The question is irrelevant. This is an open forum where everybody can state their opinion. Everybody is free to agree or disagree with mine. If Claire opens a thread here, I'm sure she doesn't expect everybody to give theta replies, as she knows this is ESMB and not Martworld. Those who post on pro-LRH forums are not interested in open discussions, so what would be the point telling them something they don't want to hear? Peace.
No, you're missing the point I'm trying to make. I'm talking about the relative validity of different viewpoints not whether or not discussion between them is profitable.
Let me put it another way?
1 / Do you believe, or do you not believe, that you can evaluate the Tech, and have evaluated the Tech, better and more definitively than they (John, Dexter, Ralph etc.) have?
2 / Have you formed an opinion of LRH which is more accurate than theirs?
If so, how would you demonstrate that to be the case?
I know it seems like I'm picking on you here, but shot through probably the vast bulk of the posts I read on here are these very two assumptions; that those who believe they're using the Tech to help themselves and others are just deluded fools whereas we've seen the Light concerning Hubbard and the Tech.
Not all positions are equally true, or we'd all still be going round thinking that the Earth is flat and the Universe was created 6000 years ago.