What is r6

Discussion in 'Scientology Technology' started by ocean12, Jul 26, 2009.

View Users: View Users
  1. Here is a link if you really want to waste your time downloading it and then listening to it

    http://www.megaupload.com/?d=WC0CFYRR

    You can listen to these portions of it while you are downloading it

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVqN4ivQ_TM

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwDKg5K3in8

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6P4YV6CfI0
     
  2. Div6

    Div6 Crusader

  3. nw2394

    nw2394 Silver Meritorious Patron

    Fac One is not specifically taken up anywhere so far as I know.

    If it came up anywhere, then it would be just another incident.

    Nick
     
  4. xenusdad

    xenusdad Patron with Honors

    Cognitions...

    Clear Cognition - you mocked up your bank

    OT8 cognition - you mocked up your whole track

    Final Straw Cognition - LRH is both God and the Devil
    :omg:
     
  5. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Google >>>wikileaks scientology<<< and download the tech volumes 1950 - 84 file. "Tech Volume 14" is not a real tech volume, but 600+ pages of Power, R6EW, Clearing Course, OT I (the 1968-82 version), OT II, OT III, old OT IV, old OT V, old OT VI, old OT VII, NOTs, some of the Ls, and more. It looks mostly genuine, from what I can tell. The handwritten stuff on OT2 and 3 is accurate.

    Paul
     
  6. ocean12

    ocean12 Patron

    Man he really made it a big deal early on to not address it
     
  7. ocean12

    ocean12 Patron

    Thanks Paul, are you the Yawn-guy? If so I want to tell you I love those videos.

    Also could you please tell me what the Data series is, I have seen you quote it
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2009
  8. ocean12

    ocean12 Patron

     
  9. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Yes, I'm the Yawn Guy. Glad you like the videos.

    The Data Series is a series of PLs written by Hubbard mostly in the early 70s, supposedly concerning logic and investigatory procedure. The idea is that when you have studied and worked with these enough you can investigate any ongoing activity, large or small, and formulate the major departure from the ideal scene, the main reason(s) for that departure, and then come up with a series of steps to be taken using available resources to turn the scene around and get it moving towards the ideal scene. In Hubbard-speak this is an evaluation. You can also do a similar thing with a good situation to discover why it is doing well and what steps should be taken to get it to do even weller. :)

    This eval tech in the SO has been completely disastrous. There are two main problems. One is that the tech is not so perfect in the first place. The second is that one has to take into account various arbitraries, such as LRH policy is always perfect and so is DM's policy. So if the obvious reason for some non-optimum scene is not politically correct — like you find the real reason for a two-week course taking a year is because of DM's ghastly out-tech arbitraries — you have to find something else that will be acceptable or else you personally will wind up in the RPF. And since this new why will be wrong (you're not allowed in this case to use the right one), any program based on it is not going to handle things.

    Paul
     
  10. nw2394

    nw2394 Silver Meritorious Patron

    Well, to be fair to evaluators, there is a fundamental flaw in the CoS - that you can substitute management technology (evals, programs, networks, compliance reports and so on) for actual, experienced, capable managers.

    Nick
     
  11. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Good point. Since it was so successful, DM moved the same model over from Admin to Tech. :). Who needs actual, experienced, capable auditors any more when you've got GAT to train people on?

    (An ironic remark coming from me, of course.)

    Paul
     
  12. nw2394

    nw2394 Silver Meritorious Patron

    :lol: I don't disagree.

    To a large degree, DM has only continued what LRH started. The Bridge itself and the various classes of auditors was an attempt to get technicians to be auditors. There was, I think, a lot of merit in that in the sense that people new to auditing need to have the subject broken into small pieces. However, ultimately, I don't think you can substitute anything for mastery of the subject.

    Nick
     
  13. Lesolee (Sith Lord)

    Lesolee (Sith Lord) Patron Meritorious

    First you should know that the Clearing Course is strictly confidential in the Co$. Reveal its contents and that's it - no more bridge for you. It is "out security". Download the materials onto your computer and - yes, you guessed it - Suppressive Act.

    Right. That's got the "politics" out of the way. The Clearing Course contains a pattern of the Basic Bank. This was implanted a very long time ago. It's pretty tricky and the pattern was repeated ten times so that you might run through one of them and not realise there were 9 more runs! So it is a very long incident. People take months running the incident out using the special techniques of the Clearing Course. You would have no chance doing that with NED.

    By all means download the special Tech volume if you want to, given the instant SP declare mentioned above. All I would say is don't read it out of curiosity. Read it when you are ready to apply it. Seriously.

    Not everyone will get harmed by reading it, especially really "dead in the head" types.
     
  14. I heard if you put out of these hats on, you can read it and you'll be okay

    [​IMG]

    the hat will place an anti-gullibility force field around you protecting you from from Hubbard's dumb ass claims
     

Share This Page