Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt boogie

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
So as most of you know, when I first got into critical fora, I was dyed in the wool churchie. Once I left and then, a year later got expelled (2001) I continued on with my interest in Scn. It was, after all, what had worked best for me. I made no inference or statement that any other practice wouldn't be worthwhile. In fact, I said that some were probably just great.
I also did not proselytize.

BUT, the fact that I was candid about my continuing interest in Scn upset some people. They gave a lot of reasons, but, frankly, none of it really seemed to compute.

I also never stopped speaking out against the abuses of the cult as I'd been doing since my expulsion (since that basically outed me in more ways than one.)

I left Scn as an ology about a year and a half ago. I still give props to things I learned just as I do with Catholicism but it's mostly background for me at this point, ideology wise. I sometimes read some (non Scn) philosophy or psychology book and think "Aha! So that's where Hubbard got that from!" Kind of amusing.

Something that has been said to me over and over by just a few people is that no one should come onto a critical forum and post pro Scn stuff here. Now, I will add that at least three quarters of the time when people thought I was posting pro tech stuff, I was actually posting stuff about the death of Lisa McPherson, insane pricing, treatment of staff, RPFing, recruitment practices, etc. But since I'd been an indie Scn'ist and people knew that, well, that's all some of 'em saw no matter what I wrote. In fact, I'm still referred to as one, which is kind of weird. I mean, I could have posted a video of me performing a citizen's arrest on David Miscavige along with the entire contents of his hard drive (ha ha) and some of them would still say I was doing all pro tech posts.

Really, it's kind of two things some people seemed upset about. One of them being my having (back then) identified myself as a Scn'ist (figuring people would rather I didn't LIE)- that somehow this was a bad thing. The other being that yes, I sometimes did defend the tech in some posts. Mostly if asked point blank or in conjunction with a thread someone already started. Plus, of course, I know a number of people who post unabashedly pro tech commentary here. Sometimes they discuss points of Scn procedure, and really go into depth on the stuff. It's really fine with me, that they do that.

For one thing, as I've pointed out before, this forum has a FZ and Independent section in it. For another, there's nothing in the rules of conduct stating one cannot discuss these things in that way. I mean, there could have been. Ems could have set it up that way. It's her board. Wouldn't matter to me. But she didn't. So the sections are there and the rules of conduct don't include any such prohibitions. Not even a vague caveat.

I'm fine with that. If this were a board where pro tech commentary were forbidden and someone wanted to post that, I'd be just as likely to report that post as would anyone else here. I'm for freedom-of-admin as well as freedom of speech. Want a forum with a particular slant? Go for it! But if that slant isn't there, I personally don't see why anyone has to get upset that pro tech commentary is being posted. Absent such prohibitions, people will do what people will do.

Some of the most skeptical or critical (I mean this in a good way) people here seem to have no problem with anyone discussing Scn in a favorable way though they aren't shy about posting their opinions. It seems to me like those are the ones who get it.

So, I'm going to ask-- what do you think of people on a forum that does not prohibit it and which has sections for it- discussing Scn in a pro tech way (on ESMB)? I am NOT asking "Hey, do you think the tech is great and that these people are helpful?" I mean, what do you think of people just posting their opinions on a board where freedom of speech cuts both ways- if not three, four, five, six - a thousand different ways- where anyone can rebut anyone's posted commentary and write "fuck the skull of L Ron Hubbard" in fifty different types of phrasing with impunity?
 

Terril park

Sponsor
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

So as most of you know, when I first got into critical fora, I was dyed in the wool churchie. Once I left and then, a year later got expelled (2001) I continued on with my interest in Scn. It was, after all, what had worked best for me. I made no inference or statement that any other practice wouldn't be worthwhile. In fact, I said that some were probably just great.
I also did not proselytize.

BUT, the fact that I was candid about my continuing interest in Scn upset some people. They gave a lot of reasons, but, frankly, none of it really seemed to compute.

I also never stopped speaking out against the abuses of the cult as I'd been doing since my expulsion (since that basically outed me in more ways than one.)

I left Scn as an ology about a year and a half ago. I still give props to things I learned just as I do with Catholicism but it's mostly background for me at this point, ideology wise. I sometimes read some (non Scn) philosophy or psychology book and think "Aha! So that's where Hubbard got that from!" Kind of amusing.

Something that has been said to me over and over by just a few people is that no one should come onto a critical forum and post pro Scn stuff here. Now, I will add that at least three quarters of the time when people thought I was posting pro tech stuff, I was actually posting stuff about the death of Lisa McPherson, insane pricing, treatment of staff, RPFing, recruitment practices, etc. But since I'd been an indie Scn'ist and people knew that, well, that's all some of 'em saw no matter what I wrote. In fact, I'm still referred to as one, which is kind of weird. I mean, I could have posted a video of me performing a citizen's arrest on David Miscavige along with the entire contents of his hard drive (ha ha) and some of them would still say I was doing all pro tech posts.

Really, it's kind of two things some people seemed upset about. One of them being my having (back then) identified myself as a Scn'ist (figuring people would rather I didn't LIE)- that somehow this was a bad thing. The other being that yes, I sometimes did defend the tech in some posts. Mostly if asked point blank or in conjunction with a thread someone already started. Plus, of course, I know a number of people who post unabashedly pro tech commentary here. Sometimes they discuss points of Scn procedure, and really go into depth on the stuff. It's really fine with me, that they do that.

For one thing, as I've pointed out before, this forum has a FZ and Independent section in it. For another, there's nothing in the rules of conduct stating one cannot discuss these things in that way. I mean, there could have been. Ems could have set it up that way. It's her board. Wouldn't matter to me. But she didn't. So the sections are there and the rules of conduct don't include any such prohibitions. Not even a vague caveat.

I'm fine with that. If this were a board where pro tech commentary were forbidden and someone wanted to post that, I'd be just as likely to report that post as would anyone else here. I'm for freedom-of-admin as well as freedom of speech. Want a forum with a particular slant? Go for it! But if that slant isn't there, I personally don't see why anyone has to get upset that pro tech commentary is being posted. Absent such prohibitions, people will do what people will do.

Some of the most skeptical or critical (I mean this in a good way) people here seem to have no problem with anyone discussing Scn in a favorable way though they aren't shy about posting their opinions. It seems to me like those are the ones who get it.

So, I'm going to ask-- what do you think of people on a forum that does not prohibit it and which has sections for it- discussing Scn in a pro tech way (on ESMB)? I am NOT asking "Hey, do you think the tech is great and that these people are helpful?" I mean, what do you think of people just posting their opinions on a board where freedom of speech cuts both ways- if not three, four, five, six - a thousand different ways- where anyone can rebut anyone's posted commentary and write "fuck the skull of L Ron Hubbard" in fifty different types of phrasing with impunity?

A problem is that pro tech posts have been limited IMO.

Emma changed her mind and no longer allows success stories to be reposted here. This follows her own views.

Clearly I have interest in going back to the original plan.

It is the case that pro scn viewpoints are extremely hard to find.

ESMB was one where they could be. Still can be to a lesser degree now.

They can help people leave CO$. I believe a universal wish here.

Currently they are more likely to go to Marty's blog.
 

AnonKat

Crusader
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/a-solution-to-economic-coercion/

http://www.freeandable.com/

A problem is that pro tech posts have been limited IMO.

Emma changed her mind and no longer allows success stories to be reposted here. This follows her own views.

Clearly I have interest in going back to the original plan.

It is the case that pro scn viewpoints are extremely hard to find.

ESMB was one where they could be. Still can be to a lesser degree now.

They can help people leave CO$. I believe a universal wish here.

Currently they are more likely to go to Marty's blog.
 
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

... Emma changed her mind and no longer allows success stories to be reposted here. This follows her own views.
...

That is flatly untrue, BB. Emma permits the posting of success stories by those individuals whose successes they actually represent. :yes:

What she has banned is the reposting of success stories by 3rd parties who are simply seeking to drum up business for themselves or others. This was done in response to the utterly reckless disregard for personal confidences exhibited by prominent members of the freezone in regard to their posts. :yes:

Perhaps you may recall the circumstances? :whistling:


Mark A. Baker
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

I personally have nothing against the posting of success stories but I also have nothing against a ban on doing it. I mean, it's Emma's board.

She does allow pro tech posts. She did put in a small limitation, yes, but even with that, as Mark states, the person who actually did the service can post a success story.

One thing she didn't say was that this was somehow a poke in the eye for people who didn't like the tech or was unfair or whatnot. There wasn't any suggestion that this was her thought. What I'm kind of driving at here is that there are people who have point blank said that no pro tech commentary should be posted on a forum that's got exes on it, cuz it might hurt them. I'm being quite tactful here in my phrasing.
 
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

Is this an issue?

Or an issue about an issue?
Or an issue about an issue about an issue?

Or an issue about something that is an issue to others?

Or an issue that some have about an issue being an issue that others have an issue about?

That is what really interests me in all this.:biggrin:
 

Emma

Con te partirò
Administrator
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

People can post whatever viewpoint they like about the tech. I'm not here to tell people what they must or mustn't think about Scientology technology.

What has always surprised me however, is the shock and dismay people feel when their pro tech viewpoint is not shared or agreed with on an EX Scientology message board.

In the past it has gone like this:

Poster 1: I like ARC straightwaire and here is why.
Poster 2: I don't and here is why
Poster 3: I don't and here is why
Poster 4: I don't and here is why
Poster 5: I don't and here is why
Poster 6: I don't and here is why
Poster 7: I don't and here is why
Poster 8: I don't and here is why
Poster 1: You are all mean and I'm going home!

The freedom of Poster 1 to post their "positive" post is equal to each of the other poster's freedom to post their "negative" post. When it comes to "tech appreciation" there will always be a major inbalance that favours those who don't like the tech anymore.

After all, we are EX Scientologists, right??
 

Emma

Con te partirò
Administrator
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

Just to reiterate for the 500th time.....

There are FZ & other "tech" sections on this board because they are topics for discussion. It is a filing system. Unlike OCMB where there are really only two main sections and everything is filed under "Opinions & Debate" or "Your story from inside Scientology" or the few media & picket sections, ESMB has more "named" sections for the classification of posts.

Having a FZ section was never a "safe section" for FZers to escape criticism. It was a label for the classification of discussion and it still is. That is all it is.

I banned FZ success stories because after several encounters with the group who would be "handling" those poor souls who might have been sucked in by the success stories, I could not in good conscience allow that group to advertise on ESMB.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

Well, that makes sense to me. It does.

I don't think of the fact that there's an FZ and an independent section as really anything more than categories, BUT I will say this: If there's a category for something, that means it's ok to post something there.

Now, if there's a category for it but only certain types of things could be posted there, like there were guidelines, criteria, limitations-whatever- then you, the Admin would let us know. Which you did re the success stories.

I may've given the impression that I thought that having those categories was an endorsement or something. If so, that was my bad. But again, I do have a sort of amazed wonderment that anyone would be on a forum that has such categories and then indicate dismay because people made full use of them.

( It's a childlike fluffy look what Santa brought us on Christmas morn kind of wonderment, actually. Which makes it ok. :coolwink: )
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

Is this an issue?

Or an issue about an issue?
Or an issue about an issue about an issue?

Or an issue about something that is an issue to others?

Or an issue that some have about an issue being an issue that others have an issue about?

That is what really interests me in all this.:biggrin:

Yeh. I got told it was an issue. So I thought I'd ask the board if it was an issue or if it was just the ramblings of some drunk plus some things from some other people, who, hopefully, weren't such.
 
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

People can post whatever viewpoint they like about the tech. I'm not here to tell people what they must or mustn't think about Scientology technology.

What has always surprised me however, is the shock and dismay people feel when their pro tech viewpoint is not shared or agreed with on an EX Scientology message board.

In the past it has gone like this:

Poster 1: I like ARC straightwaire and here is why.
Poster 2: I don't and here is why
Poster 3: I don't and here is why
Poster 4: I don't and here is why
Poster 5: I don't and here is why
Poster 6: I don't and here is why
Poster 7: I don't and here is why
Poster 8: I don't and here is why
Poster 1: You are all mean and I'm going home!

The freedom of Poster 1 to post their "positive" post is equal to each of the other poster's freedom to post their "negative" post. When it comes to "tech appreciation" there will always be a major inbalance that favours those who don't like the tech anymore.

After all, we are EX Scientologists, right??

Depends on the 'why', Em.

There is such a things as 'valid reasons' and 'invalid reason'. Reason does not respond to democratic measures. Not all 'reasons' are equal. Nor should all posters be encouraged to consider as 'equally valid' all forms of expression, much less those expressed opinions which simply accord with their own personal views. :)

5 idiots shouting down a single knowledgeable person does not a wise consensus make. If it did human legislative bodies would be much more efficient at promulgating effective legislation. :coolwink:


Mark A. Baker
 

SomeGuy

Patron Meritorious
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

I actually think it would be interesting to see a post about a scientology "technology" where it was properly dissected. Meaning those who profess to know what it does broke it down and showed why it works. Not the "I had some wins!" but an actually thoughtful breakdown of XYZ procedure did step XYXA which did XYZB to my mind which in turn allowed me to levitate an ashtray. In human language so a debate can occur.

I don't think I've ever really read a post like that. I wonder why [spoiler: this is a rhetorical tool].
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

. . . <snip> . . . If it did human legislative bodies would be much more efficient at promulgating effective legislation.

. . . as opposed to, say, Marcabian legislatures?
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

I actually think it would be interesting to see a post about a scientology "technology" where it was properly dissected. Meaning those who profess to know what it does broke it down and showed why it works. Not the "I had some wins!" but an actually thoughtful breakdown of XYZ procedure did step XYXA which did XYZB to my mind which in turn allowed me to levitate an ashtray. In human language so a debate can occur.

I don't think I've ever really read a post like that. I wonder why [spoiler: this is a rhetorical tool].
LOL, I could tell you EXACTLY how and why (I think) auditing works in some instances but it'd be a rhetorical answer. :laugh:
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
Its in the natue of the subject itself . . .

All subjects on open message boards are going to attract lively debate. When it comes to religion, however, the subject itself is particularly fraught. Unlike, say, mathematics where there is already a large body of material which defines parameters, religion starts from the basis of belief and faith. There's nothing wrong with belief and faith but without some universally accepted basis from which to extrapolate further, its hard to get off even first base.

When it comes to Scientology, the situation is exacerbated by the fact that its beliefs are set in stone - or should that be titanium plates buried beneath a mountain? Christianity, on the other hand, has multiple interpretations of given scripture and the wider subject itself has divided off into various sub-sets based on those interpretations. Perhaps we're beginning to see the early states of similar schisms within Scientology with the cult's application of L Ron Hubbard scripture vs the Independents, vs the FreeZone, vs RonsOrg and so on . . . but there still seems an air of right/wrong about what amounts to faith/belief. Same with the Christians.

Then there's the whole prosthelytising/dissemination aspect to religion. Not helping is that Scientology is known to be adept at using communication to manufacture agreement so as to commence shaping another's reality. Its all in the scripture. Its therefore difficult to know if a person is discussing aspects of the tech to promote further discussion towards a new understanding or whether its simply marketing.

Underlying these aspects is the fact that there are multiple Scientology survivors on ESMB who are recovering from, in some cases, horrific experiences. Seeing the tech being spoken of as somehow helpful is rubbing salt into their wounds. The prevalent attitude amongst the pro-tech lobby is that these people are somehow deficient; if only they could rise above "the bank", handle the ARC-X, and get back on the cans, the pain could be eased. The other line is that these people are responsible for what happened to them. This doesn't help. There are also people here who are as knowledgeable of the subject and as firm in the belief as to its perniciousness as those who are in favour of it. The difficulty for the proponents is that the detractors most often have the better argument. This seems a fair reflection of what happens in wider society as we watch concern for the spiritual world and participation in religion wane in favour of logic and rationality.

Yes, Emma could "promulgate" requirements that the various sections on ESMB are to be only for those "in favour" of the topic under discussion but, surely, that would turn ESMB into a collection of echo-chambers. It would, IMHO, detract from ESMB's core activity - to be a meeting place and source of on-going support for people who have left Scientology. Knowing that it is okay to go against the flow, to ignore OT/Office Holder status, and to really put Scientology to the test of open scrutiny aids in that core activity. Admittedly, some us could put down the sledge hammers and pick up a finer tool with which to apply the scrutiny.
 
Last edited:

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

I actually think it would be interesting to see a post about a scientology "technology" where it was properly dissected. Meaning those who profess to know what it does broke it down and showed why it works. Not the "I had some wins!" but an actually thoughtful breakdown of XYZ procedure did step XYXA which did XYZB to my mind which in turn allowed me to levitate an ashtray. In human language so a debate can occur.

I don't think I've ever really read a post like that. I wonder why [spoiler: this is a rhetorical tool].

Well, I know for a time, and once in a while nowadays, I used to write procedural type posts. But sometimes people would come in, assuming I had ulterior motives, like, say, to proselytize. It's very difficult to just sit and write a "ok, it's done like this" type post without people responding with personalities and suppositions.

I always LIKED posting stuff like that. The Ashtray Drill is one of my faves, actually, to do that with.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

Yah, Blippie, even when I was an Indie Scn'ist, I didn't want a bunch of echo chambers.

I get that it could be like rubbing salt into the wounds for some, but what are they gonna do? I mean, why are they reading FZ and Independent Scn posts or posting to a forum that allows different viewpoints?

Do you remember the old Ray Bradbury story about some family, the dad was an astronaut of some sort and the Mom said that if anything happened, she would never want to see that place where he died? But he crashed into the sun so she'd never go out into the daylight again and kept her child in the dark, too? Undoubtedly, Bradbury meant it as a metaphor.

I'm an ex Catholic. I don't freak out every time I see a Catholic church.

I was molested as a child by a 22 year old man. I still remember it VIVIDLY. Far more than I remember many other events from that time period. But I don't freak out everytime I see a park (it happened in a park) or even if I see some asshole touting a book on Amazon about how great it is to diddle kids. (there was one. They were selling it on Kindle til they got so much pressure they had to take it off the market.) I'm disgusted and outraged but no more than I'd have been had I not been molested by that asshole.

My Auntie was in WWII. A scary border crossing from Estonia into what later became E Germany as a young girl then another one a few years later frm E Germany to W Germany. She didn't use that as an excuse to be a dick to people. Oddly enough, I used to work with a lady who was also a kid in Germany WWII and she was really mean. She seemed to use her background as an excuse to be an asshole.

It's a big global village out there. Do we really want to be like that lady in the Bradbury story? In any event, the majority of posts here are not "pro tech".
Easy enough to avoid the pro tech ones or to just note one's disagreement with them if one comes across one.

Do we need to be kept in cotton batting?
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Re: Discussing Scn frm a pro tech viewpoint, whether only sorta-kinda or full tilt bo

Now, I started this thread because of a number of communications wherein it was opined that pro tech discussions don't belong on this board or any critical forum. Of course, that's bullshit because as long as the rules of conduct don't disallow it, then we can discuss it.

But I also want to mention one other thing. When this was kind of getting lobbed at me in Chat last week, several mentions were made of my own "pro tech"/"pro Scn" board.

But you know what? I allow criticism of Scn on that board.

Think about it.
 
Top