datainfo. Now I wonder if I read it in the Ethics book (like, over and over)? I was on staff, so it could have been in any number of places, but I really believe it is in something that every one has read, like the Tech Dictionary or the Ethics book or the PTS/SP course. If I can't find the exact source of it, I can just say that it is a "motto among Scientologists and expected of you as a member." Something like that, and if I have to get into it more, I'll start talking about SerFacs. Many other people that have written books before me have been able to get around this. I can always see how they handled it.
Gosh I even almost remember reading, or at least listening to a lecture before clay demoing a "Service Facsimile" and the example being - something like - Bill (seemingly out of nowhere) punching you in the face and how this really had nothing to do with Bill at all (in regards to you and your responsibility). This was all about pulling things in and having overts on Bill. This seems to tie into being responsible for your own condition, as someone mentioned SerFacs possibly including that information.
It had to be written somewhere. "Verbal data" and all that, you know? We read it somewhere.
Someone else said -- sorry I'm not too great at keeping track of your handles - that taking certain concepts to the extreme (choosing to do that as a Scientologist) is koo-koo, but I do not believe that your run-of-the-mill public Scientologist would know they had to take this concept to the extreme unless they were faced with grim circumstances, i.e.: terminal illness, forced disconnections, or when suddenly Scientology justice or tech didn't work in their favor.
Let's say you inform the Ethics officer that you have a neurological disease and you'd like to use your money on account to help you and they say, "Sorry, you pulled in this illness and you can not receive any more auditing." No refunds, Bye!
Why, that's just koo-koo!