

In light of your fear of being "forced fed" and Fluff's salient observation about this particular thread, a simple acceptable solution offers itself: close your mouth. :whistling:

Personally I see little "force feeding" occurring on the board. Although, occasionally some voice objections to the open expression of perspectives to which they may have personal opposition.


Mark A. Baker
p.s. sometimes I just can't resist an obvious straight line. :coolwink:

[Challenge]

Your usual ad hom bullshit.

Your usual PR spin.

People may identify as whatever they wish.

They can be free.

Someone denying that possibility is far more likely to have
mental problems. Or a hidden agenda.

Or both.

You used to work for the GO. Looks like you still do.

You spend much more time attacking independant/FZ than
abuses of COS.

Easy there, big fellow....
why the bloody hell can't you spell " INDEPENDENT"??!!!


Challenge

[Rene Descartes]

Easy there, big fellow....
why the bloody hell can't you spell " INDEPENDENT"??!!!


Challenge

http://www.alphadictionary.com/articles/misspelled_words.html

Rd00

[Mark A. Baker]

I know you where speaking tongue in cheek, but you're not far wrong :omg:

That's one way of looking at it. :)



I think that's overstated, but, you might be surprised at how far I would agree with you.


Actually, I'm not surprised at all that you share a similar sentiment. However, I do disagree that my original was overstated. The only question for me is the degree of insanity evidenced by any particular group.

All groups are insane, but they are not all EQUALLY insane. :coolwink:

Tea anyone? :)

Mark A. Baker

[Mark A. Baker]

So I stepped on Mark A. Baker's tale to see if his associate Terril would squeak, and he did. My bad.

You seriously NEED to word clear "non sequitur". Terril's post was entirely unrelated to either mine or yours. Nor, for reference, was my remark relevant to anything you had to say. :eyeroll:

You continue to attribute a great deal more importance to yourself than you actually warrant. :omg:


Mark A. Baker

[Voltaire's Child]

I've seen quite a few people here force-feed their beliefs down the throats of others. Most of the time, though, the posts weren't made by Free Zone or others interested in Scn ideology...just sayin'.

:whistling:

But why someone would go to the Free Zone section of the board then imply or state that he or she had been force fed is, truly, one of the fascinating phenomena of lifie.

[Voltaire's Child]

Manson did TRs in prison, and also had some Scientology processing from a cell mate. He showed up at a Scientology org in Los Angeles wanting to attest to Theta Clear.

Here he still had his fixed glare: http://www.myptsmail.com/hotdog256/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/charles_manson.jpg

I used to be good friends with a girl who knew Charles Manson's ex cell mate. I think he did CCHs, mainly, with the guy.

Veda's post is right in line with what she told me.

[Gottabrain]

Ah, I don't deserve to be called Voltaire. I can only aspire to be his humble child. (aka Fluffy aka Claire)... :)

But, with all due respect, Gottabrain, this IS the Free Zone SECTION of the EXScn message board. Got it? Good.

Okay, Voltaire's Child. Carry on. :)

Mark Baker - You are rude, aggressive and use defensive communication in place of the real thing. Not a good example at all of "a winning FZer", all commonly despised personality traits of many C of S members.

Shut YOUR mouth, Mark, if you prefer silence to free speech. I live in a democracy. One where we speak freely and try to use manners.

On the other hand, Terril and Voltaire's Child are fine people as are many others in the FZ.

[Smilla]

I'm not sure what the point is. Manson did TRs and had a meter... okay! The guy who sold out Jesus was a Jew...

I guess I don't see the point, still. <shrug>
There is no point. It's just an interesting snippet of history.

[Mark A. Baker]

Mark Baker - You are rude, aggressive and use defensive communication in place of the real thing. Not a good example at all of "a winning FZer", all commonly despised personality traits of many C of S members.

Thank you for your commendation. :hattip:


Still, as Fluff has also, if possibly more gracefully, said ....


I've seen quite a few people here force-feed their beliefs down the throats of others. Most of the time, though, the posts weren't made by Free Zone or others interested in Scn ideology...just sayin'.

:whistling:

But why someone would go to the Free Zone section of the board then imply or state that he or she had been force fed is, truly, one of the fascinating phenomena of lifie.

:p


Mark A. Baker

[AnonKat]

Im have no problem with the freezone. They never bothered me. As long as they warn people for the C of $.

[Smilla]

Im have no problem with the freezone. They never bothered me. As long as they warn people for the C of $.
I don't either really - as long as they are willing to be open and transparent to their clients.

[Zinjifar]

At least one of the problems with 'The Freezone' and 'Independent Scientologists' is that they're attempting to control and limit the opposition to Scientology to *only* opposition to the 'Church' of Scientology, and, they're doing so by *lying* about the nature of Scientology itself.

At the very least this serves to dilute and weaken the kind of public and social opposition that has taken years to achieve. And, it's a deliberate lie; an acceptable truth. No, it's *not* only Miscavige and no, it's *not* just about Slappy slapping some people around. It's about 50 years of deliberate subversion, corruption and abuse. To deliberately attempt to hijack the terms of opposition for their own purposes is not only counter-productive in halting the abuse but deliberate sabotage.

Not to mention confusing for Media that's already confused by years of Scientology shenanigans and lies.

Zinj

[Voltaire's Child]

That would be like saying that anyone who professes any ideology and discusses it from that context is lying when, in fact, they're just saying what they believe. Same with people who are incorrect on political views that they are airing, but are being earnest and candid.

Further, there are no "people in the Free Zone and Independent Scientologists". Everyone's an individual and says and does different things.

I wonder how things worked out with that wife you posted about who used to be in Scn, what sorts of things you said to her and if she knows about some of the rather strongly worded things you've said about Scientologists.

[Zinjifar]

That would be like saying that anyone who professes any ideology and discusses it from that context is lying when, in fact, they're just saying what they believe. Same with people who are incorrect on political views that they are airing, but are being earnest and candid.

Further, there are no "people in the Free Zone and Independent Scientologists". Everyone's an individual and says and does different things.

I wonder how things worked out with that wife you posted about who used to be in Scn, what sorts of things you said to her and if she knows about some of the rather strongly worded things you've said about Scientologists.

I'm not sure what you think you're accomplishing by bringing in my personal life, but, while I'm willing to grant that some of the 'Independent Scientologists' who are attempting to control the terms of opposition may actually *believe* the lies they're telling, many do not and are perfectly aware of the dishonesty of their position. However, in a further application of 'Scientology PR Tech' they grab to exactly the kind of deliberate lie called an 'acceptable truth' within *Scientology* (not the 'Church' of Scientology or Miscavology or whatever) and attempt to sell *that* 'truth' to media and others.

While people were risking their lives and careers and families and reputations to oppose Scientology, many of these people were still *in* Scientology, some as the point elements in selling lies and committing abuses. Now, as johnny-come-lately opponents of the 'Church' they're *still* attempting to sell lies.

I'm less irritated by them, to tell you the truth, than I am by those who promote the lies in full knowledge that they're lies because they see a *tactical* advantage in doing so. Scientology and the 'Church' of Scientology survive by lies. If either can survive without lies, then fine, but, nobody is well served by a continuation of deliberate dishonesty.

I have no intention of embracing the kind of winking bullshit being sold, no matter *who* is selling it.

Zinj

[Voltaire's Child]

Zinj,

You had posted about it. This is not from an email or some back channel or clandestine thing. I've been a tad bit mystified by it for quite some time, now, to be perfectly honest. But, if you'd rather, I won't bring it up again, even if you DON'T reciprocate. That's just the kind of good awesome nice chica I am. :coolwink:

People are individuals.

And disagreeing with a true believer does not make that true believer a liar, even if the person's some flat earther or whatnot.

[Zinjifar]

People are individuals.

And, some people operate in concert


And disagreeing with a true believer does not make that true believer a liar, even if the person's some flat earther or whatnot.

A person who perpetuates an untruth knowingly is a liar. Even if he's doing it 'for the cause' or 'because it helps the cause' or 'for tactical reasons'.

A person who *deliberately* protects his own ignorance in order to be able to support a lie may not be at least *one* version of liar, but, it's not far off. Scientology's 'acceptable truth' is deliberate untruth.

Zinj

[Dulloldfart]

Easy there, big fellow....
why the bloody hell can't you spell " INDEPENDENT"??!!!

Challenge

Try a different question — why can you? (It's a serious comment, not a joke or insult.)

I would guess that the confusion comes from the two words "(in)dependent" and "pendant" (hanging necklace-type object) being similar in meaning but having different spellings. And this similarity, uninspected, causes the mush-up. Kinda like the uninspected earlier-similar, but not exactly the same. Terril, as an experienced word-clearer, should appreciate this gem. :)

Paul

[Mark A. Baker]

And, some people operate in concert



A person who perpetuates an untruth knowingly is a liar. Even if he's doing it 'for the cause' or 'because it helps the cause' or 'for tactical reasons'.

A person who *deliberately* protects his own ignorance in order to be able to support a lie may not be at least *one* version of liar, but, it's not far off. Scientology's 'acceptable truth' is deliberate untruth.

Zinj


Ummm, is this suppose to be another one of your conspiracies, Z?


Mark A. Baker :whistling:

[Voltaire's Child]

And, some people operate in concert



A person who perpetuates an untruth knowingly is a liar. Even if he's doing it 'for the cause' or 'because it helps the cause' or 'for tactical reasons'.

A person who *deliberately* protects his own ignorance in order to be able to support a lie may not be at least *one* version of liar, but, it's not far off. Scientology's 'acceptable truth' is deliberate untruth.

Zinj

Yes, I have seen a number of people act "in concert" but I try not to hold that against them, of course.

And, no, if a person's a true believer, then he's not knowingly saying anything false.

[Veda]

And, some people operate in concert

A person who perpetuates an untruth knowingly is a liar. Even if he's doing it 'for the cause' or 'because it helps the cause' or 'for tactical reasons'.

A person who *deliberately* protects his own ignorance in order to be able to support a lie may not be at least *one* version of liar, but, it's not far off. Scientology's 'acceptable truth' is deliberate untruth.




Ummm, is this suppose to be another one of your conspiracies, Z?



Hit a nerve?

[Terril park]

Try a different question — why can you? (It's a serious comment, not a joke or insult.)

I would guess that the confusion comes from the two words "(in)dependent" and "pendant" (hanging necklace-type object) being similar in meaning but having different spellings. And this similarity, uninspected, causes the mush-up. Kinda like the uninspected earlier-similar, but not exactly the same. Terril, as an experienced word-clearer, should appreciate this gem. :)

Paul

English has the world's largest vocabulary and I believe the most exceptions re spelling. And the yanks decided to interfere and confuse matters.

In a course room I'm severely[ sort of] KSW with a battery of dictionaries
from baby to " World Book" and squirrel my way around with good results.

While posting from the keyboard I can't be bothered to consult the panopoly of dicts and play it by ear.

LRH commented on OT 2 materials that in the future word meanings may change and one has to use the def that gives most TA.

I'm furthering that wish with creative spelling. Create, no?

Sadly the spelling police have migrated from my FZ forums.

I stand firm, asserting the rights of personal creation!!

[ULRC/S]

A person who perpetuates an untruth knowingly is a liar. Even if he's doing it 'for the cause' or 'because it helps the cause' or 'for tactical reasons'.

A person who *deliberately* protects his own ignorance in order to be able to support a lie may not be at least *one* version of liar, but, it's not far off. Zinj

What specific lies are these freezone individuals perpetuating? Generalities don't cut it. Specifics or GTFO.

Regards, Allen

[AnonKat]

English has the world's largest vocabulary and I believe the most exceptions re spelling. And the yanks decided to interfere and confuse matters.

In a course room I'm severely[ sort of] KSW with a battery of dictionaries
from baby to " World Book" and squirrel my way around with good results.

While posting from the keyboard I can't be bothered to consult the panopoly of dicts and play it by ear.

LRH commented on OT 2 materials that in the future word meanings may change and one has to use the def that gives most TA.

I'm furthering that wish with creative spelling. Create, no?

Sadly the spelling police have migrated from my FZ forums.

I stand firm, asserting the rights of personal creation!!

OT 2 is the sex stuff isn't it , Does he write good porn ?

[Veda]

-snip-

I stand firm, asserting the rights of personal creation!!

Don't be silly.

Get some file cards. On one print: Aberration, on the other print Independent, and on the other print Miscavige.

Your promo will be much more effective if you spell these three words correctly.

And why not?

[Smilla]

What specific lies are these freezone individuals perpetuating? Generalities don't cut it. Specifics or GTFO.

Regards, Allen
One of the lies is that that Scientology is the road to freedom. It isn't, and never was. The history of the subject gives times, places, forms and events, supportive of my assertion.

[Terril park]

OT 2 is the sex stuff isn't it , Does he write good porn ?

Create? No!

Lol!

[Terril park]

Don't be silly.

Get some file cards. On one print: Aberration, on the other print Independent, and on the other print Miscavige.

Your promo will be much more effective if you spell these three words correctly.

And why not?

Why the fuck do you think you have any authority to tell me
or anyone to not to be silly! Let alone why anyone would obey
your commands!

Go fuck yourself and print your own file cards.



asshole!

[AnonKat]

Create? No!

Lol!

DAMN IT It is rumoured people attest to parts of OT 2 or maybe an other level without reading it all out of disgust

I am not easily disgusted when its only stand alone tekst

[AnonKat]

Why the fuck do you think you have any authority to tell me
or anyone to not to be silly! Let alone why anyone would obey
your commands!

Go fuck yourself and print your own file cards.



asshole!

lol yeah Veda get of your lazy ass lol

[Terril park]

DAMN IT It is rumoured people attest to parts of OT 2 or maybe an other level without reading it all out of disgust

I am not easily disgusted when its only stand alone tekst

Its humour. :) You havn't done OT 2 it may pass you by.

[Smilla]

DAMN IT It is rumoured people attest to parts of OT 2 or maybe an other level without reading it all out of disgust

I am not easily disgusted when its only stand alone tekst
OT II is the most boring and pointless thing I ever did in Scientology. A lot of other people felt that way too. Once you've done the first few steps it's easy to guess what the rest will be. It's a waste of time. But you think that maybe the next level will make more sense. Ha Ha - fooled again! OT III might be crap, but at least it's not boring crap - or at least it wasn't then, when it was still more or less secret.

[AnonKat]

Its humour. :) You havn't done OT 2 it may pass you by.

Okay I Got some offers from Indies to train me up untill an inch of my life, should I do it ?

[AnonKat]

OT II is the most boring and pointless thing I ever did in Scientology. A lot of other people felt that way too. Once you've done the first few steps it's easy to guess what the rest will be. It's a waste of time. But you think that maybe the next level will make more sense. Ha Ha - fooled again! OT III might be crap, but at least it's not boring crap - or at least it wasn't then, when it was still more or less secret.

Maybe i can re write it lol, I think some of the stuff needs an update

[Smilla]

Maybe i can re write it lol, I think some of the stuff needs an update
I'd trust you to do it too. Put a lot of sex in it. It'll sell like hell :)

[uniquemand]

I think that if you are solo auditing, and paying for the privilege, it should come with fellatio. Least that way it would end with a floating tone arm.

[Veda]

Don't be silly.

Get some file cards. On one print: Aberration, on the other print Independent, and on the other print Miscavige.

Your promo will be much more effective if you spell these three words correctly.

And why not?


Why the fuck do you think you have any authority to tell me
or anyone to not to be silly! Let alone why anyone would obey
your commands!

Go fuck yourself and print your own file cards.

asshole!

I did. Many years ago my spelling was terrible. Realizing my writing would be more effective if words were spelt correctly, I spent a few months in the library and accumulated several hundred note cards with correct spellings. It was a very useful action.

I also examined the obsession that some had with correct spelling, and with a little (squirrel/unauthorized) whole track exploration found - amusingly - that I had track as a carver of stone in ancient times, when words had sacred significance, and words were not just spelled, but contained "spells" or "postulates." MisSPell a word - or incorrectly carve a glyph - in the tomb of the Pharaoh and the consequences could be unpleasant.

As a result, I developed an insight into a possible explanation for some English professor's preoccupation with correct SPELLing, and also freed myself from the reaction to that obsession - I felt no need to rebel against it (by indifferently misspelling words), or to comply with the established spelling of a word. YET, I saw that my written communications would be more effective if I spelled words correctly.

My advice to you was intended to help you.

Make those three note cards. It's simple, and your writings and promo will be more effective.

[Terril park]

OT II is the most boring and pointless thing I ever did in Scientology. A lot of other people felt that way too. Once you've done the first few steps it's easy to guess what the rest will be. It's a waste of time. But you think that maybe the next level will make more sense. Ha Ha - fooled again! OT III might be crap, but at least it's not boring crap - or at least it wasn't then, when it was still more or less secret.

Hey, sorry bro/sister.

OT II was the best bridge action I did.

Dunno why this big difference.

Was described as digging ditches, and yes true, but there were also revelations. Even did it twice cos I loved it so much.

[Terril park]

I did. Many years ago my spelling was terrible. Realizing my writing would be more effective if words were spelt correctly, I spent a few months in the library and accumulated several hundred note cards with correct spellings. It was a very useful action.

I also examined the obsession that some had with correct spelling, and with a little (squirrel/unauthorized) whole track exploration found - amusingly - that I had track as a carver of stone in ancient times, when words had sacred significance, and words were not just spelled, but contained "spells" or "postulates." MisSPell a word - or incorrectly carve a glyph - in the tomb of the Pharaoh and the consequences could be unpleasant.

As a result, I developed an insight into a possible explanation for some English professor's preoccupation with correct SPELLing, and also freed myself from the reaction to that obsession - I felt no need to rebel against it (by indifferently misspelling words), or to comply with the established spelling of a word. YET, I saw that my written communications would be more effective if I spelled words correctly.

My advice to you was intended to help you.

Make those three note cards. It's simple, and your writings and promo will be more effective.

Confused.com

Which entity should I address here?

[Smilla]

Hey, sorry bro/sister.

OT II was the best bridge action I did.

Dunno why this big difference.

Was described as digging ditches, and yes true, but there were also revelations. Even did it twice cos I loved it so much.
Well bro/sister.

I came into Scientology and stayed in Scientology, because I was repeatedly promised that it would handle a certain serious problem I had. I had no interest in Hubbard or his cosmology - just wanted to deal with the problem. OT II was so impersonal and totally unrelated to me, that I was hugely disappointed, and felt betrayed. But I did it and found it boring. It must have fallen within your area of interest.

Does that explain it well enough, bro/sister?

[Type4_PTS]

Even did it twice cos I loved it so much.


I can understand repeating something because you didn't actually get the EP as promised. But if you get the EP (meaning "End Phenomena" - for you non-scio lurkers out there ;) I'm not sure if I understand why you'd repeat it. I'm sure there's a good reason or you wouldn't have done so, but isn't there also a chance that running a process after you've already achieved the EP can hang you up?

[Vinaire]

My Brother!

challenge

Hi sister... love you! :)

.

[Veda]

Confused.com

Which entity should I address here?

The one with two brains and three eyes.

[Gottabrain]

Mark, thank you for a more polite answer. Honestly.

I rarely post in the FZ area. When I do, it is because the topic grabs my interest or because there is something specific I want to discuss with the FZ. But I hold my tongue on many of my opinions while here and try to be respectful. Because I respect others' rights to believe in whatever they want, even broccoli with ice cream as a bridge to freedom - as long as it does not hurt the rights of others - particularly children.

Regardless - it is true that both groups have slammed each other. It is also true that you are not shy about doing so on the regular exscn boards that are not FZ.

Point made both ways.

[I told you I was trouble]

Mark, thank you for a more polite answer. Honestly.

I rarely post in the FZ area. When I do, it is because the topic grabs my interest or because there is something specific I want to discuss with the FZ. But I hold my tongue on many of my opinions while here and try to be respectful. Because I respect others' rights to believe in whatever they want, even broccoli with ice cream as a bridge to freedom - as long as it does not hurt the rights of others - particularly children.

Regardless - it is true that both groups have slammed each other. It is also true that you are not shy about doing so on the regular exscn boards that are not FZ.

Point made both ways.

A point well made ... both ways, Gotta.

:yes:

[Terril park]

I can understand repeating something because you didn't actually get the EP as promised. But if you get the EP (meaning "End Phenomena" - for you non-scio lurkers out there ;) I'm not sure if I understand why you'd repeat it. I'm sure there's a good reason or you wouldn't have done so, but isn't there also a chance that running a process after you've already achieved the EP can hang you up?

CBR advised that those who hadn't gone clear on the clearing course,
look at the CC platens when doing OT 2. So I did that and it was incredibly active for a short while, and then presumably the composite case was
kicked apart some more, so I did a bit more OT 2 and had another run on OT 3.
Was well worth while.

Smilla, don't know what your problem was but it sounds like something that should have been addressed on life repair rather than OT 2.

[Type4_PTS]

OK, thanks for the explanation Terril. :)

[Voltaire's Child]

Mark, thank you for a more polite answer. Honestly.

I rarely post in the FZ area. When I do, it is because the topic grabs my interest or because there is something specific I want to discuss with the FZ. But I hold my tongue on many of my opinions while here and try to be respectful. Because I respect others' rights to believe in whatever they want, even broccoli with ice cream as a bridge to freedom - as long as it does not hurt the rights of others - particularly children.

Regardless - it is true that both groups have slammed each other. It is also true that you are not shy about doing so on the regular exscn boards that are not FZ.

Point made both ways.

Not to be upsetting to anyone, but, truly, I've been on this and other boards a long long time and the only times I have seen Free Zoners be negative about those who are not is after having had something derogatory said to or about them. Whereas the inverse is not the case.

[Dulloldfart]

LRH commented on OT 2 materials that in the future word meanings may change and one has to use the def that gives most TA.


He actually said to use the one that gives the most lasting read. In discussing this with my tech peers at Saint Hill we decided this meant to write down the three (say) options and call all three alternately, 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 1 etc. marking the reads, and after a bit only one would still read and so one should use that one.

Funnily enough, there was a foreign student who was doing OT2 in her native language. She noticed a mistake in the "official" translation, and applied this bit of tech to it and came up with a better translation for the word in question. I don't remember if she was applauded or shredded for her initiative.

I have no comment as to any underlying truth to this little bit of Hubbard tech. I could understand about the one that gives the most TA, but merely repeating a read (where the needle goes back to where it started to fall from) has no TA in it at all.

Paul

[Smilla]

CBR advised that those who hadn't gone clear on the clearing course,
look at the CC platens when doing OT 2. So I did that and it was incredibly active for a short while, and then presumably the composite case was
kicked apart some more, so I did a bit more OT 2 and had another run on OT 3.
Was well worth while.

Smilla, don't know what your problem was but it sounds like something that should have been addressed on life repair rather than OT 2.
It was addressed on every level from L/R to OT VII. I managed to get some results on the issue from outside Scn, so it's OK. Thanks for your reply.

[Veda]

Nothing says "bait and switch" better than Scientology.

Scientology: Where "walking the road to Total Freedom" becomes "digging a trench" to Xenu.

Scientology, confidentially "using electronics to [subtly] overwhelm with significance" since 1965. http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=381568&postcount=13 Now in our forty fifth year of implanting.

Public Service announcement: http://forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=77478&postcount=14

[Mark A. Baker]

Well bro/sister.

I came into Scientology and stayed in Scientology, because I was repeatedly promised that it would handle a certain serious problem I had. I had no interest in Hubbard or his cosmology - just wanted to deal with the problem. OT II was so impersonal and totally unrelated to me, that I was hugely disappointed, and felt betrayed. But I did it and found it boring. It must have fallen within your area of interest.

Does that explain it well enough, bro/sister?

I think BB has a good point. Sounds like YOUR concerns were never addressed. Whatever our differences about the subject of scientology I see that as a failure on the part of the church to address that in which you as a pc had an interest. I see that as a violation of fundamental principles.


Mark A. Baker

[Mark A. Baker]

It was addressed on every level from L/R to OT VII. I managed to get some results on the issue from outside Scn, so it's OK. Thanks for your reply.

Glad to hear it.


Mark A. Baker

[Smilla]

Glad to hear it.


Mark A. Baker
Thanks Mark :)

[I told you I was trouble]

Not to be upsetting to anyone, but, truly, I've been on this and other boards a long long time and the only times I have seen Free Zoners be negative about those who are not is after having had something derogatory said to or about them. Whereas the inverse is not the case.


Is that because they think it is 'natter' and therefore indicative of hideous 'overts/witholds' ... ?

Lol.

Perhaps we should be happy at how WELL we do all get on ... because really, under the circumstances, we do. I know that I am very fond of a lot of the FZ/indi scio's that come here, but I don't agree with the hubbard glorification at all.

:eyeroll:


In the end though, it is an EX scio board so the FZ/indi guys may never feel totally comfortable even in their own threads.

[Voltaire's Child]

[/B]


Is that because they think it is 'natter' and therefore indicative of hideous 'overts/witholds' ... ?

Lol.

Perhaps we should be happy at how WELL we do all get on ... because really, under the circumstances, we do. I know that I am very fond of a lot of the FZ/indi scio's that come here, but I don't agree with the hubbard glorification at all.

:eyeroll:


In the end though, it is an EX scio board so the FZ/indi guys may never feel totally comfortable even in their own threads.


No, not really. It's mainly that nobody really likes being denigrated and most people WILL tend to stand up for themselves.

And, well, yes this is an ex member board. But it does have a Free Zone section and an Independent section. I find myself bemused by those who come to those sections and indicate dismay over seeing pro tech or "advertising" (of Scn) posts there. That's like going to a forum with a recipe section and being unhappy about seeing piecrust recipes.

[AnonLover]

And, well, yes this is an ex member board. But it does have a Free Zone section and an Independent section. I find myself bemused by those who come to those sections and indicate dismay over seeing pro tech or "advertising" (of Scn) posts there. That's like going to a forum with a recipe section and being unhappy about seeing piecrust recipes.

good analogy... much better than the one i was coming to realize with all the drama in this thread:

The Freezone subforum up here is ESMBr's politically correct equivalent of the thunderdome on WWP, trolls trolling trolls albeit a different game on a different playground :D

(j/k :lol:)

[Voltaire's Child]

Weeellll...I have a different thought on the matter.

ESMB had something like a tdome but it got removed. It was called The Bitching Post. Things got too disharmonious and so it got removed. The Bitching Post was analagous to The Thunderdome. At this point, the closest thing ESMB has to The Thunderdome is "Grudge Matches".

[I told you I was trouble]

No, not really. It's mainly that nobody really likes being denigrated and most people WILL tend to stand up for themselves.

And, well, yes this is an ex member board. But it does have a Free Zone section and an Independent section. I find myself bemused by those who come to those sections and indicate dismay over seeing pro tech or "advertising" (of Scn) posts there.That's like going to a forum with a recipe section and being unhappy about seeing piecrust recipes.

:hmm:

Not if the main board is actually about the benefits of fasting or dieting ... because essentially the two groups would be diametrically opposed, even if the main board members were once very into cooking and eating, themselves!

Lets just face facts ... it is a miracle that we all get on as well as we do here ... and leave it at that.

:yes:

[Voltaire's Child]

:hmm:

Not if the main board is actually about the benefits of fasting or dieting ... because essentially the two groups would be diametrically opposed, even if the main board members were once very into cooking and eating, themselves!

Lets just face facts ... it is a miracle that we all get on as well as we do here ... and leave it at that.

:yes:

If the main board were about dieting then I'd have to wonder why there was a recipe section on it. And if there was such a section, I'd not have reservations about anyone's attempt to post therein because I'd figure they saw the name of the section.

It's like when smoking used to be legal in public places out here and there were smoking sections and non smoking sections. Of course people don't want second hand smoke and I get that. I hate it myself. But I always thought people who were upset at smokers lighting up in the smoking section and who gave those smokers a bad time were misplacing their anger. If you tell someone there's a section for them, then they're gonna use it. If you think that's bad, then your issue is with the creation of such a section, not with those who read the title of the section and went there.

[I told you I was trouble]

:lol:

My last post on this ...

Sticking with your analogy ... (and with tiresome feelings of Déjà vu) ...

Nah, I always liked to see the smokers in their allotted corner ... it reminded me of how lucky I was not to have the urge to smoke.


:tease:

[uniquemand]

I just wish they smoked something more interesting than cigarettes. Ever done objectives stoned?

[I told you I was trouble]

Per Voltaire's Child's analogy.

Non smoker = EX scientologist.

Smoker= Scientologist (FZ/Indi etc).


A recent example of why IMHO, the 'smokers and the non smokers' sometimes clash ... (and please note, it has nothing to do with the ESMB owner setting up an area for the smokers to go and share a ciggie or due to a non smoker denigrating a smoker).

This 'smoker' (below) likes to drop off a few cases of his smelly fags to the non smokers, the very same 'non smokers' that are getting on with life and doing really well and are working hard to kill off the 'smoking' industry ... due to the damage it does.

He drops his fags off gently and pleasantly, but constantly and in the main part of the board (non smokers part).



Below from the new members section of this EX scio board ...


Originally Posted by Feral

After prolonged exposure to "the tech" I can attest to having lost more extra sensory shit than I gained.

Now, wheres the examiner?




Reply by Blue Spirit

I'm sure there are people or a person that could repair the damage done with
all of those 6-month checks and the overrun (at least in some form) of OT-7.
It is only Bypassed Charge, after all.


I lied when I said it was my last post in this thread ... I'm like that.

:yes:

[Voltaire's Child]

Of course, as they say, all analogies limp...and where mine goes a tad bit wrong is that the FZ and indies are also ex members, too, just as Feral, ITYIWT, myself, Emma and scores and scores of others are.

So we're all ex members and we're all critics of the cult. That really should be the bottom line.