ESMB and The Freezone - let's have it out!

[Vinaire]

...

well I guess we just have to agree to disagree, seems to me that this is going to come down to preferences.

Or to some kind of a "sucker" quotient, or "an ability to differentiate" quotient.

I do consider both Alanzo and Mick to be very high on the Intelligence quotient.

Why should I distract myself by the phrase "study tech"? Why do I have to "take it or leave it" concerning whatever is packed inside the phrase "study tech." Why shouldn't I be able to think for myself even when my stance got me in trouble with "Cramming Officers" like Dennis Erlich?

.

 

[Mick Wenlock]

Or to some kind of a "sucker" quotient, or "an ability to differentiate" quotient.

I do consider both Alanzo and Mick to be very high on the Intelligence quotient.

Why should I distract myself by the phrase "study tech"? Why do I have to "take it or leave it" concerning whatever is packed inside the phrase "study tech." Why shouldn't I be able to think for myself even when my stance got me in trouble with "Cramming Officers" like Dennis Erlich?

.

you don't Vin. But the ability to differentiate between "looking a word up in a dictionary" and Hubbard's drivel would be a good one to work on (in your spare time maybe?)

Let's explore the wonderful world of the intellectual achievements and scientific discoveries and ground breaking theories that have come about because of people being able to use study tech.

What? Back already? Weren't too many of them eh?

Like all things Hubbardian - and I mean ALL - it is a pseudo technology trying very hard to masquerade as something important, and failing.

 

[ScudMuffin]

Why bother getting in trouble in the first place? If that's going to happen, take the lot or leave the lot.

 

[Alanzo]

Here comes the logician... Logic can be taken to extreme to look absurd.

All I am saying is that a truth that existed outside of Scientology still remains the same truth when used inside Scientology. An intelligent person will look at the truth and not be distracted by the wrapping.

In my view, Scientology is more than just wrapping. It may contain a house of mirrors, but it also has a useful organization of data.

.

And so Mick's statement was not false in any way.

Thanks.

Wouldn't it have been great if you could have set aside the Hubbard rhetorical attack tactics long enough to simply make your point like you did above?

I think so.

 

[olska]

...Yes, one does have to be, if not nice, at least civil to others because this board has ROCs. As do other forums on which you participate.

Is the "you" in your statement above a generalized "you," or were you referring to me specifically? If you feel that I (or anyone else) has violated the ROCs of this board, I'd suggest you report it.

I don't think that the difference between people who are just being candid about their interests and affiliations without telling others to try those things and people who ARE telling people to try those things is understood by a number of people.

I think that difference is quite well understood by most of the members of this board who do not (some may have in the past, but no longer) practice scientology.

However, maybe you're right. We should wear armbands with yellow Fs, drink out of separate fountains, be curtailed in where we can visit on the internet (didn't CofS try that??) and have our every action, thought, word and deed ratified by a super committee. I mean, this society has freedom of speech, worship, etc, but really, it shouldn't- right?

Again, with the "you" in your above statement that I've highlighted in red, is that a generalized "you"? and if so who are you (I mean you, Fluffy) referring to? Or were you referring to me specifically?

Because if you were referring to me, you/Fluffy should note that I never in all my years of posting on this forum or any other forum on the internet or in any conversation in real life (which of course you/Fluffy wouldn't know since you/Fluffy don't know me and have never been involved in a conversation with me of any kind, ever) or in any other way have ever once during my more than sixty years of life suggested or implied that, as you put it above...

We should wear armbands with yellow Fs, drink out of separate fountains, be curtailed in where we can visit on the internet (didn't CofS try that??) and have our every action, thought, word and deed ratified by a super committee. I mean, this society has freedom of speech, worship, etc, but really, it shouldn't- right?

Not my scary idea.

As I wrote in the post you quoted in the post of yours that I quoted, I favor uncensored/ unmoderated forums. I also favor in real life uncensored press and publications, art, TV, movies, etc. etc. etc. You know -- the kind of uncensored environment where people can speak out honestly about how they really think and feel about things.

For example, an environment in which if I don't like the way the scientologists (who post on this forum) behave, I am free to express my uncensored opinion about that (as I have already on this thread), without having my opinions censored.

 

[Vinaire]

And so Mick's statement was not false in any way.

Thanks.

Wouldn't it have been great if you could have set aside the Hubbard rhetorical attack tactics long enough to simply make your point like you did above?

I think so.

There is no Hubbard... it is just me. Do I scare you?

.

 

[SchwimmelPuckel]

.. truth that existed outside of Scientology still remains the same truth when used inside Scientology

One thing that nagged me even when I was in and grooming the dedicated stare.. Was that I freaquently perceived Hubbard to tell me obvious stuff that I knew already.. And that Hubbard somehow usurped credit for it.

I became worried that I myself would end up as copyrighted by L.Ron Hubbard!

 

[Alanzo]

There is no Hubbard... it is just me. Do I scare you?

.

But you still use the manipulative rhetorical tactics that you learned from Hubbard.

Or should I say that you "dramatize" the manipulative rhetorical tactics that you learned from L Ron Hubbard?

No. I won't.

I will say that you intentionally and purposefully employ inflammatory and manipulative rhetoric to distract attention from the fact that your arguments are illogical and indefensible.

Just like Hubbard did.

 

[Vinaire]

One thing that nagged me even when I was in and grooming the dedicated stare.. Was that I freaquently perceived Hubbard to tell me obvious stuff that I knew already.. And that Hubbard somehow usurped credit for it.

I became worried that I myself would end up as copyrighted by L.Ron Hubbard!

House of mirrors!

Knowledge is free. It cannot be copyrighted. Even Hubbard said so.

I gave a finger to Applied Scholastics on this point when they demanded that I need to be licensed by them to be a math tutor.

.

 

[Vinaire]

But you still use the manipulative rhetorical tactics that you learned from Hubbard.

Or should I say that you "dramatize" the manipulative rhetorical tactics that you learned from L Ron Hubbard?

No. I won't.

I will say that you intentionally and purposefully employ inflammatory and manipulative rhetoric to distract attention from the fact that your arguments are illogical and indefensible.

Just like Hubbard did.

I think you are being judgmental.

Why can't I be as scary as Hubbard? Or, this thing could just be in your mind.

.

 

[Boldgirl]

One thing that nagged me even when I was in and grooming the dedicated stare.. Was that I freaquently perceived Hubbard to tell me obvious stuff that I knew already.. And that Hubbard somehow usurped credit for it.

I became worried that I myself would end up as copyrighted by L.Ron Hubbard!

Right! I agree with that. Many times I had that same experience and then i would have to thank the picture on the wall of the dead guy for allowing me to read common sense in his golden books. I never did get used to clapping to a wall with a picture of a dead guy on it....but I did it anyway like a good little drone.

 

[Alanzo]

I think you are being judgmental.

Why can't I be as scary as Hubbard? Or, this thing could just be in your mind.

.

Nope.

I watch you do it all the time. You employ the same tactics in your dealings and arguments with others here that L Ron Hubbard employed against Scientologists.

And I just proved it too.

In fact, here's your Positioning Statement:

Vinaire
L. Ron Hubbard's ButtBoy on ESMB!
​

So no, I'm not being judgmental, and it's not all in my mind.

It's right there in your own positioning statement!

 

[Boldgirl]

Nope.

I watch you do it all the time. You employ the same tactics in your dealings and arguments with others here that L Ron Hubbard employed against Scientologists.

And I just proved it too.

In fact, here's your Positioning Statement:

Vinaire
L. Ron Hubbard's ButtBoy on ESMB!
​

So no, I'm not being judgmental, and it's not all in my mind.

It's right there in your own positioning statement!

you're right alanzo, that is it exactly in that statement above. In Hubbard's truman show, if you dont agree, it's always your fault.

 

[Escalus]

I've been desperately trying to follow this thing. All i can conclude is that we're all bozos on this bus.

 

[Alanzo]

I've been desperately trying to follow this thing. All i can conclude is that we're all bozos on this bus.

I think that's about the only reasonable conclusion that one could come to.

 

[paradox]

.... This is a global village....

Eeeyewwww. <gag> I don't mean this personally, it's just a reaction to the phrase used.

 

[Vinaire]

Nope.

I watch you do it all the time. You employ the same tactics in your dealings and arguments with others here that L Ron Hubbard employed against Scientologists.

And I just proved it too.

In fact, here's your Positioning Statement:

Vinaire
L. Ron Hubbard's ButtBoy on ESMB!
​

So no, I'm not being judgmental, and it's not all in my mind.

It's right there in your own positioning statement!

I can't argue with that.

.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Eeeyewwww. <gag> I don't mean this personally, it's just a reaction to the phrase used.

I know! It is kinda over the top politically correct...but I figure, well, even though it's annoying and I'm no fan of the people or the political party where it originated, still, if you get beyond the buzzphrase aspect of it, it is true. Also, seems to me that most people on these forums are liberals so it always cracks me up when I start seeing commentary implying that some of us should be wearing armbands with yellow Fs or bans...hmmmm....come on, it's a friggin' global village. Hillary Clinton told us so- remember?

 

[Alanzo]

I can't argue with that.

.

LOL!!!



​

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Or to some kind of a "sucker" quotient, or "an ability to differentiate" quotient.

I do consider both Alanzo and Mick to be very high on the Intelligence quotient.

Why should I distract myself by the phrase "study tech"? Why do I have to "take it or leave it" concerning whatever is packed inside the phrase "study tech." Why shouldn't I be able to think for myself even when my stance got me in trouble with "Cramming Officers" like Dennis Erlich?

.

I think one can use whatever phasing one wants but I also think that if a person's in a social situation or a forum or something where not everyone is a Scn'ist, then it's best to use everyday type terms. And if it's a universal truth then it should be relatively easy to do so.