The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[Ted]

Another thoughtful and accurate post.

Please continue posting your observations, thoughts, and experience. It will mean quite a bit to people you might never know or hear from.

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

I'm just afacinthecrowd

So nice to read your post. I am very pleased that we are in a phase now where we are returning to the very roots of what this thread is named for. I enjoyed your "rambling" very much. I just had a thought come to mind. I was on lines at the L.A. Org as a newbie from June 6, 1970 to October 1970 before transfering to CCLA. At the L.A. Org, there was a guy named Bill who I talked to at almost every coffee break. I was 30 then and Bill was somewhat older, perhaps in the 35 to 40 range. We really had a good comm cycle. He kept saying how much I was changing and improving in my communication skills, etc. In less than 2 months, I had a full Scientology vocabulary and knew all their jargon and Bill was impressed.

Bill joined the Sea Org sometime in the summer of 1970 and was sent off to be posted on the Apollo and we got one letter back from him to our course room in the Academy saying that he was doing great and had a major post. When I heard I was going to the Apollo in October, 1973 I was looking forward to reconnecting with Bill. When I got there, I just missed him. He had been gone only a month or two when I arrived. He had quit and had a dispute with management. One day when I was still a Programs Chief, there was an article in the Orders of the Day (OODS) by Ron, saying the Flag had to get a replacement for Bill. He was good but not so good that he was irreplaceable. LRH said that someone had to be posted to Bill's post and confront the post and do just as good a job as Bill had done. Somehow, based on what you wrote, I am getting the idea that you were that guy from the L.A. Org who had coffee with me at every break. Am I right? If you want to stay under the radar, could you private mail me if you are that guy or otherwise, let us all know.
Thanks, Lakey

Sorry, Lakey...I'm not your Bill. Sounds like he was a sure enough good feller though.

 

[Blue Spirit]

SOON

Who did you have trouble with in the Freezone? What happened there?

I am working on a long report, all to be posted soon.

The guy is a very covert and in LRH's valence (good and Bad).

He is very much an exception to the Freezone people I have met who are

a great group I have found, spirited, non-serious, with good products.

 

[Blue Spirit]

Much Wisdom Here

And, I knew El Ron.

........... Afaceinthecrowd responded with a very detailed write-up quoting this HCOPL, that HCOPL, this HCOB, that HCOB, this El Ron book, that El Ron book, etc, etc. A few days later El Ron issued HCOPL’s with his signature (not BPL's) that contained parts of afaceinthecrowd’s write up but also made fundamental changes that “gutted” the essence of what it was that had produced the long-term high statistics. El Ron’s HCOPL was void of little things like not sacrificing long term viability for short term upstats, granting beingess to others and the importance of true admiration, two way comm…silly stuff like that. El Ron liked stuff that was “enforceable” on an immediate basis, required no need for independent judgment and, more than anything, no need for any fundamental understanding of Scientology basics.

So what’s my point?

El Ron was the founder of Scientology, but he was not a Scientologist, per the actual definition. What is good about any of this came from the legions of Dart’s, Alan’s, John’s, Yvonne’s, Hanna’s, Heber’s, etc. over the years and what made it something worth being a part of was us…each and everyone of us that gave our hearts to help others, face our own demons and continue our paths, unflinching, “into the breach”. What is bad about any of this is irreversibly on its way down the rabbit hole.

Scientology is a cult.

Very very excellent points, particularly the part in red.

(I liked the whole post, but excerpted just part.)

Thank you and am looking forward to more of your wise posts.

This board recently has been seeing some really good new posters.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

joke

Another thoughtful and accurate post.

Please continue posting your observations, thoughts, and experience. It will mean quite a bit to people you might never know or hear from.

This wasn't directed at me, but I'll do my best.

These are examples of the newest styles of decorating work cubicles to match the personality of the worker.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

and now for something completely different:

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa today announced cutting back ALL city workers to 3 day and 4 day weeks for the foreseeable future with the exception of public safety workers (police, fire). The city is going to be out of money very soon. It was said when, I just don't remember -- soon.

Yesterday a study was announced that CALPERS is probably going to have a $250 BILLION shortfall in the next decade. With the state promising pensions, and the fund running short (because of badddd investments and people living longer). The State of California might be forced to make up the difference.

These same things are happening in San Diego and in many other states.

Do you know how to survive when your check doesn't come?

Now, might be a good time to do some planning.

Not unlike the Mormons, who worry about locusts, you might consider having 50 gallons of water, a months worth of dehydrated food, seeds, some gold and silver coins, some cash, a gun and some ammo, soap, and solar power on your roof.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Who are these people?

Russ Meadows, Dan Auerbach, and the old fool I recognize.

Is that Charlie on Laffy's left?

Who is everyone else?

 

[RogerB]

Russ Meadows, Dan Auerbach, and the old fool I recognize.

Is that Charlie on Laffy's left?

Who is everyone else?

Actually, as I look at that photo . . . . those folks just don't look happy!

Maybe it's the company they have as their leader?

R

 

[lkwdblds]

When your nature is not MCCO, What happens to you.

Thank you…thank you all for your response to my last post. Thanks EP for clueing me in regards RogerB…I can always use a few extra shekels.

At the dawn of the Age of Information Peter Drucker wrote, “The Age of the Monolithic Command and Control Organization is over.” These words have proved to be prophecy.

R. Vaughn Young wrote 10 years or so ago, “The internet will be Scientology’s Waterloo.” These words are proving to be prophecy.

Several years ago a man passed on whom I deeply admired and--by virtue of his presence alone--made me better human being. He was a successful and respected investment banker, benevolent philanthropist, a Prince of a Man and a paragon of husbanding and fatherhood. He also had a tattoo on his arm—placed there when he entered his first concentration camp during the Holocaust. How he survived those camps placed a weight on his soul that never lifted but that he bore with dignity, humanity and charity. He conducted his life as an Ode to his perished loved ones. When I looked into his eyes I felt the unfathomable depths of the human spirit.

Scientology is the ne plus ultra of “Monolithic Command and Control Organization”. It is utterly and completely unable to either self correct, or adapt in response to external stimuli. The inherent nature of all MCCO’s is the minimization of non-directed or non-specified individual expression or action. El Ron was, and functionally still is by his own edicts, “Source”.

Scientology, by leave of El Ron’s edicts, is in op term to the internet. It is rife with lies, secrecy, hidden data trap-doors, institutional megalomania and a “Corporate Culture” of greed. Greed makes you blind…always in all ways. Greed morphs as jealousy, hubris, cruelty and a host of other mutations.

The combination of MCCO and Greed as a Corporate Culture allowed to flow forward, unchecked, was the construct that evolved into the heartless entity that imprisoned and tortured my friend, and murdered his loved ones.

Please take the following as a “loose parallel analogy” and not a “statement of equivalence”:

El Ron’s unstated de facto goal was, in essence, a spiritual “Holocaust”. There are taped lectures wherein he unnervingly and too “enthusiastically” ponders the concept of blowing the atmosphere of Earth so that all of us could instantly be “free”. There are taped lectures wherein he unnervingly and too “enthusiastically” ponders the concept of isolating and offing those amongst us he deems as “dangerous” and “unfit”. And, there is his “edifice”—The Church of Scientology and its’ ecclesiastic "Storm Troopers" (of which I was a “Flag Officer”).

“…and they shall inherit the wind.”

Fantastic post! a new (at least for me) look at what C of S is and why the internet is an anethema (violent curse) to it. Not to be egotistical but many of my stories are personal experiences which illustrate goings on in the C of S of the past. My original intent was to relate my experience, sharing it with others, then getting their feed back and then reformulating what I think happened based on the feed back which I received.

In this instance, "aface" gave feed back without me telling a story but I do have an untold story which Face's feedback sheds light on.

CCLA had a very low Gross Income one week, late 1972 or early 1973. Our normal food allocation was $850 a week to feed a crew of nearly 150 people but due to the low G.I., only $350 was allocated for food. I was at the FP meeting, and the thought was that a large "reg" cycle was scheduled for early the next week and and that we could put through an "emergency purchase order for the remaining $500, later on in the week.

The person in Charge of preparing the meals came to Treasury to get her $850 allocation for the week to go do her shopping. I told her there was only $350 budgeted for food, she hit the ceiling and demanded $850, yelling and screaming at me. My hat write up, by LRH, tells the Director of Disbursements to practice saying "no" to people in a mirror and to get use to saying no. I told her that I was just Director of Disbursements and could only disburse what the Execs allocated through FP. She did not care and just kept yelling at me demanding her full $850. I started to hand her $350 in cash and she said that she was planing a special surprise menu for tomorrow and that she would spend the entire $350 for tomorrow's meals and then we would either have to give her $500 more tomorrow or starve the rest of the week. I pulled back the $350 cash and only gave her $150 and told her to cook frugally tomorrow and come back the next day for some more money. I thought I had done my job as Dir of Disbursements, keeping this matter of of the plate of the Executives and making sure this person could not blow the entire $350 on steaks and gourmet foods for just one day as she was threatening to do. After this cycle, I routed on to my study period from 9:30 AM to 12:00.

About half way through study, the Qual Sec, Sam Loria came to study and demanded from the Course Supervisor that I leave study immediately because I was needed at a meeting. THIS WAS TOTALLY AGAINST POLICY WHICH STATED THAT NO ONE COULD BE PULLED OFF OF STUDY FOR ANY REASON. Carole Ferguson fought this hard for two or three minutes and I heard the entire discussion and then Sam came to get me. I refused to leave study and cited the appropriate policies and Sam insisted and said that Yvonne Jentzsch had given me a direct order to leave study and go see her. He told me that I had made myself "AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION POINT' and had put the welfare of the Org in jeopardy. I had no idea what he was talking aboutbut left study and went with Sam to see Yvonne.

In my thread, I have presented Yvonne as an icon, a giant among leaders and she was but she had a nasty side to her if she felt one had crossed her and here again, as in two other incidents I related earlier, she was very hostile to me. I came in to her room, wondering what in the hell this was about. She immediately accused me of making myself "AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION POINT", of ignoring source and setting my own policy and compromising the survival of the Org. She refused to hear my explanation. She ordered me to write two checks, One for the remaining $200 that I held back from the Cook and another for $500 for the remaining food allocation, telling me that she was putting a rush Purchase Order through the FBO and Guardian for Finance as we spoke for the missing $500. SHE ADMONISHED ME STERNLY FOR MAKING MYSELF AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION POINTand told me I had acted unethically. I was not consulted as to why I acted as I did, in fact, she would not allow me to say even one word in my own defense.

This was why she would not allow me to be promoted to Treasury Sec and later FBO and she fought tooth and nail to try to stop me from being promoted up to the Apollo as well as I read in the data files when I was CC Program's Chief on the Apollo. The C of S was an MCCO as "aface" states above and this is how a top Exec in an MCCO handled someone who was triying to do their post non robotically. Yvonne, one of the top Sea Org executives on the planet, listened enthusiastically while her wild irrational cook third partied her upstat Director of Disbursements, and then refused to hear even one word of what the Dir of Disb had to say on the matter but upbraided him for making himself an INDIVIDUAL DECISION POINTand afterwords passed him up for all promotions.
Lakey

 

[Arthur Dent]

And excellent post, afaceinthecrowd! Thank you!

Carmelo, I agree that "The Co$ has taught that this all has to be done perfectly" as regards auditing, particularly the prep check list you posted. This "perfection" (not) came with the Grotesque Abomination of Technology. Years prior it was done with flourish and and honest effort to help people on the part of practitioners. It is sheer robotism now. It's unfortunate. It used to be the attitude of there was no error you couldn't fix so there was no fear of auditing. The auditors are forced to live in a box and not dare step out of line or actually think. The cofs would rather see someone dead than competent!

If you dig around in the books and tapes you will find references that say you can do this or that quite informally. These inferences are buried from the main references sometimes and the robots will kill the auditor for "out tech" when it is most definitely "in tech". But as most sitting in judgment these days are not actually familiar with the tech, this would just seem to reason.

 

[lkwdblds]

Perhaps it was also the terrible music on the record.

Actually, as I look at that photo . . . . those folks just don't look happy!

Maybe it's the company they have as their leader?

R

I believe that is Charlie Rush on LRH's left, our right as we look at the picture. I think the woman is Janet, who was not a musician but the LRH personal PR and was later the Vice President of the C of S wheh Heber was serving as the President.

I bought that Apollo All Stars as an LP vinyl record and was eager to hear LRH's music, assuming it would be first rate. The music was terrible and the band did not sound that good either. The only thing on the album which I enjoyed was a piece by George Gershwin. I played the record maybe 3 or 4 times and it did not grow on me but only sounded worse and worse. I then boxed it and held onto it for over 25 years and sometime in the 90's gave my entire collection away to a non Scientologist who I worked with who posted here last year on Vinnaire's Oh!God!! thread under the name, "Finishedman".
Lakey

 

[Div6]

Fantastic post! a new (at least for me) look at what C of S is and why the internet is an anethema (violent curse) to it. Not to be egotistical but many of my stories are personal experiences which illustrate goings on in the C of S of the past. My original intent was to relate my experience, sharing it with others, then getting their feed back and then reformulating what I think happened based on the feed back which I received.

In this instance, "aface" gave feed back without me telling a story but I do have an untold story which Face's feedback sheds light on.

CCLA had a very low Gross Income one week, late 1972 or early 1973. Our normal food allocation was $850 a week to feed a crew of nearly 150 people but due to the low G.I., only $350 was allocated for food. I was at the FP meeting, and the thought was that a large "reg" cycle was scheduled for early the next week and and that we could put through an "emergency purchase order for the remaining $500, later on in the week.

The person in Charge of preparing the meals came to Treasury to get her $850 allocation for the week to go do her shopping. I told her there was only $350 budgeted for food, she hit the ceiling and demanded $850, yelling and screaming at me. My hat write up, by LRH, tells the Director of Disbursements to practice saying "no" to people in a mirror and to get use to saying no. I told her that I was just Director of Disbursements and could only disburse what the Execs allocated through FP. She did not care and just kept yelling at me demanding her full $850. I handed her a check for $350 and she said that she was planing a special surprise menu for tomorrow and that she would spend the entire $350 for tomorrow's meals and then we would either have to give her $500 more tomorrow or starve the rest of the week. I pulled back the $350 check and only gave her $150 and told her to cook frugally tomorrow and come back the next day for some more money. I thought I had done my job as Dir of Disbursements, keeping this matter of of the plate of the Executives and making sure this person could not blow the entire $350 on steaks and gourmet foods for just one day as she was threatening to do. After this cycle, I routed on to my study period from 9:30 AM to 12:00.

About half way through study, the Qual Sec, Sam Loria came to study and demanded from the Course Supervisor that I leave study immediately because I was needed at a meeting. THIS WAS TOTALLY AGAINST POLICY WHICH STATED THAT NO ONE COULD BE PULLED OFF OF STUDY FOR ANY REASON. Carole Ferguson fought this hard for two or three minutes and I heard the entire discussion and then Sam came to get me. I refused to leave study and cited the appropriate policies and Sam insisted and said that Yvonne Jentzsch had given me a direct order to leave study and go see her. He told me that I had made myself "AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION POINT' and had put the welfare of the Org in jeopardy. I had no idea what he was talking aboutbut left study and went with Sam to see Yvonne.

In my thread, I have presented Yvonne as an icon, a giant among leaders and she was but she had a nasty side to her if she felt one had crossed her and here again, as in two other incidents I related earlier, she was very hostile to me. I came in to her room, wondering what in the hell this was about. She immediately accused me of making myself "AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION POINT", of ignoring source and setting my own policy and compromising the survival of the Org. She refused to hear my explanation. She ordered me to write two checks, One for the remaining $200 that I held back from the Cook and another for $500 for the remaining food allocation, telling me that she was putting a rush Purchase Order through the FBO and Guardian for Finance as we spoke for the missing $500. SHE ADMONISHED ME STERNLY FOR MAKING MYSELF AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION POINTand told me I had acted unethically. I was not consulted as to why I acted as I did, in fact, she would not allow me to say even one word in my own defense.

This was why she would not allow me to be promoted to Treasury Sec and later FBO and she fought tooth and nail to try to stop me from being promoted up to the Apollo as well as I read in the data files when I was CC Program's Chief on the Apollo. The C of S was an MCCO as "aface" states above and this is how a top Exec in an MCCO handled someone who was triying to do their post non robotically. Yvonne, one of the top Sea Org executives on the planet, listened enthusiastically while her wild irrational cook third partied her upstat Director of Disbursements, and then refused to hear even one word of what the Dir of Disb had to say on the matter but upbraided him for making himself an INDIVIDUAL DECISION POINTand afterwords passed him up for all promotions.
Lakey

Actually, I have to go with Yvonne on this one. While I think the cycle could perhaps have waited until you came off of study, she acted for the welfare of the entire crew. And the Cook probably should not have "hung fire" with you but urgently Order's Queried the Allocation.

But, this is far from a perfect world.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Carmelo, I agree that "The Co$ has taught that this all has to be done perfectly" as regards auditing, particularly the prep check list you posted. This "perfection" (not) came with the Grotesque Abomination of Technology. Years prior it was done with flourish and and honest effort to help people on the part of practitioners. It is sheer robotism now. It's unfortunate. It used to be the attitude of there was no error you couldn't fix so there was no fear of auditing. The auditors are forced to live in a box and not dare step out of line or actually think. The cofs would rather see someone dead than competent!

If you dig around in the books and tapes you will find references that say you can do this or that quite informally. These inferences are buried from the main references sometimes and the robots will kill the auditor for "out tech" when it is most definitely "in tech". But as most sitting in judgment these days are not actually familiar with the tech, this would just seem to reason.

I never had any experience with the Co$ post 1979, but I've certainly been made wrong for using tech or talking about using it on freezone lists by people who were auditors and C/Ses during the 80s 90s, 00s. They had been "trained" within an inch of their lives. Being effective has taken a major back seat to dotting all the "i's and crossing all the "t"s. What is important is that the auditor writes it all down and has done what the C/S wrote to do. And of course, this all needs to be FESed at Flag, the Mecca of Tech perfection.

on the flip side of all this, I know "Joe Howard" who wrote the GAT materials. He is a smart friendly guy. I would trust him to do the right thing. I don't know where the train fell off the tracks.

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Another Cool Carmelo Pic

Actually, as I look at that photo . . . . those folks just don't look happy!

Maybe it's the company they have as their leader?

R

Seated L to R: Auerbach's A/V gofer (I can't remember her name), Dan Auerbach El Ron Hisself's A/V Geek, El Ron Hisself, DeDe Reisdorf Commodores A/V Messenger, Charlie Rush.

Standing L to R: Russ Meadows, Laurel Watson (Sullivan) LRH Pers PRO, Luten Taylor.

I assure you RogerB that they were not having fun. Anyone that has ever "shared" the "Joy of Creating" with El Ron Hisself knows of which their faces and bodies speak.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Seated L to R: Auerbach's A/V gofer (I can't remember her name), Dan Auerbach, El Ron Hisself, DeDe Reisdorf Commodores A/V Messenger, Charlie Rush.

Standing L to R: Russ Meadows, Laurel Watson (Sullivan) LRH Pers PRO, Luten Taylor.

I assure you RogerB that they were not having fun. Anyone that has ever "shared" the "Joy of Creating" with El Ron Hisself knows of which their faces and bodies speak.

You have Charlie and De De reversed. I thought that was Charlie, just wasn't certain. Now I have faces matching DeDe and laurel, whose names I've heard but never saw.

 

[lkwdblds]

Interesting point.

Actually, I have to go with Yvonne on this one. While I think the cycle could perhaps have waited until you came off of study, she acted for the welfare of the entire crew. And the Cook probably should not have "hung fire" with you but urgently Order's Queried the Allocation.

But, this is far from a perfect world.

I don't know if you understand what my alleged crime was. Disbrusements is low on the food chain, the Director has no real choices to make, it is all spelled out in policy. All I was supposed to do is to give the representative from the Galley, the total food allotment in cash. I believe I said check above but that is wrong. the Dir of Disbursements can not sign the checks, only write them out and present them to the FBO and the Commanding Officer for their signatures so I could not have taken back a check as I erroneously stated. The payroll and the food allocation checks were cashed by me and the cash was brought back to the Org. Policy called for me to pay her the full $350. Actually, it did not specifically say to do it all at once but I think that was Ron's intent. That day was something important, maybe Yvonne's birthday or a big Celebrity was coming to dinner or something big and the Cook wanted to put on a special dinner. She wanted her entire $850 and threatened to spend the $350 on the first day alone. I told her to nurse the $350 for a couple of days and we were trying to get an emergency Purchase Order through and have $500 more for her in a couple of days. She refused and was yelling and acting hysterical. I was fully hatted on Volume III, Treasury and on the Full Disbursements Hat and I realized that the policies did not specifically state that those allocations to be paid in cash had to be paid all at once so I decided to give her only $150 of the $350 in cash.

I think that either way I did it, I was going to be slammed. It was a lose - lose situation for me. I thought hard and tried to apply the concept, "What would Ron do." I came up with only giving her one day's food allocation until she cooled off. When she calmed down, I planned on giving her the rest. If I had given her the entire $350, and she ran out and spent it all on for the big meal planned for the evening, I would not be surprised if I would have been raked over the coals for doing that as well. The safer way was to give her the entire $350 all at once. Even if Yvonne tried to bash me for doing that, I could have said I was just following policy and she could not have disciplined me. The concept of only giving the cook one day's food allocation instead of the whole $350 was my idea based on me thinking "what would Ron do."

Yvonne considered that doling out only $150 instead of the full $350 was an instance of me making my self an individual decision point. I could certainly understand where she was coming from and if you think she was right, I can certainly understand that as well. What I think is evil is the way I was handled and treated in the aftermath.

The fact that the policy did not specifically say to pay all cash payments at once and that there is a policy called, "What would Ron do?" plus the fact that my stats were totally out the roof and that I was handling about half of the Treasury Division myself and it was perhaps the most stable division in the Org should have been given some consideration. I feel that I should have been allowed to complete my study period then Yvonne should have summoned me and let me explain my position and the policies I was going by and then if she considered that I was wrong, she should have had me corrected in cramming. Treating me like a pariah and thereafter trying to block me from all promotions was very symptomatic.

It was symptomatic of an organization being run the way "aface" describes it, as an MCCO. Hubbard and Yvonne following his command intention did not want anyone on post who tries to think out how to handle a touchy situation using logic or even using the poicy, "What woudl Ron do?" They just want a no comm lag, Yes Sir , and then the person behaves as a robot or Ron clone. I would never behave 100% in the manner they were looking for. It would never happen so Yvonne's solution was to use me for what I was good at and make sure I never rose any higher in the ranks. Once this became clear to me, my only choice was to quit but it never became clear until I got on ESMB.
Lakey

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

More about MCCO's

I don't know if you understand what my alleged crime was. Disbrusements is low on the food chain, the Director has no real choices to make, it is all spelled out in policy. All I was supposed to do is to give the representative from the Galley, the total food allotment in cash. I believe I said check above but that is wrong. the Dir of Disbursements can not sign the checks, only write them out and present them to the FBO and the Commanding Officer for their signatures so I could not have taken back a check as I erroneously stated. The payroll and the food allocation checks were cashed by me and the cash was brought back to the Org. Policy called for me to pay her the full $350. Actually, it did not specifically say to do it all at once but I think that was Ron's intent. That day was something important, maybe Yvonne's birthday or a big Celebrity was coming to dinner or something big and the Cook wanted to put on a special dinner. She wanted her entire $850 and threatened to spend the $350 on the first day alone. I told her to nurse the $350 for a couple of days and we were trying to get an emergency Purchase Order through and have $500 more for her in a couple of days. She refused and was yelling and acting hysterical. I was fully hatted on Volume III, Treasury and on the Full Disbursements Hat and I realized that the policies did not specifically state that those allocations to be paid in cash had to be paid all at once so I decided to give her only $150 of the $350 in cash.

I think that either way I did it, I was going to be slammed. It was a lose - lose situation for me. I thought hard and tried to apply the concept, "What would Ron do." I came up with only giving her one day's food allocation until she cooled off. When she calmed down, I planned on giving her the rest. If I had given her the entire $350, and she ran out and spent it all on for the big meal planned for the evening, I would not be surprised if I would have been raked over the coals for doing that as well. The safer way was to give her the entire $350 all at once. Even if Yvonne tried to bash me for doing that, I could have said I was just following policy and she could not have disciplined me. The concept of only giving the cook one day's food allocation instead of the whole $350 was my idea based on me thinking "what would Ron do."

Yvonne considered that doling out only $150 instead of the full $350 was an instance of me making my self an individual decision point. I could certainly understand where she was coming from and if you think she was right, I can certainly understand that as well. What I think is evil is the way I was handled and treated in the aftermath.

The fact that the policy did not specifically say to pay all cash payments at once and that there is a policy called, "What would Ron do?" plus the fact that my stats were totally out the roof and that I was handling about half of the Treasury Division myself and it was perhaps the most stable division in the Org should have been given some consideration. I feel that I should have been allowed to complete my study period then Yvonne should have summoned me and let me explain my position and the policies I was going by and then if she considered that I was wrong, she should have had me corrected in cramming. Treating me like a pariah and thereafter trying to block me from all promotions was very symptomatic.

It was symptomatic of an organization being run the way "aface" describes it, as an MCCO. Hubbard and Yvonne following his command intention did not want anyone on post who tries to think out how to handle a touchy situation using logic or even using the poicy, "What woudl Ron do?" They just want a no comm lag, Yes Sir , and then the person behaves as a robot or Ron clone. I would never behave 100% in the manner they were looking for. It would never happen so Yvonne's solution was to use me for what I was good at and make sure I never rose any higher in the ranks. Once this became clear to me, my only choice was to quit but it never became clear until I got on ESMB.
Lakey

Anathema is a very applicable word to use re: Scn vs Internet. I chose "op term" as perhaps being more descriptive to the readers on this thread.

The last bastion of classic MCCO’s are governments (duh) and armed forces--where actually it’s probably the best system if you want to effectively and efficiently get people to kill other people.

One of the mutations of greed is the lust for power and dominion over others.

I’m glad my post may have helped you resolve a part of a bigger issue.

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Ooops!

You have Charlie and De De reversed. I thought that was Charlie, just wasn't certain. Now I have faces matching DeDe and laurel, whose names I've heard but never saw.

Carmelo your right and I'm right...and I’m also wrong--sometimes me old synapses just don't work right and I need to check my posts more thoroughly (like Willie said, "It's not the years it's the miles that get you").

The guy on the end is definitely not Charlie but the person to Hisself's immediate left is DeDe. She actually looked somewhat similar to Charlie (forehead, Nose/browridge, hair). DeDe had a very masculine face and body-type. Her brother Gary was also on the Apollo and, with the exception that he was taller, a little thinner and had curly hair, they looked strikingly similar.

My post should have read “DeDe Reisdorf Commodores A/V Messenger, not Charlie. I don’t recall the name of the guy on the end.

I apologize for my incomplete and errant post.

 

[lkwdblds]

Your posts have helped clarify things for me!

Anathema is a very applicable word to use re: Scn vs Internet. I chose "op term" as perhaps being more descriptive to the readers on this thread.

The last bastion of classic MCCO’s are governments (duh) and armed forces--where actually it’s probably the best system if you want to effectively and efficiently get people to kill other people.

One of the mutations of greed is the lust for power and dominion over others.

I’m glad my post may have helped you resolve a part of a bigger issue.

Having you here has been a breath of fresh air. For one thing you returned some of the discussion to the theme, "The Apollo. 1973" We should talk about that topic from time to time since it was decided to keep that name. Another thing is that you write inciteful posts which stir up people's thinking and "pique" their interest (how is that for another good word?- used as to provoke or arouse). I see now that this thread can have two strong dialogues going at the same time, both harmoniously. Also, take note that so far, "knock on wood", no bashers, haters, or smut peddlers have been attracted to this thread. We've got a vibrant thread going here.

Yes and your last post just helped me see clearer why Yvonne kept me around but worked very hard to see that I never advanced or was promoted. Being a smart and crafty executive in the LRH mold, she could use her enormous charisma to charm people and make them feel important and then if they had any worth or value, they could do valuable background type services on staff and not be a danger to the Org if they were kept off of the executive lines. Thanks to you, I see this very clearly know. Of course, before you, I had some awareness of what she was doing but you have supplied the missing ingredients to help me see it crystal clear.

And you know what, I deserve to see it more clearly and I have earned the knowledge which I have picked up from your because of all the writing I have set down here which I thought might benefit some others. I think we have a reverse spiral going on here, an upward spiral with our forum of free form panel discussion. We lift one another to higher and higher levels by our bootsraps, each pulling someone up higher and higher and thereby lifting the entire group.

I think LRH may have had something when he mentioned putting on those Boots in the Sky and walking out of this Universe. He was a little off target, however, he was saying to put on the boots and walk out with him but he should have emphasized more the boot straps and then whole groups applying a lifting action and not a walking action.
Lakey

 

[Ted]

Can We Ever Be Friends?

I never had any experience with the Co$ post 1979, but I've certainly been made wrong for using tech or talking about using it on freezone lists by people who were auditors and C/Ses during the 80s 90s, 00s. They had been "trained" within an inch of their lives. Being effective has taken a major back seat to dotting all the "i's and crossing all the "t"s. What is important is that the auditor writes it all down and has done what the C/S wrote to do. And of course, this all needs to be FESed at Flag, the Mecca of Tech perfection.

on the flip side of all this, I know "Joe Howard" who wrote the GAT materials. He is a smart friendly guy. I would trust him to do the right thing. I don't know where the train fell off the tracks.

I have had plenty of experience post 1979. Just hitting a few high points here, before 1979 I learned to run only reading questions and items, F/N everything, and, ah, TR-3.

I learned to prepcheck by simply asking the question, then when the pc runs out of answers, check the question against the meter. Move on if no read.

For years it worked GREAT!

Then only running questions that read, it worked not so great. I argued with Class 8's over that, and argued with whomever was sitting in for LRH on the SO#1 line.

Last I heard from anyone at Flag, I was said to have been "squirreling in the field for years."

Oh, well...

I like your expanded prepcheck questions. They give pc's a lot to talk about without undue pressure.

My present attitude, one I have had for some time now, is that anything can be run whether it reads on meter or not as long as the pc is running what he is interested in and as long as he is not being overly controlled down some path that he feels is irrelevant. Also, it is not necessary to "F/N everything." It is only necessary for the auditor to run what pc is interested in running, and complete auditing cycles as best as possible.

A pressurized TR-3 creates synthetic valences of some people. They become someone else to be able to receive a session.

The last person I cleared I think I used TR-3 maybe once, and TR-4 just once. That says a lot for the willingness and trust of the pc, and pc+auditor being greater than bank.

Also, I might do a worksheet for my own guidance. When the processing is complete the sheets are destroyed -- excepting L&N's.

We don't need no stinking worksheets if we are auditing the pc in front of us, the pc who can change in a flash thus immediately stale-dating any C/S that might have been correct at start of session.

About Flag being the mecca of technical perfection...