Scientology - The Internet & OSA

AnonKat

Crusader
I am in love, so fuck me
[video=youtube;7n_hkeYGcT0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7n_hkeYGcT0[/video]
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
Concern Troll's

Here's some info about a particular breed of troll, a bit different than just your average garden variety troll.


WHAT IS CONCERN TROLLING?
Concern trolling is a form of Internet trolling in which someone enters a discussion with claims that he or she supports the view of the discussion, but has concerns. In fact, the concern troll is opposed to the view of the discussion, and he or she uses concern trolling to sow doubt and dissent in the community of commenters or posters. Although this practice originated on the Internet, it has since spread to the real world as well, with concern trolls popping up in a variety of places from network television to op-ed columns.

Artful concern trolling involves developing a believable persona as a supporter of a cause who has legitimate concerns. In an example of concern trolling, a group of people might be having a political discussion on a website about a candidate they support. The concern troll would log on and say “I'm concerned that this candidate might not be strong enough to beat the opposition,” or “I'm worried that the candidate's history in the legislature might be a problem in the election.”

Once a concern troll has sowed dissent or discord, often he or she can sit back and let the other commenters do the rest of the work. When a concern troll has done the job correctly, the discussion will split, factions will emerge, and support for the cause will have eroded. Concern trolling can also be highly distracting, as people band together to oppose the concern troll, rather than discussing serious issues, including valid concerns which should be addressed.

<SNIP>

Read Full Post:
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-concern-trolling.htm#didyouknowout
 
Last edited:

clamicide

Gold Meritorious Patron
Yes but we do have people on this forum who were never in who are very perceptive and intuitive and "get it". They also provide an untainted viewpoint on things that provoke thought or thinking that may not have occured without their input. We have some here who are excellent contributors

I do absolutely agree with this. Sometimes the outside view is the one that can really help make a change. My counselor who was an absolute expert in the subject had never been in a cult, and it took some time for me to trust that he could 'get it', and dang--he really understood and was a brilliant man.

That being said, some of the times I kind of got a bit more blase here was when there were so many new posters who were 'omg, I've never been in, but this is so interesting and awful and just never cared to dig in
. It was like ESMB was a fad for some of them. Others, at times, it almost felt like they were looking at lab rats... there were periods when it came into the news, and you just knew these folks weren't going to hang here.

I like that I have met so many here that have been "in the trenches" and there's almost times when I just feel 'knowing nods' pass across, but we post a reply anyways... and the lurker or newbie that was once us, sees that it's not just one person feeling that way.

I freaking admire, love and ADORE so many of the not-ins that hang out here. It amazes me that folks who weren't impacted personally by this cult see what it is we went through, and think it's wrong enough to learn more and speak out, and try to understand. I also love and adore Anon, because I don't think we'd be where we are.

also, a big, huge freaking THANK YOU TO MATT STONE AND TREY PARKER!!!! I'd been fans before, during times I was offlines (Southpark), because I have a dark and sick sense of humor, and I actually remember when I was a child and how just evil and weird they can be... I almost had a nervous breakdown, because I'd been routed off staff and still not mentally out when the Xenu episode came on. I FREAKED and made my son turn the channel, when they got to the part they were about the OT III stuff, because I figured they had the info and were really going to spill it... because they mocked and screwed some stuff up (THEEEETAN? really?), I was pretty damn sure the real stuff was coming.... but, these fuckers (and I mean it lovingly) just said F U and did the episode, and it sorta was the start of the watershed where media wasn't afraid.

WWP can laugh its ass off at OSA. At one time, they were seriously-- no joke, and I know some folks who post (and I'm thinking maybe more, lurking).

but to all the parties I've mentioned above (and haven't, but deserve it)... :heartflower::handinhand::grouphug::thewave::thankyou: (and, I need a kilted smiley... feck!)

The other thing to remember is, even if this cult gets taken down, cults are continually created. By getting this cult into the media and into public consciousness, hopefully fewer folks will fall prey to whatever other cult springs up...
 
Last edited:

john reguerra

Patron with Honors
Information for whomever. Scientology: Reminder of Internet Mafia Programs - Tory Magoo [video=youtube;M5_mAMxARec]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5_mAMxARec&list=UU__gcXYVQlmVocNLZykibUw[/video] Operation Clambake presents: Tory Christman http://www.xenu.net/archive/personal_story/tory/ OSA 101 - Part 1 How the OSA Trap really works (Mar 2001) OSA 101 - Part 2 The key players (Mar 2001) OSA 101 - Part 3 Who is the real Mike Smith (Mar 2001) OSA 101 - Part 4 Black PR (Mar 2001) OSA 101 - Part 5 Super super secret (Apr 2001) Fair Game http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) "The term Fair Game is used to describe policies and practices carried out by the Church of Scientology towards people and groups it perceives as its enemies. Founder L. Ron Hubbard established the policy in the 1960s, in response to criticism both from within and outside his organization. Individuals or groups who are "Fair Game" are judged to be a threat to the Church and, according to the policy, can be punished and harassed using any and all means possible. In 1968, Hubbard officially canceled use of the term "Fair Game" because of negative public relations it caused, although the Church's aggressive response to criticism continued." Scientology Controversies: Dead agenting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#.22Dead_agenting.22 "In the 1970s, Hubbard continued to codify the policy of "attacking the attacker" and assigned a term to it that is used frequently within Scientology: "dead agenting." Used as a verb, "dead agenting" is described by Hubbard as a technique for countering negative accusations against Scientology by diverting the critical statements and making counter-accusations against the accuser. In other words, "attack the attacker". Hubbard defined the PR (public relations) policy on "dead agenting" in a 1974 bulletin: The technique of proving utterances false is called "DEAD AGENTING." It's in the first book of Chinese espionage. When the enemy agent gives false data, those who believed him but now find it false kill him - or at least cease to believe him. So the PR slang for it is 'Dead Agenting.'" —L. Ron Hubbard, Board Policy Letter, PR Series 24: Handling Hostile Contacts/Dead Agenting, May 30, 1974. The phrase comes from a misunderstanding of the chapter on espionage in The Art of War. The Scientology-sponsored website, religiousfreedomwatch.org, features depictions of so-called "anti-religious extremists," most of whom are critics of Scientology. Featuring photos of the critics and claimed evidence of their personal wrongdoing (sometimes very vague, for example: "Documentation received by Religious Freedom Watch shows that [Kristi] Wachter paid an individual to carry out a specific project for her, and also instructed this individual to lie about what he was doing in case he was caught"). The "Religious Freedom Watch" site is often cited by alt.religion.scientology users as a contemporary example of "dead agenting." Dead agenting has also been carried out by flier campaigns against some critics—using so-called "DA fliers." Bonnie Woods, an ex-member who began counseling people involved with Scientology and their families, became a target along with her husband in 1993 when the Church of Scientology started a leaflet operation denouncing her as a "hate campaigner" with demonstrators outside their home and around East Grinstead. After a long battle of libel suits, in 1999 the church agreed to issue an apology[18] and pay £55,000 damages and £100,000 costs to the Woods." Troll http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet) In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion. Trolling http://netforbeginners.about.com/od/netiquetteonlineculture/f/What-Is-Trolling.htm Answer: Internet 'trolling' is the anti-social act of causing of interpersonal conflict and shock-value controversy online. Named for the wicked troll creatures of children's tales, trolling is purposely sowing hatred, bigotry, racism, misogyny, or just simple bickering between others. Trolls themselves are emotionally-immature users who thrive in any environment where they are allowed to make public comments, like blog sites, news sites, discussion forums, and game chat.
Hi there!! The only thing I really need and again I really need is a full disclosure of all the overt and withholds these two fantastic people have done against the 3D and 4D when they were pretending to salvage the planet at Int. That is it nothing else. We are in this arguing business with no Bridge and many people developing it because these guys did not have cojones to ask LRH what the hell is going on. No excuse. Sorry.
 

AnonKat

Crusader
I am in love, so fuck me
[video=youtube;7n_hkeYGcT0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7n_hkeYGcT0[/video]

bump with content

[video=youtube;fD1512_XJEw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fD1512_XJEw[/video]
 
Last edited:

AnonKat

Crusader
See OSA is nothing

do you folks have anything ?

[video=youtube;OFtNChII78k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFtNChII78k[/video]
 

dchoiceisalwaysrs

Gold Meritorious Patron
Hi there!! The only thing I really need and again I really need is a full disclosure of all the overt and withholds these two fantastic people have done against the 3D and 4D when they were pretending to salvage the planet at Int. That is it nothing else. We are in this arguing business with no Bridge and many people developing it because these guys did not have cojones to ask LRH what the hell is going on. No excuse. Sorry.

Well in 1973 I did ask LRH what was going on that he didn't get out and do more public speaking and I am still waiting for his answer. Damned long comm lag. Per the tech it is a bit disappointing that the founder was so low toned per his SOS tone scale.

Based on the dictate that LRH who was to receive all mail addressed to him, I guess you would have to ask DM. Oh wait, the new leader, (and surely Ron would have made sure his created religion that he so worked at hard at to construct and fully researched and proven as a route to total freedom), would be led by a beneficent one after LRH handed off the reigns) is being asked what has been going on is also failing to answer. Will he also go into hiding from charges of his impropriety? .....fooled once...fooled twice....just go on hiding the lack of evidence from self. Oh well, life goes on. Gotta run and go join the solitaire club, I think they are meeting again this century.
 

F.Bullbait

Oh, a wise guy,eh?
Well in 1973 I did ask LRH what was going on that he didn't get out and do more public speaking and I am still waiting for his answer. Damned long comm lag. Per the tech it is a bit disappointing that the founder was so low toned per his SOS tone scale.

Based on the dictate that LRH who was to receive all mail addressed to him, I guess you would have to ask DM.

I believe the LRH public line was "all mail addressed to me will be answered by me" or something close to that.

The reason I remember this was when I was in the SO, I was given a mission to dig around in the Pubs stacks and found that there were 'confidential' memos about this LRH letter thing. They weren't available to view but the confidentiality thing caused me to take a second look at the LRH letter promotions.

I had attended a public event where everyone was encouraged to write the great Oz himself so I did. Sure enough, I got back a letter on some nice letterhead and with the famous signature. The content of the letter was nothing but LRH quotes. Disappointed, I never wrote again.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
Hi there!! The only thing I really need and again I really need is a full disclosure of all the overt and withholds these two fantastic people have done against the 3D and 4D when they were pretending to salvage the planet at Int. That is it nothing else. We are in this arguing business with no Bridge and many people developing it because these guys did not have cojones to ask LRH what the hell is going on. No excuse. Sorry.

Thank you for that incomprehensible OT post.
 

Mick Wenlock

Admin Emeritus (retired)
I believe the LRH public line was "all mail addressed to me will be answered by me" or something close to that.

Standing Order #1 (SO1 in Sea Org acronym)

The unit was, during my time, at the FSO in CW.

Letters to hubbard that had complaints or issues would be excerpted and forwarded to the appropriate areas and failure to respond - was painful.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
Scientology and the Internet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_and_the_Internet (Full article at link}

"There are a number of disputes concerning the Church of Scientology's attempts to suppress material critical of Scientology on the Internet, utilising lawsuits and legal threats.[2][3][4] In late 1994, the Church of Scientology began using various legal tactics to stop distribution of unpublished documents written by L. Ron Hubbard. The Church of Scientology is often accused of barratry[5][6][7] through the filing of SLAPP suits. The official church response is that its litigious nature is solely to protect its copyrighted works and the unpublished status of certain documents.

Various critics[who?] of the Church of Scientology have characterised the organization as a confidence scam and claim that these secretive writings are proof, or allege that they contain evidence that the Church of Scientology's medical practices are illegal and fraudulent.[8][9] Scientology has been convicted of fraud in the courts of several nations, although not those of the United States. Others have claimed that the Church of Scientology is abusing copyright law by launching lawsuits against outspoken critics."


Scientology's online campaign

"After failing to remove the newsgroup, Scientologists adopted a strategy of newsgroup spam and intimidation.[25] Scientologists hired third parties to regularly flood the newsgroup with pro-scientology messages, vague anti-scientology messages, irrelevant comments, and accusations that other posters are secret Scientologists intent on tracking and punishing posters. This makes the newsgroup virtually unreadable via online readers such as Google Groups, although more specialized newsreading software that can filter out all messages by specific "high noise" posters make the newsgroup more usable.[citation needed]

While legal battles were being fought in the courts, an equally intense and aggressive campaign was waged online. The newsgroup alt.religion.scientology found itself at the heart of an electronic maelstrom of information and disinformation, as the newsgroup itself was attacked both literally and figuratively. Tens of thousands of junk messages were spammed onto the newsgroup, rendering it nearly unreadable at times when the message "floods" were at their peaks.[25] Over one million sporgery articles were injected into the newsgroup by Scientology management and staff; former Scientology staff member Tory Christman has spoken at length about her involvement in these attacks. Lawyers representing the Church of Scientology made public appeals to Internet service providers to remove the newsgroup completely from their news servers.[26] Furthermore, anonymous participants in the newsgroup kept up a steady stream of flame wars and off-topic arguments. Participants on the newsgroup accused Scientology of organising these electronic attacks, though the organization consistently denied any wrongdoing.

In the early days of the World Wide Web, groups associated with Scientology employed a similar strategy to make finding websites critical of the organization more difficult. Scientology employed Web designers to write thousands of Web pages for their site, thus flooding early search engines.[27] This problem was solved by the innovation of clustering responses from the same Web server, showing no more than the top two results from any one site (e.g. Google).

Since 1995, Scientology has utilised copyright infringement laws to prosecute critics posting controversial information about the organisation on the Web. The organization has been accused of utilising not only legal pressure, but also blackmail and character assassination in an attempt to win many of the court cases in which it involves itself.[28] On the other side of the battle, many Web-page developers have linked the words "Dianetics" and "Scientology" to Operation Clambake. This resulted in the anti-Scientology site having the highest Google index on the term for a while, which in turn resulted in Scientology persuading Google to remove links to the site[29] until international outcry led to the links being restored. This might be considered an early example of a Google bomb, and has led to questions about the power and obligations of Internet search providers.

In the 1990s Scientology was distributing a special software package for its members to 'protect' them from "unapproved" material about the church. The software is designed to completely block out the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology, various anti-Scientology web sites, and all references to various critics of Scientology. This software package was derided by critics, who accused the organization of censorship and called the program "Scieno Sitter", after the content-control software net-filter program Cyber Sitter. Since no updates have been reported since 1998 (and the original filter program only worked with Windows 95) the package is unlikely to be in use with recent operating systems and browsers due to software rot.[27]

In June 2006, Scientology lawyers sent cease-and-desist letters to Max Goldberg, founder of the website YTMND, asking him to take down all sites that either talked about or mocked Scientology, which had recently become a fad on the site following a popular South Park episode. Goldberg responded by stating that the "claims are completely groundless and I'm not removing anything," adding to the members of the site, "it should only be a matter of time before we're sued out of existence." In response, YTMNDers created yet more sites about Scientology, and these were highlighted on the main page. They also campaigned to Google bomb "The Unfunny Truth About Scientology" site. No legal action was taken against YTMND or Goldberg.

In August 2007, MSNBC quoted Associated Press in an article on the Wikipedia Scanner, that computers owned by the Church of Scientology have been removing criticism in the Scientology entry on Wikipedia.[30] A Fox News article also reported that Church of Scientology computers had been used to delete references of the relationship between Scientology and the Cult Awareness Network, in the article on the Cult Awareness Network on Wikipedia.[31] In May 2009, the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee decided to restrict access to its site from Church of Scientology IP addresses, to prevent self-serving edits by Scientologists.[32][33] A "host of anti-Scientologist editors" were topic-banned as well.[32][33] The committee concluded that both sides had "gamed policy" and resorted to "battlefield tactics", with articles on living persons being the "worst casualties".[32]
 

rich

Silver Meritorious Patron
Can somebody please make me a list of the good guys and the bad guys? I desprately want to hate, but I don't know who to hate.
I was public in the church for 13yrs and I still can't figure it out.
I guess I didn't study hard enough.
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
I believe the LRH public line was "all mail addressed to me will be answered by me" or something close to that.

The reason I remember this was when I was in the SO, I was given a mission to dig around in the Pubs stacks and found that there were 'confidential' memos about this LRH letter thing. They weren't available to view but the confidentiality thing caused me to take a second look at the LRH letter promotions.

I had attended a public event where everyone was encouraged to write the great Oz himself so I did. Sure enough, I got back a letter on some nice letterhead and with the famous signature. The content of the letter was nothing but LRH quotes. Disappointed, I never wrote again.

It was more like "all mail addressed to me shall be received by me". The policy was labeled "Standing Order #1", or SO #1.

I once stole a peek at an LRH Comm hat pack at Flag when they were doing an LRH Comm training course there. I vaguely recall that one reference said the LRH Comm was supposed to take the letters to LRH, and for each compose a proposed reply and attach it before sending the letters uplines.

At Flag, (in the old bank building in the late 70's/early 80's or so), there was a room labeled "SO #1 Unit", where you could hear the continual sound of lots of typewriters. It was here that the responses "from Ron" would be typed up.

I'm going to guess that a sampling of letters would occasionally really get up to LRH, particularly if the letter pointed out an actual situation. Don't know.
 

john reguerra

Patron with Honors
Well in 1973 I did ask LRH what was going on that he didn't get out and do more public speaking and I am still waiting for his answer. Damned long comm lag. Per the tech it is a bit disappointing that the founder was so low toned per his SOS tone scale. Based on the dictate that LRH who was to receive all mail addressed to him, I guess you would have to ask DM. Oh wait, the new leader, (and surely Ron would have made sure his created religion that he so worked at hard at to construct and fully researched and proven as a route to total freedom), would be led by a beneficent one after LRH handed off the reigns) is being asked what has been going on is also failing to answer. Will he also go into hiding from charges of his impropriety? .....fooled once...fooled twice....just go on hiding the lack of evidence from self. Oh well, life goes on. Gotta run and go join the solitaire club, I think they are meeting again this century.
What can I say? You are right that is a very long comm lag. But what has to do with the O/W of those two fantastic guys? I have no beef with LRH but I have some concern of those who enrolled to do good for the 3D and 4D but they have done really bad for those two dynamics.
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
Can somebody please make me a list of the good guys and the bad guys? I desprately want to hate, but I don't know who to hate.
I was public in the church for 13yrs and I still can't figure it out.
I guess I didn't study hard enough.


Lurk Moar
 

WildKat

Gold Meritorious Patron
Scientology and the Internet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_and_the_Internet (Full article at link}

"There are a number of disputes concerning the Church of Scientology's attempts to suppress material critical of Scientology on the Internet, utilising lawsuits and legal threats.[2][3][4] In late 1994, the Church of Scientology began using various legal tactics to stop distribution of unpublished documents written by L. Ron Hubbard. The Church of Scientology is often accused of barratry[5][6][7] through the filing of SLAPP suits. The official church response is that its litigious nature is solely to protect its copyrighted works and the unpublished status of certain documents.

Various critics[who?] of the Church of Scientology have characterised the organization as a confidence scam and claim that these secretive writings are proof, or allege that they contain evidence that the Church of Scientology's medical practices are illegal and fraudulent.[8][9] Scientology has been convicted of fraud in the courts of several nations, although not those of the United States. Others have claimed that the Church of Scientology is abusing copyright law by launching lawsuits against outspoken critics."


Scientology's online campaign

"After failing to remove the newsgroup, Scientologists adopted a strategy of newsgroup spam and intimidation.[25] Scientologists hired third parties to regularly flood the newsgroup with pro-scientology messages, vague anti-scientology messages, irrelevant comments, and accusations that other posters are secret Scientologists intent on tracking and punishing posters. This makes the newsgroup virtually unreadable via online readers such as Google Groups, although more specialized newsreading software that can filter out all messages by specific "high noise" posters make the newsgroup more usable.[citation needed]

While legal battles were being fought in the courts, an equally intense and aggressive campaign was waged online. The newsgroup alt.religion.scientology found itself at the heart of an electronic maelstrom of information and disinformation, as the newsgroup itself was attacked both literally and figuratively. Tens of thousands of junk messages were spammed onto the newsgroup, rendering it nearly unreadable at times when the message "floods" were at their peaks.[25] Over one million sporgery articles were injected into the newsgroup by Scientology management and staff; former Scientology staff member Tory Christman has spoken at length about her involvement in these attacks. Lawyers representing the Church of Scientology made public appeals to Internet service providers to remove the newsgroup completely from their news servers.[26] Furthermore, anonymous participants in the newsgroup kept up a steady stream of flame wars and off-topic arguments. Participants on the newsgroup accused Scientology of organising these electronic attacks, though the organization consistently denied any wrongdoing.

In the early days of the World Wide Web, groups associated with Scientology employed a similar strategy to make finding websites critical of the organization more difficult. Scientology employed Web designers to write thousands of Web pages for their site, thus flooding early search engines.[27] This problem was solved by the innovation of clustering responses from the same Web server, showing no more than the top two results from any one site (e.g. Google).

Since 1995, Scientology has utilised copyright infringement laws to prosecute critics posting controversial information about the organisation on the Web. The organization has been accused of utilising not only legal pressure, but also blackmail and character assassination in an attempt to win many of the court cases in which it involves itself.[28] On the other side of the battle, many Web-page developers have linked the words "Dianetics" and "Scientology" to Operation Clambake. This resulted in the anti-Scientology site having the highest Google index on the term for a while, which in turn resulted in Scientology persuading Google to remove links to the site[29] until international outcry led to the links being restored. This might be considered an early example of a Google bomb, and has led to questions about the power and obligations of Internet search providers.

In the 1990s Scientology was distributing a special software package for its members to 'protect' them from "unapproved" material about the church. The software is designed to completely block out the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology, various anti-Scientology web sites, and all references to various critics of Scientology. This software package was derided by critics, who accused the organization of censorship and called the program "Scieno Sitter", after the content-control software net-filter program Cyber Sitter. Since no updates have been reported since 1998 (and the original filter program only worked with Windows 95) the package is unlikely to be in use with recent operating systems and browsers due to software rot.[27]

In June 2006, Scientology lawyers sent cease-and-desist letters to Max Goldberg, founder of the website YTMND, asking him to take down all sites that either talked about or mocked Scientology, which had recently become a fad on the site following a popular South Park episode. Goldberg responded by stating that the "claims are completely groundless and I'm not removing anything," adding to the members of the site, "it should only be a matter of time before we're sued out of existence." In response, YTMNDers created yet more sites about Scientology, and these were highlighted on the main page. They also campaigned to Google bomb "The Unfunny Truth About Scientology" site. No legal action was taken against YTMND or Goldberg.

In August 2007, MSNBC quoted Associated Press in an article on the Wikipedia Scanner, that computers owned by the Church of Scientology have been removing criticism in the Scientology entry on Wikipedia.[30] A Fox News article also reported that Church of Scientology computers had been used to delete references of the relationship between Scientology and the Cult Awareness Network, in the article on the Cult Awareness Network on Wikipedia.[31] In May 2009, the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee decided to restrict access to its site from Church of Scientology IP addresses, to prevent self-serving edits by Scientologists.[32][33] A "host of anti-Scientologist editors" were topic-banned as well.[32][33] The committee concluded that both sides had "gamed policy" and resorted to "battlefield tactics", with articles on living persons being the "worst casualties".[32]

Bumping this important info
 
Top