some thoughts on OSA

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
Actually, on my Golden Age of Tech Professional TRs Course, I would have been flunked for that on TR2.

It would have been labeled a "double Ack".

But thanks anyway, Vinaire.

Methinks you don't know what a double ack is, Alanzo.

Or is it the GAT Pro TRs Course that doesn't know what a double ack is?

Paul
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
Methinks you don't know what a double ack is, Alanzo.

Or is it the GAT Pro TRs Course that doesn't know what a double ack is?

Paul

I think it was the GAT Pro TRs Supes I had at ASHO. You don't know how many crams I wrote on them. But they kept flunking me for "double acks".

I remember bringing in a set of Pro TRs Tapes and listening to them in the course room - the tapes of LRH auditing people on the BC that USED to be used as demonstrations of how TRs are supposed to be done.

They weren't on the GAT checksheet that I was on in 99.

When I brought them in the first time, after getting flunked so many times for "double ack" like the one below, my supervisor went white. It presented a real conflict for her to enforce the orders she was given for GAT, even though the LRH tapes totally supported saying "All right. Thank You." as an acceptable ack.

It didn't matter, though.

I was never going to pass my video if I said, "All right. Thank you." on TR2.

I think this is one of the big reasons the GAT auditors I had sounded so robotic: They could only say one word acks - every time.

So yes, I swear. I know what an ack is.

GAT trained supes may know what one is, too.

They just can't pass them in the "Golden Age of Tech".
 

Tanstaafl

Crusader
I think it was the GAT Pro TRs Supes I had at ASHO. You don't know how many crams I wrote on them. But they kept flunking me for "double acks".

I remember bringing in a set of Pro TRs Tapes and listening to them in the course room - the tapes of LRH auditing people on the BC that USED to be used as demonstrations of how TRs are supposed to be done.

They weren't on the GAT checksheet that I was on in 99.

When I brought them in the first time, after getting flunked so many times for "double ack" like the one below, my supervisor went white. It presented a real conflict for her to enforce the orders she was given for GAT, even though the LRH tapes totally supported saying "All right. Thank You." as an acceptable ack.

It didn't matter, though.

I was never going to pass my video if I said, "All right. Thank you." on TR2.

I think this is one of the big reasons the GAT auditors I had sounded so robotic: They could only say one word acks - every time.

So yes, I swear. I know what an ack is.

GAT trained supes may know what one is, too.

They just can't pass them in the "Golden Age of Tech".

Rejoice! The Golden Age of Robotism is at hand!
 

Tanstaafl

Crusader
Don't forget the Klearnex.

Zinj

I'm a fool to reply to this one. You have a talent for ambiguous responses that can make others look prats if they follow-up one possible meaning.

I don't know if these robots are like the ones in Joe's Garage. I assume Klearnex is what you get when you've audited all the BTs in the region just below the head?
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
Anything *at all* that causes the other participant in a two-way communication cycle to believe they have been heard, duplicated and understood - of course. :thumbsup:

I mean "Holy Crap!" or "Wow!" can be an appropriate acknowledgment in the appropriate circumstances, you know ? A simple wave of the hand when someone lets you go first in traffic can be an appropriate acknowledgment.

So they don't teach that anymore thanks to Miscaviage? and his Golden Age of Squirreling? :grouch:

A person with really great two-way comm cycle can make another person feel much better, key out whatever incident they are in, etc.... meerly by talking with them and running no other special processes!!

Almost the absolute bedrock foundation of Auditing is a good two-way communication - this is way beyond absurd! :duh:

The Sneakster

Yeah. Try to use a "Holy Crap!", no matter how appropriate to the comm, or something like the equivalent of a hand wave or head nod, to pass your video in the Golden Age of Tech.

Ha!

Nothing but a totally starched and stiff "Thank you!" or "I got it!" would ever have been accepted when I was there. And when you went into session with GAT auditors, that's all you got, too. I remember receiving a session by an auditor who was held up as a paragon of GAT and being totally horrified that I would ever be audited again by her, she was so robotic and "not there".

I'm interested to see what Bea Kiddo thinks about this. From what I understand she did all her training in GAT, and was a C/S for many years, too during GAT.

Griffy Blythe was the C/S who finally passed my video on GAT Pro TRs. Mine took 5 months to pass, on course Mon-Fri nights and most Saturdays. And mine was one of the faster passes! It was clear to me that, for all the staff, there was heavy ideological pressure to pass only the most "politically correct" TRs .

Nobody could have the "ease of personal beingness" that LRH displayed in his Pro TRs tapes. I was even told that "only LRH could get away with" those kinds of acks.

For me, the struggle was "How do I express my own ARC through this lead box apparatus they want me to wear during this session"? That same feeling began to permeate my whole existence as a Scientologist during those years.

Total bullshit, as far as I was concerned. Being put through this ideological GAT cookie cutter factory was one of the things that started to wake me up.
 

Veda

Sponsor
I think it was the GAT Pro TRs Supes I had at ASHO. You don't know how many crams I wrote on them. But they kept flunking me for "double acks".

I remember bringing in a set of Pro TRs Tapes and listening to them in the course room - the tapes of LRH auditing people on the BC that USED to be used as demonstrations of how TRs are supposed to be done.

They weren't on the GAT checksheet that I was on in 99.

When I brought them in the first time, after getting flunked so many times for "double ack" like the one below, my supervisor went white. It presented a real conflict for her to enforce the orders she was given for GAT, even though the LRH tapes totally supported saying "All right. Thank You." as an acceptable ack.

It didn't matter, though.

I was never going to pass my video if I said, "All right. Thank you." on TR2.

I think this is one of the big reasons the GAT auditors I had sounded so robotic: They could only say one word acks - every time.

So yes, I swear. I know what an ack is.

GAT trained supes may know what one is, too.

They just can't pass them in the "Golden Age of Tech".

This exact situation, and the exact same explanation, existed in the 1970s, long before the 'Golden Age of Tech'.

This one can't be blamed on 'GAT'.
 

Veda

Sponsor
In other words, "the way that Ron shows you is High Crime Out Tech."

Un-fucking-believable! :omg:

If anyone needed positive proof that David Miscaviage has supplanted L. Ron Hubbard as The Source of Scientology, that one there should be more than sufficient.


The Sneakster

Oh, the problem with those "LRH TRs tapes" existed long before Miscavige.

Let's be realistic. Scientology, per Hubbard's design, has been a full blown mental-healing-coated deceptive/abusive ("Destructive") cult since the early 1970s, or earlier.

The mental-healing portion - under Miscavige - has become thinner, and the Slave (Clear) Bracelets are a bit too snug (chaffing), but when Miscavige is replaced with a more "ARC" type person, and the Slave Bracelets are loosened slightly, the cult-machine will run much more efficiently.
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
Acknowledgment is not the sole provenance of Scn. :D

I agree.

On another related note:
Once, in an all-staff meeting, Mary Corydon gave her explanation that the TRs were "extremes" meant for training purposes (i.e. not to be done exactly as in the training drills in real daily life... not in a robotic manner.)
 
Top