We had quite a few management changes in the eighties and after the Broeker's got dumped, I retained a healthy skepticism, alert for a possible dupe.
I seemed to be reassured by various events in the 90's, I like the debug of the VM program, a few things.
When I mentioned this in auditing in 99 I got a hell of a shock, the CS got the auditor to check for overts. I thought I was being vigilant for Scientology.
And of course now the COB thing is everywhere. COB this COB that. I can't recall any former executive in Scientology having such a cult of personality.
Sec Checks are important, and they can ask anything in session to check for charge, but as a tool of management it opens to abuse that real criticisms just get lumped with overts and introversion is used to suppress.
Just on another point I wonder if LRH really thought out succession. I would think a panel of senior officers would be best to elect the leader.
To my mind COB has done some good things, and to a certain extent leadership is relative and irrelevant. But in other respects, the allegations of bullying I think are credible, and the diversion into fundraising which is off policy, as well as allegations about his lack of study, the lack of enhancement of staff generally, these things are enough for him to go.
I think his paranoia kicked into overdrive when he revised the SP/PTS materials a few years ago, and this is pulling in current attacks. He needs a correction.
And furthermore the COB is not the head of Scientology, his job is just KSW which is a service role to the side.
Does anyone have any info on when the sec check / cult of personality began?
I seemed to be reassured by various events in the 90's, I like the debug of the VM program, a few things.
When I mentioned this in auditing in 99 I got a hell of a shock, the CS got the auditor to check for overts. I thought I was being vigilant for Scientology.
And of course now the COB thing is everywhere. COB this COB that. I can't recall any former executive in Scientology having such a cult of personality.
Sec Checks are important, and they can ask anything in session to check for charge, but as a tool of management it opens to abuse that real criticisms just get lumped with overts and introversion is used to suppress.
Just on another point I wonder if LRH really thought out succession. I would think a panel of senior officers would be best to elect the leader.
To my mind COB has done some good things, and to a certain extent leadership is relative and irrelevant. But in other respects, the allegations of bullying I think are credible, and the diversion into fundraising which is off policy, as well as allegations about his lack of study, the lack of enhancement of staff generally, these things are enough for him to go.
I think his paranoia kicked into overdrive when he revised the SP/PTS materials a few years ago, and this is pulling in current attacks. He needs a correction.
And furthermore the COB is not the head of Scientology, his job is just KSW which is a service role to the side.
Does anyone have any info on when the sec check / cult of personality began?