Scientology Review Website

Discussion in 'MartyWorld' started by Daisy, Nov 9, 2012.

View Users: View Users
  1. Anonycat

    Anonycat Crusader

    I think that Clear and OT are fictional, is enough.
     
  2. Smilla

    Smilla Ordinary Human

    My Review:

    Absolutely

    Nothing

    I
    n


    Scientology

    Works As Claimed

    Yeah, it does stuff, but not what's claimed

    [​IMG]



     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2012
  3. Freeminds

    Freeminds Bitter defrocked apostate

    This is such a joke.

    To be a Cult of Rathbun "independent" Scientologist means going back to a version of Scientology that existed (or perhaps, never existed but is remembered with rose-tinted spectacles) sometime before 1986.

    Miscavige is a "squirrel", right? Well, yes. He's made alterations to the writings of LRH. And why? Because the poor, simple-minded little arsehole has spent a quarter of a century trying to make LRH's promises pay off. He's trying to produce the Übermensch, the expansion and the respectability that Hubbard claimed would happen... and surprise surprise, they've failed to happen. One reason being, because of the Internet.

    So a new 'wish-I-was-Miscavige' appeared, sacked everything post 1986 (except, oooh: shiny eMeters! Must have!) and that sucker then winds the clock back to 1986 and follows the same path: trying to make the Tech work.

    The fact that the Tech has never worked, that not one single Clear has been demonstrated to exist in the last six decades... well that's just because, er: because you're glib. You're an SP. No case on post! Etc., etc...

    There are some mistakes that a person simply has to make for himself, I suppose. Thankfully, there are fewer people stuck in the system this time, and the cultic machinery is less thoroughly developed to keep them stuck there... and the Internet is a heck of a lot more accessible than it was in 1986, and journalists are wise to the scam.

    Basically, this is going to be ugly, but at least it's going to be short. If anybody wants to sing the praises of Cheapzone Scientology, go ahead and do it. Freedom of speech is something the other side want to take away, not me... but I think we all know how magnificently useless LRH was, from the perspective of all these years.
     
  4. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    PAUL

    "I did Expanded Grade 0 in the mid-70s. It took a hundred hours or so, and I got quite a lot out of it, in that it did become much easier for me to talk to people. "

    Nice reviews!

    I'm a bit puzzled why despite saying good things about many
    services, [ as above] you always say you would never recommend it to a friend. Is that because you would recommend your auditing
    modules? Or did you feel mentioning these would get you moderated? Or some other reason?
     
  5. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Yes. :)

    Plus I wouldn't want to give the idea to someone that Scn was a good thing to get into.

    Paul
     
  6. Smilla

    Smilla Ordinary Human

    [STRIKE]Free[/STRIKE]Zone Grade 0 EP = Ability to get banned from any forum without ever figuring out why.
     
  7. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    Thanks for posting your reviews.

    I do think that TP makes a point - unintentionally - for the difficulty encountered when attempting to penetrate the Scientological mind, a mind which regards anything positive asserted about the "tech" as proof of the validity of the "tech" and, therefore, the "Bridge," and anything negative - such as your not wanting a friend to do ("in-tech") Scientology - as an odd non sequitur that indicates "misunderstood words," or perhaps an "ARC break" on your part, and thus should be dismissed, with the positive statement remaining.

    That's why, perhaps, explaining a little further why you answer "No," to the "Would you like a friend..." etc., question might, IMO, be a good idea. :)


    In case anyone is wondering why I answered , "No," it's because __________________.


    Something to ponder.
     
  8. Anonycat

    Anonycat Crusader

    I'm feeling kind of left out of the review site. So I will just say how many laughs with good friends I had while listening to, and talking about the original tape series. I have about 1,400, starting with the first one. LOVED the pre-recorded fanfare before Ron spoke.

    To be brief, I liked Ron's early lectures so much because he thinks of really wild stuff when he's doing his time-traveling soul thing, and writes the funniest things. Ron is dead and gone, but the laughs continue.

    The other part of my review is on scientology as a whole. It is the worst social plague of my generation and my children's lifetime. How this horrific cult still operates its business is beyond me. I can only put my full weight into dismantling the cult as quickly as possible. That is the greatest good for the greatest number.

    [​IMG]
     
  9. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    http://www.scientologyreviews.com/scientology-lectures

    There are 63 items under "lectures" that can be reviewed. Most of them have zero reviews. Go for it. :)

    Paul
     
  10. Anonycat

    Anonycat Crusader

    I would, but I have a funny feeling that if I invested the time to write something good, I would only be found "insincere", or one of the other membership filters, and it wouldn't be posted by the moderators. I was just listening to the Cat People bit someone suggested, and have plenty of funny quotes in mind though.
     
  11. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Yes, definitely needs pondering.

    In case anyone is wondering why I answered, "No," it's because I think overall Hubbard was a psychopathic conman and inveterate liar, and absolutely nothing he says can be taken at face value. It is very hard to spot the source of the procedures he uses as he stole from many, and their value is hard to determine also because users tend to lie about their results "since they don't want to make Scientology look bad, it being Man's only hope and all." Someone with decades of experience who has extricated themselves from the webs of deceit may be able to cherry-pick out the good bits, but for a newbie or someone still entangled, no way. I recommend using PaulsRobot3 at http://paulsrobot3.com, which gives sessions 24/7 free of charge to anyone in the world, using amazing stuff that contains some of those cherries plucked from Scientology, but mostly new stuff that is far better and requires no faith at all — it's all "try it and see." It violates many of Hubbard's cherished theories plucked out of his ass about how impossible such a thing is, but, contrary to expectation, per the dozens of published successes (mostly attributable) it seems to work. Awkward, isn't it?

    Yeah, I'll add that to each review. :)

    Paul
     
  12. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    :) Actually, something like that would be good - for your last :melodramatic: review on that site, but even then I'd drop the "sociopathic."

    Short of that, some kind of elaboration on "Why, the 'No'?", I think, would be helpful - if it were allowed.

    That's just my opinion, of course.
     
  13. BunnySkull

    BunnySkull Silver Meritorious Patron

    Since these inDependents are so on source then they should just call this site, "Indie success stories & BTW DM is an SP" and be done with it.

    Rebranding "success stories" as "customer reviews" is just Hall's sad little marketing gimmick. I know he thinks he can save Scientology via marketing but he is wrong. He's just wasting his time turd polishing.

    Steve's a Fanatical, obnoxious and totally deluded man; or more succiently a true Scientologist.
     
  14. Free Being Me

    Free Being Me Crusader

    I agree. I've looked over the isite and don't plan on returning as I don't wish to increase the hit rate or post a Hub book review that can be twisted into what ever purpose serves SH's Hubbard based whims or critique the site to improve it's marketing message.
     
  15. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    Early indications are that he's being surprisingly relaxed about what reviews are allowed.

    This could be a good sign, or it could be an application of one of Hubbard's patterns: "BIG FRONT DOOR, LET THE REINS LOOSE."

    I see no harm in giving this person the benefit of the doubt and hoping for the best. After all, people can, and do, change.

    Let's wait and see. :)


    _____________________________________​

    From a 1986 interview of Martin Samuels, former Mission Holder, and founder of the Delphian School, from the 'Reflections' chapter of the book, 'L. Ron Hubbard, Messiah or Madman?' http://www.amazon.com/reader/0942637577?_encoding=UTF8&ref_=sib_dp_pt :

    "Hubbard operated according to a couple of key patterns.

    "The first pattern involved basically decent well intentioned people... no one was able to rise in the organization to a point of any real proximity to him, without being attacked and vilified...

    "The next pattern: It's reap and rape.
    Hubbard would let the reins loose. He'd let people believe they really could get on with it... He'd let people believe they really could prosper to the full extent of their own ability, and enjoy the fruits of their labor.

    "And, with that kind of freedom, prosperity does occur, Inevitably, though, he'd come along and rape and pillage and rip off and take what had been produced. The most dramatic example of this was '82, '83, when he 'raped' his most decent people in management along with the mission holders, and looted the entire mission network.

    "And look at this pattern... He surrounded himself with absolute hooligans as 'managers'; guys who beat the shit out of people. This man, who 'is this OT, the author of Science of Survival, completely able to predict human behavior', surrounded himself with ruthless people - like Miscavige - who got there because they emulated Hubbard's savagery. They emulated his total willingness to completely break, use, and discard another person.

    "And then after their hands were so bloody - and the only reason their hands were bloody was that they were doing what Hubbard wanted - when it finally started to get to the point where it couldn't be tolerated by people anymore, Hubbard wiped them out. Then he said. 'My God! I didn't know!' Scapegoat. He even did that to his own wife, who went to jail in his place..."



    ________________________​

    Of course, Miscavige is the latest scapegoat for Scientology not working as promised, and that pattern is not going to be dropped any time soon, but who knows about the seemingly relaxed acceptance policy re. Reviews? Sincere? Not sincere? A gimmick? A ploy? A sign of change?

    As it stands now, it is an opportunity to - tactfully - reach some people - So why not?
     
  16. Free Being Me

    Free Being Me Crusader

    [​IMG]

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17075092/Steve Hall -Michael Moore.docx

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17075092/Steve Hall attacking auditors on Indie Scientologist FB group.docx

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17075092/WHO ARE WHAT IS THE FREEZONE.docx

    1. "I, am running out a group engram and I'm actually using the tech to do it which you apparently know NOTHING about."

    2. "How many people have I gotten in session running out that group engram? Oh, I have 2.2 million hits so far. You do the math."

    3. "Group Dianetics is a tech. I studied it. I am applying it. I got everyone into session and I was the first one to do so. If each person visited my website 50 times, that's still 44,000 people I have audited in 4 years. Let that sink into your brain dead head."

    4. "You have the audacity to come into our group and suggest we are just an attacking Miscavige. No, jack ass. I'm auditing more people than you've ever done in your life all added together. We are using the tech. We are auditing. AND we are exposing Miscavige."

    5. "I am a Class IV auditor and one of the best group auditors anyone ever heard of."

    6. "I'm not management. I'm just someone who knows what an enemy line is and who is not afraid to expose them for what they are."

    7. "And for info, I DID visit the FBI before I even built Scientology-cult.com — part of my research during 2008. They told me the primary barrier I faced was that the truth was so incredible it was hard to believe. My solution was to create a multiple viewpoint system (LRH management tech) online called Scientology-cult.com to start the process of running out the GROUP ENGRAM. I personally was the first to do that. "

    8. "We are a FIRST."

    9. "Being an Independent Scientologist does not mean you have to spend all day every day exposing CoS corruption and crimes. But you call yourself an Independent Scientologist with a capital “I” you better damn well support the attack as THAT IS the core ideal that made us what we are. How do I know? Because I was the person who came up with the entire concept in December 2008 after a year of study and investigation, then built Scientology-cult.com to launch the idea and then worked with Marty and many others for the last few years to help turn that concept into a movement. So I, of all people, am qualified to define what has come to be known as an Independent Scientologist. Like it or not, I was the first one and that’s the truth."

    10. "I myself started Scientology-cult.com to run out our 3rd dynamic engram. It IS Group Dianetics in action. How did I learn Group Dianetics? I studied it in the 1990s — read everything LRH ever wrote on the subject. With 2.2 million hits and counting, that equates to getting tens of thousands of people into the session of running out this group engram."

    11. " We never sold out. We didn’t desert our comrades. We do not work for OSA. We will not deal. We remain loyal to the human race. We are a FIRST and that is something to be proud of."

    12. "And that’s why we have the support of the world and the wind at our backs."

    13. "I'm trying to get your ethics in and they are out."

    14. "I'm exposing you as the imposter you are."

    15. "I worked undercover for the GO for two years. My job: break up SP comm lines. My tools: All the tech in reverse."

    16. "(fwiw, I'm not an Independent Scientologist, I'm a Scientologist - period)"

    17. "Indie Scientology is growing for one reason, we are getting Ethics in on the CoS. That's the only reason — we are doing what is right despite personal cost."

    18. "After studying the scene for a year, I spoke up LOUD and CLEAR in Scientology-cult, starting in Dec 2008. I didn’t make any agreements with the Church of any kind because I believed in HELPING those still in and the rest of the planet. Marty came online almost immediately thereafter and he unleashed his powerhouse of HELP. As a result we grew fast and overtook all earlier efforts within months. Since then we have enabled an entire landslide of people to leave the Church."

    19. "What about the rest of us still in the Church trying to figure out what is going on?"

    20. "And as I sit here being dev-ted by you and your friends, I'm actually working on another pieced of that infrastructure."

    21. "My friends Marc and Claire Headley sued the Church and STOPPED the practice of forced abortions."

    22. "The Indies aren't the "new group" we are the fiercest mother fuckers DM ever ran into and we are going to finish him period as we've done many times before throughout history, and then restore THE BRIDGE TO FREEDOM IN FULL."

    23. "So who is DM that the entirety of Scientology — every person in it — went PTS to him? I'll tell you who he is: dead meat."

    24. "You guys don't get what we are going. We are doing BOTH. We are getting in ethics AND starting groups, and centers and a whole new community-based structure. You aren't dealing with my "charge" — I'm getting your ethics in because you guys keep wanting us to recognize that you were here first."

    25. "Actually I like all these guys, I respect them tremendously and know they are helping. But they should not be here to recruit people out of Independent Scientology. It's not "counter intention" it's "other determinism." We are making it safe for them and everyone to operate. If they would get their ethics in, we could promote them on our websites and send them pcs. That will soon be happening in greater quantity."

    26. "You just saw the release of iScientology.org. There's something else coming and I've been working around the clock for over a month on these two projects to get them done. We are putting in various things to handle these functions on the cycle of production and org board."

    27. "Every month Roy, 1.2 million people Google the word "Scientology." That is a river of people. Not one drop of that river is getting onto the Bridge in the Church. I am doing some engineering to divert that entire river into our front door and up the Bridge. But before you divert a river, you had better have some structure in place for that river to flow. So I have been putting that structure into place so it has somewhere to go. You have been seeing some of the pieces appear one by one. Freeandable.com — where any field auditor can list for free and pcs can be sent there to find auditors near to them. They can even search by zip code. Then you just saw iScietonlogy.org, our flagship site for Independent Scientology where people are going to learn about us as a group. There are two more giant pieces I'm putting into place that will come before those the others do divert that river and drive people into our delivery resources so they can move up the Bridge. But as LRH said in a Flag Order, do not "let the enemy in on our operations" So I can't brief everyone on exactly what I'm doing. What you can do is help me by getting your friends all on the same page, where should be."

    28. "I attacked for good reasons that are written into the very policies Gayle Smith has copied into this thread. "Class VIII" doesn't make someone in ethics. It is a help flow to get ethics in."

    29. "I slept 3 1/2 hours last night because as I said I am working around the clock to get this next project finished for Independent Scientology. I don't get paid for any of this. For iScientology.org I worked 215 hours in 12 days."

    30. "Right now I'm trying to debug some design problems..."

    31. "By the way, I get very testy and short tempered when I'm tired, incase that blows down for anyone."


    I don't see how cutting Steve Hall any slack for being open minded, regarding his allowance of less than flattering posts of Hubbard/Scientology on his iSio site, is anything more than P.R. to mislead.
     
  17. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Gold Meritorious Sponsor


    Thanks Paul.

    Of course your post got rejected for including a link to ESMB.

    That's why I said (my earlier post) that there is NO WAY they would ever publish my review. Because I knew that I would include a LINK to the thread on ESMB about Hubbard admitting that DMSMH doesn't make a Clear.

    So, this proves my point that they are censoring what people have to say or outright refusing to publish an "honest" review if they think it will cause damage to their precious sales or marketing of Scientology.

    What frightfully inept hypocrites! Inviting people to post their opinion (Review) and then telling them it is the wrong opinion and won't be published.

    I did not submit a post I already knew they would reject for that exact reason. And I had/have no intention of editing my posts to please some deluded, alien-hunting cult member.

    I reject ALL handlings and corrections from ALL Scientologists at ALL times.

    Wooooo, it feels sooooooo great to be away from their f*cking handlings!!! lololollololololol.
     
  18. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Gold Meritorious Sponsor


    Well, so far I am one-for-one on correctly predicting that the Indies would reject my review of DMSMH.

    Here is my next prediction. . .

    If I changed that one paragraph:

    To:

    Then they would censor and reject that Review too.

    They are frauds. They say they want your "honest opinion" and "facts". But when I provide a link to HUBBARD SPEAKING IN HIS OWN WORDS ABOUT DMSMH, they reject it.

    They even reject Ron's facts when it doesn't match their lies!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOL


    Hipocrisy Hipocrisy Hooray!!!
     
  19. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Here's a paste of my next 6 reviews, taken from "my review page" at http://www.scientologyreviews.com/component/jreviews/my-reviews?Itemid=&user=119. That page is easier to read than the bare text below, which I am not going to bother to reformat beyond bolding my review headings and the site's service names.

    Paul

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

    Reviews written by Paul Adams

    49 results - showing 1 - 49

    TRs and Objectives
    Auditing Services

    Overall rating

    3.0
    Applicability (hits home)

    3.0
    Easy-to-do

    3.0
    Wow factor

    2.0
    Results

    4.0
    Reviewed by Paul Adams November 12, 2012
    #1 Reviewer -
    Good bang for the buck

    I sup'd students on this in the early 90s. At the time I thought it was a pretty damn good course, that didn't have a whole lot of theory but had them do TRs 0-9, little bits of auditing and process theory, and then lots of auditing, both giving and receiving. They ended up getting about 100 hours of auditing each, with minimal interference necessary from the sup or a review auditor beyond checking for end phenomena.

    WHERE I STAND
    I am a...
    ex-Scientologist
    PROS AND CONS (OPTIONAL)
    Pros
    Very much a practical course, lots of auditing, not interminable theory.
    BOTTOM LINE...
    Recommend it to a friend?
    No
    Comments (0) Was this review helpful to you? 00Report this review

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

    Self Analysis (book auditing)
    Auditing Services

    Overall rating

    3.3
    Applicability (hits home)

    4.0
    Easy-to-do

    4.0
    Wow factor

    2.0
    Results

    3.0
    Reviewed by Paul Adams November 12, 2012
    #1 Reviewer -
    Good introduction to Scn auditing

    My own Self Analysis was done as part of Expanded ARC S/W around 1973, and is detailed in that review. Around 1990 as Staff Courses Practical Sup in the Hollywood Guarantee Building I supervised the HQS Course for a couple of dozen new staff when it was on their training line-up, and Self Analysis was part of it. The checksheet included two lists, and they ended up averaging about 10-15 hours, co-audited. Almost all of the students had neither done nor received any auditing before.

    Self Analysis is ideal for this kind of first approach. Some rudimentary TRs and theory/drilling of key auditing basics, and bang, into session! Good stuff if you're keen on Scientology.

    It can also be audited from the book at home by oneself. The line that it is "not solo auditing, it is Hubbard auditing the person" is rubbish, as quite honestly, almost any Scientology procedure can effectively (but not approved by Hubbard) be solo audited if you are a good enough auditor. Still, if "solo auditing" is defined in such a way as to only include the things one is "supposed" to solo audit, then it becomes impossible by definition. Ahem. But I digress. Self Analysis is allowed solo auditing right at the beginning of Scientology, although you're not allowed to call it by that name, and you're supposed to believe that Hubbard is auditing you through the pages of the book.

    WHERE I STAND
    I am a...
    ex-Scientologist
    PROS AND CONS (OPTIONAL)
    Pros
    Good way of getting your feet wet in auditing yourself, and no-one will call you a squirrel!
    Cons
    The wins can cause one to mistakenly think that Scientology as a whole is a good thing.
    BOTTOM LINE...
    Recommend it to a friend?
    No
    Comments (0) Was this review helpful to you? 00Report this review

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

    R6EW
    Auditing Services

    Overall rating

    2.5
    Applicability (hits home)

    2.0
    Easy-to-do

    3.0
    Wow factor

    3.0
    Results

    2.0
    Reviewed by Paul Adams November 12, 2012
    #1 Reviewer -
    Awful name: it's sexy but only if you can understand it

    I supervised this at Saint Hill in the early 80s. Not many people did it, but there were one or two. If you look at the HCOBs from this time and the various R6EW* alternatives, you might get the idea it can fairly complex. However, R6EW is actually pretty simple, and not like the complex variations at all.

    If you filter out the theory, the explanations of what it is supposed to do like cure hunger in Africa (joke), then it is a simple procedure that in the small number of cases I saw produced an acceptable result.

    WHERE I STAND
    I am a...
    ex-Scientologist
    PROS AND CONS (OPTIONAL)
    Pros
    It's got some wow factor if you are into believing Hubbard's PR. It's not as cookie-cutter as related actions.
    BOTTOM LINE...
    Recommend it to a friend?
    No
    Comments (0) Was this review helpful to you? 00Report this review

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

    Purification Rundown
    Auditing Services

    Overall rating

    2.8
    Applicability (hits home)

    3.0
    Easy-to-do

    2.0
    Wow factor

    3.0
    Results

    3.0
    Reviewed by Paul Adams November 12, 2012
    #1 Reviewer -
    Be careful!

    I did this at Saint Hill as soon as the sauna opened there. There were about 20 naked men squashed into the male sauna. After several weeks of that I certainly got flat on naked male bodies. It also made a nice change from working on post all the time.

    Physically, I felt much cleaner after completing it. The most significant change I noticed was that drinking coffee no longer gave me a headache. I don't know why it should have had that result, but it did.

    The New OT4 HCOB explains in great detail why the Purif should be considered to be a spiritual rehabilitation program and not a physical one, as it would appear to almost anyone. When I first saw that HCOB I thought, "Wow, this would make *amazing* Purif promo, although it will never happen." Now, I think the explanation in that HCOB is ridiculous.

    Healthwise I have read much about the dangers of the extreme doses of vitamins required if you are on the program for any length of time (over a month?), especially niacin causing liver damage, and I have met someone who was on the Purif for a year and blames it for her chronic endocrine troubles. So if you insist on doing it "per the book," just make sure the medical doctor associated with your Purif delivery knows his stuff.

    WHERE I STAND
    I am a...
    ex-Scientologist
    PROS AND CONS (OPTIONAL)
    Pros
    Can be fun, and many people report benefits.
    Cons
    High vitamin doses can be dangerous if you are on it for a long time, and if the doctor assigned to the program isn't doing his job.
    BOTTOM LINE...
    Recommend it to a friend?
    No
    Comments (0) Was this review helpful to you? 00Report this review

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

    New OT IV
    Auditing Services

    Overall rating

    2.0
    Applicability (hits home)

    1.0
    Easy-to-do

    4.0
    Wow factor

    2.0
    Results

    1.0
    Reviewed by Paul Adams November 12, 2012
    #1 Reviewer -
    Usually a short action

    I completed this in maybe 7 hours and perhaps 5 sessions. I started it in 1984 and finished in around 1992. Ah, the joys of getting audited as a non-paying staff member! By 1992 I was far more interested in getting it done so I could get onto other stuff than any possible case gains from doing it.

    The theory of this as covered in the long HCOB about it is far-fetched, but some real stuff does seem to get dug up and addressed by the people run on it. The general attitude I observed with people getting the RD at Saint Hill while I worked in the NOTs division there was that it was just something they had to do between the wow levels of OT3 and NOTs, so let's get it over with and onto the "hot" stuff.

    WHERE I STAND
    I am a...
    ex-Scientologist
    BOTTOM LINE...
    Recommend it to a friend?
    No
    Comments (0) Was this review helpful to you? 00Report this review

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

    OT III
    Auditing Services

    Overall rating

    3.5
    Applicability (hits home)

    3.0
    Easy-to-do

    3.0
    Wow factor

    5.0
    Results

    3.0
    Reviewed by Paul Adams November 12, 2012
    #1 Reviewer -
    The biggie (the promo says)

    I could copy/paste into this review much of what I said about OT2, but I won't. I will just say that doing the procedure seems to produce good results if the person is well set up case-wise, and well-trained and confident as a solo auditor. I used to sup this at Saint Hill and ITO and am very familiar with it.

    Interestingly, I found that doing the procedure even badly can produce the expected results and F/Ning and one's attention being released from that area. The theory is preposterous, but I'm not really sure what is being addressed on this level. It does seem to be genuine personal phenomena and not delusion, but as to *what* exactly, well, who knows?

    In 2004 I wrote and put online (they are still there) highly-detailed checksheets for OT2 and OT3 based on my familiarity with the CofS materials and experience sup'ing. I couldn't reproduce the original materials for copyright reasons, but I did link to the relevant Prometheus Reports articles covering the same ground. Today, however, I realise that all this precision is not needed at all.

    Still, if you think your salvation depends on doing this level, go for it.

    At Saint Hill in 1985 I spoke to many people who had done OT3 earlier, and basically grilled them as to what they understood of the materials when they audited the level. Man! Many of them hadn't a clue what they were doing, but still managed as required. I didn't think the thought through at the time as the environment wasn't conducive to such doubts, but now, well.

    WHERE I STAND
    I am a...
    ex-Scientologist
    PROS AND CONS (OPTIONAL)
    Pros
    Great status value! Interesting style of auditing as you shouldn't have done it before. Can handle stuff other styles of auditing won't have addressed precisely enough.
    Cons
    Preposterous theory. Confidentiality is completely unnecessary.
    BOTTOM LINE...
    Recommend it to a friend?
    No
    Comments (0) Was this review helpful to you? 00Report this review

    -----

    <snipped by Paul as the earlier ones have been pasted to ESMB already>
    OT II
     
  20. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Have you read my reviews he published there? I've pasted them all (so far) into this thread, posts #97 and #119.

    I'm still listed as #1 reviewer, which only means that I have had the most reviews published. There have been 22 votes as to the "helpfulness" or not of those reviews, and my current score is 20 positive and 2 negative. Now, that score does surprise me. Wouldn't it only take one KSW nut to nix a large number of them? It's not as if one has to write a CSW explaining why the review is considered helpful or not. Wouldn't it all be automatic? I can't really be bothered to look up the Joomla Reviews software to see.

    Paul
     

Share This Page