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

[FoTi]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

The error in Hubbard's '60's tech on handling these identities when found . . . is that he actually did not handle them. He never developed the tech to handle these troublesome, negative and destructive identities

Example: in the own goals GPM listing for identities, when he found the items . . . nothing was doe with them!!! They were simply listed off of to find the/an opposing identity . . . and left! Ditto with his R2-10 and R2-12 R/Ds.

Quite nuts, even insane and evil when you look at it.

Ditto, the S&D R/D . . . . it is possible Hubbard rejected John Mac's brilliant piece of tech because Hubbard had no handling for what was found as the item by listing the "who or what/represent" question.

Neither did John Mac have a handling except to find the item . . . . and make no mistake, finding such right items do afford huge relief!

But the full resolution of the case situation is to handle the client's relationship to the found identity/Beingness "what." For, until that is done, the client will always be stuck with it.

Rog

Thank you for this post, Roger. It's helping to clarify this for me.

So...once you find the "what".....then how do you handle the client's relationship to the found identity/Beingness "what"?

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Right now I'm not aware of any pattern outside of the "because Hubbard says so" ones. I do know from personal experience that items can have opposite polarities which are tied together and discharge against each other, and don't include this in the "mainly because Hubbard so" bin.

Paul

My reference is simply to how for a specific individual a 'pattern of accumulated polarities' may itself reveal something about what 'problems' the individual has been trying unsuccessfully to resolve for himself, and not necessarily in a fully conscious fashion. That can shed light on unrecognized postulates, considerations & thought patterns which may need to be addressed.

Hubbard's ideas do not necessarily directly relate, although they may touch on observed phenomenon.


Mark A. Baker

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

S & D Research

I know I'm the person who posted the John McMaster article from "The Free Spirit."

I've read it and referred to it for fifteen years or more.

This time was different. I've got several items running in my space, where "I" have split apart in opposition to myself. i'm not sure how it is going to turn out, but my space is noticeably cleaner.

At the same time, Emma noted that 5 people, attracted to themselves, the most flak. Claire (Fluffy), Challenge, and Terril (BB) being three of them. That strikes me so funny. i find them all easy to get along with.

But it is that phenomena that JM talks about - attracting enturbulation.

It was just so funny to see it playing out on the board, and Sneakster (Mike Hobson) actually taking his marbles and going home.

 

[RogerB]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Thank you for this post, Roger. It's helping to clarify this for me.

So...once you find the "what".....then how do you handle the client's relationship to the found identity/Beingness "what"?

Alan's Identity/Beingness handling R/Ds . . . Presence 3 deals with the identities that are one's own that one has worn but lost control of, and Presence 4 deals with the identities of others that you have gotten into conflict with or otherwise become effect of.

These R/Ds are rather fulsome and they do undo all of the hung up, out of control and automatic actions/creations etc., of these old Beingnesses/Identities one has, or the compulsively being stuck fighting or otherwise being attracted to those Identities/types of people who shit on you

Two broad aspects involved: a) the undoing and freeing the person from the unwanted effects being produced and, b) restoring you to a causative, volitional relationship with the identity . . . which in the case of the troublesome identity of another, means you can be free to associate, or handle, but certainly you are then in a state where you are no longer unwantedly and unwittingly automatically effect, overwhelmed or restimulated by the person and you can play the game you choose. In the case of your own identities you are restored to being able to operate the identity, if you choose to maintain it, at a knowingly causative, volitional and fully controlled level.

By the way . . . for those who did the old own goals listing of '62-'63, "items" (terminals and Opterminal identities) found were all "whats" . . . . not "who's." This is the reason why John Mac used the term the way he did.

It takes someone like Terril who demonstrates he likes mixing simple things up into confusion to interject the dull idea that the "what" John Mac referred to was "implant type stuff."

But then, Terril actually knows squat about the tech, and can only speak from the experience of his own case and reality on "wins." But as has been seen, that is a very limited and dangerous perspective on things.

FoTi, If you are brave enough, and want to do something about any perceived identities you are aware of PM me and I'll get you the R/Ds to use. Folks do successfully do it solo.

R

 

[Claire Swazey]

Re: S & D Research

I know I'm the person who posted the John McMaster article from "The Free Spirit."

I've read it and referred to it for fifteen years or more.

This time was different. I've got several items running in my space, where "I" have split apart in opposition to myself. i'm not sure how it is going to turn out, but my space is noticeably cleaner.

At the same time, Emma noted that 5 people, attracted to themselves, the most flak. Claire (Fluffy), Challenge, and Terril (BB) being three of them. That strikes me so funny. i find them all easy to get along with.

But it is that phenomena that JM talks about - attracting enturbulation.

It was just so funny to see it playing out on the board, and Sneakster (Mike Hobson) actually taking his marbles and going home.

Cupcake, Sneaks had quit the forum before Emma wrote that post to which you refer. I think the timing matters in this case.

It's a funny thing-- I'm known in my office for being genial and very good with borrowers, clients and other employees. My neighbors and I get along great. I hang out IRL with other ex members and nothing EVER comes up that's in the least bit skrelky.

I have been extremely aggressive with those who had initiated things against me and my only regrets about that are that I used the wrong tactics. There's a tactical advantage in playing doormat, and clearly that's the one I should have taken. My husband says I've done nothing wrong, other than giving people like that too many explanations. That's why, if you'll notice, starting a month ago I've been extremely brief with anyone I thought was yelling at me or thought the comment was flamey. I also didn't take up a certain post that was made.

And the only time I ever heard from any mod about any of my posts (being objectionable or problematic) in the past three or so years on ESMB was once re my old avatar.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Re: S & D Research

Cupcake, Sneaks had quit the forum before Emma wrote that post to which you refer. I think the timing matters in this case.

It's a funny thing-- I'm known in my office for being genial and very good with borrowers, clients and other employees. My neighbors and I get along great. I hang out IRL with other ex members and nothing EVER comes up that's in the least bit skrelky.

I have been extremely aggressive with those who had initiated things against me and my only regrets about that are that I used the wrong tactics. There's a tactical advantage in playing doormat, and clearly that's the one I should have taken. My husband says I've done nothing wrong, other than giving people like that too many explanations. That's why, if you'll notice, starting a month ago I've been extremely brief with anyone I thought was yelling at me or thought the comment was flamey. I also didn't take up a certain post that was made.

And the only time I ever heard from any mod about any of my posts (being objectionable or problematic) in the past three or so years on ESMB was once re my old avatar.

My quote regarding Sneakster was he took his marbles and went home. I didn't mean to imply that it was because of Emma's post. It was because he was being harassed for rather dumb stands, and I think, but I don't know, just found himself like Lucy and Ethel wallpapering the room, in a corner, with no place to go.

I have to say, that regarding many things, the things I regret are the things I didn't do, the things I didn't say. The things I've done and said, I can't bring myself to regret even when I was really wrong.

I've used the letters FOAD more than once in my life. I would never disparage your use of them.

 

[Terril park]

Re: S & D Research

I know I'm the person who posted the John McMaster article from "The Free Spirit."

I've read it and referred to it for fifteen years or more.

This time was different. I've got several items running in my space, where "I" have split apart in opposition to myself. i'm not sure how it is going to turn out, but my space is noticeably cleaner.

At the same time, Emma noted that 5 people, attracted to themselves, the most flak. Claire (Fluffy), Challenge, and Terril (BB) being three of them. That strikes me so funny. i find them all easy to get along with.

But it is that phenomena that JM talks about - attracting enturbulation.

It was just so funny to see it playing out on the board, and Sneakster (Mike Hobson) actually taking his marbles and going home.

I'm in complete agreement with JMs comments. And they may well have some relevance to the situation. However Emma's post [ below] is talking about HER problems, not the people she mentions.

If one posts about religion or politics for example anywhere, or chats in a pub one will usually get disagreements voiced and they can escalate too extremes. This isn't usually a PTS sit.

However if one sows the seed of creating a public forum about the world's most controversial religion and and states the intent to moderate
it, one shall reap a lot of work.

Also if one posts pro scn posts ANYWHERE one will get attacked.


"What would solve most of my moderating problems is to just ban Ladybird, Challenge, Claire/Fluffy/Voltaire's child, Terril & Sneakster.

99% of ALL issues arise from just these 5 posters.

Yep, pretty much all of the "noise" on the board involves or is generated by one or more of these 5 folks.

How about I just ban them all and be done with it?"

 

[Terril park]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Terril, what I have picked up on ESMB and also find true for myself is that for those of us who believe that parts of Hubbard's tech have workability, that workability seems to be available mostly on the earlier part of the bridge.

Life Repair, TR's and Objective Processing, Dianetics, the Grades and Power Processing. Those seem to provide positive changes for a significant number of people as does doing auditor training.

If you take a look at the upper bridge, from OT III on through NOTS and track how the people are doing who have done these things, results are spotty and many people have had negative results.

I've done tons of NOTS myself. Just by the very nature of what it addresses, a person is not going to have increased OT like abilities from doing this level. The first few years I received NOTS, I thought it was awesome. I bought into the line that one NOTS session was as powerful as a full Grade of standard auditing. I was willing to go into debt to purchase more NOTS.

Looking back in retrospect, I see that I was deluded by all the hype and PR into believing that this level is an end all. Here on ESMB, it was pointed out to me that getting rid of everything in one's space is not necessarily the best way to approach auditing. There are such things as spiritual team mates who are better off being cleaned up and kept than being gotten rid of.

If LRH did something wrong, such as rejecting very workable tech and instead releasing a watered down version, I believe it behooves us to apply the LRH policies, "Look, don't listen." and "The Supreme Test of a Thetan is to Make things go right".

Its very simple. Why does an excuse have to be created to justify LRH's screw up and get him off the hook. I find it absurd to make excuses and sugar coat the errors of a being who was proclaimed by himself and his followers as being the most enlightened being in the Universe. He came down HARD on all of us who served him so why do we have to treat him with kid gloves? He should be held to at least as high a standard as the rest of us.
Lakey

Well one ideally should have some balance, he got some stuff right and some stuff wrong. He made much effort to make things better and I don't
personally think his creation reached perfection.

He stood on others shoulders, and others have stood on his. Thats the
way of the world.

With regard to upper levels you missed out clear to OT 3. People get gains from these. I have to say I can't recall anyone who has done the CC in the FZ. They iether went clear on NED, or before coming to the FZ or
are not yet clear.

With regard to NOTs I've not been interested in doing this level, despite knowing many who have done very well from it, and knowing world class auditors who swear by it and even use it on new people.

In fact I got onto this a bit doing L-11. Nothing special, nothing bad,
but just a transition for me to get back to the meat of that level.

 

[Terril park]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

It takes someone like Terril who demonstrates he likes mixing simple things up into confusion to interject the dull idea that the "what" John Mac referred to was "implant type stuff."

I diidn't say that at all!

But then, Terril actually knows squat about the tech, and can only speak from the experience of his own case and reality on "wins." But as has been seen, that is a very limited and dangerous perspective on things.


R

Is it the case that you can't believe anyone can get gains from Clear to
OT3?

You in denial of this fact?

You think all the people who have done so are delusional?

This why you keep insulting me?

 

[Claire Swazey]

Re: S & D Research

My quote regarding Sneakster was he took his marbles and went home. I didn't mean to imply that it was because of Emma's post. It was because he was being harassed for rather dumb stands, and I think, but I don't know, just found himself like Lucy and Ethel wallpapering the room, in a corner, with no place to go.

I have to say, that regarding many things, the things I regret are the things I didn't do, the things I didn't say. The things I've done and said, I can't bring myself to regret even when I was really wrong.

I've used the letters FOAD more than once in my life. I would never disparage your use of them.

Sure, Carmie. We're cool. I wanted to say that about Sneaks because I got the impression that some people thought that he did that in response to Ems' post. Panda did set the record straight but I am really not sure that this false impression is gone.

I think he had his own reasons and, of course, the right to do leave ESMB and to delete post content.

I had something like this happen on my board. This person was someone who posted a lot and was always asking me to approve this and that and edit posts (it's before I learned enough about the board software to loosen up the regs and restrictions) - I used to get requests from this person almost every day- decided not to be on the board anymore. Ok, fine. Asked for account to be nuked. Ok, no prob. Then said I should remove all that person's posts even though there were MANY. I told the person I would NOT do all that, there were too many for me to remove each one. Too much time. The person then offered me money and said why won't you do this, why why why. I nuked the account and the way scnforum software is, it deleted all person's posts which I'd not previously known it would do. Problem solved. Awesome. Everybody wins. But I didn't inform the board about what happened between person and me, though, frankly, I wanted to throw the book at the person.

As to the rest...nowadays I mainly give people who I think are fucking with me short shrift. They aren't going to get any flames or lengthy rebuttals. I stopped doing that about a month ago. If, however, I think someone is being civil or momentarily angry but isn't trying to fuck me over, with them, I bother going into some detail. Then if it seems to get hostile and stupid, then I give up on 'em. Cuz they suck.

 

[paradox]

Re: S & D Research

....

I have to say, that regarding many things, the things I regret are the things I didn't do, the things I didn't say. The things I've done and said, I can't bring myself to regret even when I was really wrong.

....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn5SWXwbqRs&feature=related

Non, Je Ne Regrette Rien

Non! Rien de rien
Non! Je ne regrette rien
Ni le bien qu'on m'a fait ni le mal
Tout ça m'est bien égal!

Non! Rien de rien
Non! Je ne regrette rien
C'est payé, balayé, oublié
Je me fous du passé!

Avec mes souvenirs
J'ai allumé le feu
Mes chagrins, mes plaisirs
Je n'ai plus besoin d'eux!

Balayés les amours
Avec leurs trémolos
Balayés pour toujours
Je repars à zéro

Non! Rien de rien
Non! Je ne regrette rien
Ni le bien qu'on m'a fait ni le mal
Tout ça m'est bien égal!

Non! Rien de rien
Non! Je ne regrette rien
Car ma vie, car mes joies
Aujourd'hui ça commence avec toi!

No, I Regret Nothing

No! Absolutely nothing
No! I regret nothing
Neither the good done to me nor the bad
All this is much the same to me!

No! Absolutely nothing
No! I regret nothing
It is paid, swept away, forgotten
I don't give a damn about the past!

With my souvenirs
I lit a fire
My sorrows, my pleasures
I have no more need of them!

Swept away the love affairs
With their tremors
Swept away forever
I start from scratch

No! Absolutely nothing
No! I regret nothing
Neither the good done to me nor the bad
All this is much the same to me!

No! Absolutely nothing
No! I regret nothing
Because my life, because my joys
Today that begins with you!

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

story, don't know if there is any truth to it

"Response to a wildfire on the south of France's Cote d'Azur was billed as a marvel of modern fire-fighting technology. Two specially-built flying boats zoomed in, skimmed the waters of the Mediterranean, scooping vast amounts of water into their belly tanks, and then dropped the water on the hillside fire. All was jolly until a body was found in the ashes."

"The coroner found that the gentleman had apparently fallen from a great height, suffering serious injuries before being burned to death. The report further noted that the victim was wearing a bathing suit, snorkel, and swim fins."

 

[paradox]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Ha ha. I believe the movie, Magnolia (1999), helped spread that particular urban legend.

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/freakish/scuba.asp

 

[I told you I was trouble]

Re: S & D Research

My emphasis.

I'm in complete agreement with JMs comments. And they may well have some relevance to the situation. However Emma's post [ below] is talking about HER problems, not the people she mentions.

If one posts about religion or politics for example anywhere, or chats in a pub one will usually get disagreements voiced and they can escalate too extremes. This isn't usually a PTS sit.

However if one sows the seed of creating a public forum about the world's most controversial religion and and states the intent to moderate
it, one shall reap a lot of work.

Also if one posts pro scn posts ANYWHERE one will get attacked.


"What would solve most of my moderating problems is to just ban Ladybird, Challenge, Claire/Fluffy/Voltaire's child, Terril & Sneakster.

99% of ALL issues arise from just these 5 posters.

Yep, pretty much all of the "noise" on the board involves or is generated by one or more of these 5 folks.

How about I just ban them all and be done with it?"

Not true Terril.

There are pro scio boards (I believe you run one) where you can post your pro comments about scientology and hubbard till your hearts content, but few would read them except the already indoctrinated, which is probably why you choose to come to an Ex scio board and try to make it your own and possibly pick up some new recruits along the way, as does Roger with his tek.



​

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

ex scios

here is what Alan C. Walter wrote

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...-MAN-THAT-I-KNEW&p=84428&viewfull=1#post84428

The problem with most Scio cases is they have almost no charge off their case.

You do not need a meter to observe charge dissipating - it is obvious - the mood level of the pc will move up and down - as the charge erases - the mood level will trend up - until there are so many good indicators.

In my almost 50 years of processing people - I have yet to find any set levels of case - set levels of competency in specific areas, yes - but no set levels across the board of upper levels.

In some areas one has almost unlimited space - time - energy - and the ability to manifest in - in other areas one is a dot with all their space - time - energy - and the ability to manifest in - is collapsed in on itself.

It takes very little to undo the dependence of the meter - or the need for someone telling the pc what they should run next. Just take away their meters - teach them what good indicators and bad indicators are.

Scio's and Ex-Scio's are something else as they have been running a false bridge and consequently have a false case.

A simple:

What has someone implied, told or convinced you needed to handle about your case?

When was that?

Where was that?

Tell me about that?

What happened?

What was the consequences of that?

If things got worse in the pc's life after that action you can ask: Was that a wrong action or item?

What have been the consequences of that?

On most Scio's and Ex-Scio's this will run for weeks - if it slows down - just mention reging - training - ethics - EDs - SO - OSA - etc.

Suggested buttons:

Is there any suppressed rage? Get it expressed.

Is there any suppressed fury? Get it expressed.

Behind the rage and fury are the pc's own violations of their integrity - most often these also blow to view.

Often the pc is locked in mortal combat with itself due to these unexpressed moods.......if they were on a meter the TA would be moving quite heavily.

Very quickly the pc begins to get certainty on what is optimum for them - and what is not.

Alan

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Another Gem from Alan C. Walter

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...-t-OT3-use-the-Valence-Tech&p=77992#post77992


Yesterday, 11:44 PM

Alan
Gold Meritorious Patron


Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Montague, Texas
Posts: 2,352

Quote:
Originally Posted by gomorrhan

I don't think I've ever been exterior, Mark, as a result of auditing or otherwise. I've been "turned on", where my senses were sharper, or additional senses seemed present. I've had the sensation that I was experiencing vertigo, and looking down on myself, or through my eyes from another point, or from no other point, like I was falling into myself, but that's more of an out-int phenomena, perhaps related to forced exteriorization, or forced interiorization, but not the sort of exteriorization that people seek (with full perception, knowledge of their own eternal nature, etc.)
When I read this - I think what a bozo!

What a tangled mess of self-sabotage!

What a foolish bounced series of non-inspection!



Overts whilst on drugs - restrained abilities - destroyed knowingness - unwilling to experience deeds done whilst exterior - must not be knowns - etc., etc.

Exterior is an ability.

Being fully present - spanning now and a chosen future is the result of several abilities co-ordinated in order to knowingly take and maintain a full exterior position.

Perceptions are multiple abilities.

Remote viewing is an ability.

Remote influencing is an ability.

Each is a specific ability - each has many connected abilities to make them work or operatable.

Each ability needs to be cleared fully - then drilled to operating capability - as you do this - your awareness opens up further - and you will collide with past incidents of being exterior when you used those abilities to cause harm - plus the solutions you used in order to turn those abilities off and to shut those abilities down.

As you expand your awareness as an operating exterior being - you will turn on massive problems - as you are processing these abilities in a rising scale manner - thus you continuously collide with that problem/solution with which you used to shut off the ability.

The moment you do any BE HERE - NOW action or drill - you will put into play all these problems and solutions as to why the ability is not operating.

These abilities do not shut off easily - it takes a tremendous amount of conflicting mass, confusion, stupidity, blanknesses, and constant charge to prevent them from turning back on.



Alan
__________________
The truth is what it is - not what you want it to be.
Last edited by Alan : Yesterday at 11:55 PM.

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Well one ideally should have some balance, he got some stuff right and some stuff wrong. He made much effort to make things better and I don't
personally think his creation reached perfection.

He stood on others shoulders, and others have stood on his. Thats the
way of the world.

With regard to upper levels you missed out clear to OT 3. People get gains from these. I have to say I can't recall anyone who has done the CC in the FZ. They iether went clear on NED, or before coming to the FZ or
are not yet clear.

With regard to NOTs I've not been interested in doing this level, despite knowing many who have done very well from it, and knowing world class auditors who swear by it and even use it on new people.

In fact I got onto this a bit doing L-11. Nothing special, nothing bad,
but just a transition for me to get back to the meat of that level.

Fair enough, Terril! You have strong opinions in this area of discussion and have expressed them well. I have no beef with what you say. I share some opinions with you and differ a bit on others. That's as it should be.

Thanks for clearing up your stand on NOTS and OTIII. BTW, I did do Grade 6, the Clearing Course and all seven of the "old" OT Levels. I still have my Clear Certificate, Clear #4943 dated August 27th, 1975.

After doing it, I felt as if it had done me a lot of good. Everyone doing the Clearing Course got a pre printed letter from LRH congratulating us for going that far and then beseeching us to help him further "Clear the Planet" by taking on much more responsibility and making a much bigger committment to work for him.

You write this following eloquent statement, "He stood on others shoulders, and others have stood on his. Thats the
way of the world."

That statement contains a lot of truth. However, now, in retrospect, learning so much about LRH, I just don't like the MANNER in which he stood on the shoulders of others.

We heard continuously from Hubbard, that he was the greatest being on Earth by far and that we was the first being ever in the Universe to discover this or conquer that. In virtually every field of endeavor, he was claiming to be the best.

He often got his points across be belittling other early pioneers in the subject he sought to claim expertise in - which was nearly all subjects. In this manner Franklin D. Roosevelt was poked fun at, "Frankie the Limper", Freud, was given a little credit and then poked fun at, mathematics was poked fun at, Physicist were made to look like idiots because they did not know the definition, "Space is the Viewpoint of Dimension." Einstein was singled out and was repeatedly made fun of and/or belittled by LRH. Plato, Socarates and Aristotle were given a little credit and then we were told that everything they were aiming for had been achieved or exceeded by LRH.

Upon encountering the Internet, the fact that Hubbard routinely exagerated and lied about his achievements becomes apparent for the first time. He was not a Doctor of Philosophy, he was not in the first nuclear physics class in the USA. The one physics class he attended, he stopped showing up and got a grade of "F". Certainly, he had the intelligence to pass the course but he simply was not interested in showing up. Fine, but then to bill himself as a nuclear physicist. That is certainly not the behavior of a great man!

Yes some of us stood on his shoulders and he stood on the shoulders of others. The problem is that when he stood on the shoulders of others, he did not acknowledge their contributions. In fact, quite the contrary he tended to get rid of the people whose work he plagiarized.

Reading KSW #1 in present time says it all. Hubbard states that others made over 100,000 suggestions to him to further the tech and of these only 20 had any value and of the 20, non were fundamental or basic. THAT STATEMENT IS COMPLETELY UNTRUE!!! We were forced to read this lie every time we did a course and sign off that we duplicated it. Anyone forcing his disciples to read and sign off on a lie of this enormity cannot be considered a great man. If anyone wants to continue honoring him after he pulled off that stunt, be my guest but proceed at your own risk.

I don't like phonies, hustlers and carnival like promoters. If they developed something I find useful, I will use it and give them credit but will go no further. No more "Hip, hip hoorays!"
Lakey

 

[Claire Swazey]

A truce is needed, IMO

My emphasis.

Not true Terril.​

There are pro scio boards (I believe you run one) where you can post your pro comments about scientology and hubbard till your hearts content, but few would read them except the already indoctrinated, which is probably why you choose to come to an Ex scio board and try to make it your own and possibly pick up some new recruits along the way, as does Roger with his tek.​

​

Well, I'm torn. I do see people on critical fora attacking others just for being Scn'ists. Like with MAB the other day. I thought that was really unnecessary, those things being said.

I also know people tend to get into cliques. I am NOT saying this derogatorily. Or at least if I am, I certainly have to include myself in that, because I do it, too. But that probably contributes to things.

I do think some people will expect certain people to say certain things even when they really aren't, and then there's no persuading them. To be perfectly honest, I was discussing that in IRC with someone I know, and I know that this has happened to that person and to others.

However, I've seen the SAME thing happen on FZ yahoo group lists. They REALLY didn't like it when I indicated my disgust with the Ethiers. It got as nasty as any flamewar anywhere and as foolish. Lots of allegations.

And I've seen some of my FZ friends be unfair to each other on this board. I personally think they're relatively polite to the NON Scientologists here, but obviously,not everyone would agree with me. That's fine, you're entitled.

There's been too many hard feelings. I'm seeing really good people hurt each other.
So the thing is, we're all dickheads sometimes. ALL of us. And we've hurt each other. Sometimes people go after each other. Sometimes they don't, but they defend themselves in such a way that leaves a scorched earth type thing. A Pyrrhic victory!

I really see only one solution and that's to forget or at least put aside who's wrong and who's right and who was mean. Has anyone involved in a flame war, even the ones who are usually "on the bottom", so to speak, ever been in a position to say they never did anything wrong here and were never mean to anyone? I really do NOT think so.

So they can spend time discussing who's right who's wrong who sucks etc. But that doesn't go anywhere. Do any of you readers see stuff getting better with these situations? I surely don't.

Originally I thought we could just all hash it out. If someone says "you weren't a staff member though you claim you were" (Imaginary/hypothetical example) I thought, ok, counter that with the truth. But it doesn't work.

The only thing to do is have a truce where everyone just goes, yeah, sometimes I was a dick, and if you were a dick, too, well, you weren't the only one. We may never agree. Let's just move forward.

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: S & D Research

My emphasis.

Not true Terril.

There are pro scio boards (I believe you run one) where you can post your pro comments about scientology and hubbard till your hearts content, but few would read them except the already indoctrinated, which is probably why you choose to come to an Ex scio board and try to make it your own and possibly pick up some new recruits along the way, as does Roger with his tek.



​

Your comment would make perfect sense if one particular term had a very specific definition which everybody could agree on. The term I am speaking of is "Ex Scio". The term as defined on ESMB means that someone was once in the Church of Scientology and has quit being a member of that particular Church.

You are using the term in a much stronger way such that the person is not only no longer in the Church of Scientology but that they no longer believe there is an validity whatsoever in the tech (or scriptures) of that Church and that its founder was a complete con man.

I am not saying that you are wrong. Its just that there is not yet universal agreement on what the term "Ex Scientologist" actually means.

I do think you and the faction of people who feel as you do are acting a bit too boldly by coming onto a forum such as ESMB, which has their own definition of the term, and instead of adhering to that definition, you are trying to override it with your own definition.

The bottom line is that we have to have more a universal definition for terms of this nature before people can come to agreement on posts such as the one which you just made.
Lakey

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Tom and Dave, Why are they friends?

I have a video (on VHS) somewhere... of my daughter and I petting a moray eel about 110 feet below the surface off Oahu. The memory is pretty cool.

I have lots of memories of rock climbing and skiing with our kids.

When one of our grandchildren was six, I took him off his first cornice(s)

I know a little bit about adrenaline. So do my kids and their kids.

A week or two ago, I was asking what TC sees in Dave.

TC has major cojones. You won't find me jumping around outside the tallest building in the world.

I was talking with Face the other day, and what we came up with as to why they are friends, is that they are both adrenaline junkies.

When Dave was handling LRH's money, he lost some. He scurried, and got it back. That kind of adrenaline rush gets to be addictive.

I had been wondering *what* Tom saw in Dave. It is the power and it is the shared rushes they get.

Deep down inside there is good.

[video=youtube;pq28qCklEHc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pq28qCklEHc[/video]