Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
Blondes ain't my item but Teri Garr is someone I've had serious lust issues about in so many ways. The woman is brilliant, funny, beautiful and one of the few greatly undervalued actresses in the u.s..
Mark A. Baker
The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But
- Thread starter lkwdblds
- Start date
- Status
Blondes ain't my item but Teri Garr is someone I've had serious lust issues about in so many ways. The woman is brilliant, funny, beautiful and one of the few greatly undervalued actresses in the u.s..
Mark A. Baker
CarmeloOrchards
Crusader
It isn't terrible. It is indicative of the empathy and warmth Flag has, and how they always deliver what's promised.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAnS_3PwxEI
Hatshepsut
Crusader
Blondes ain't my item but Teri Garr is someone I've had serious lust issues about in so many ways. The woman is brilliant, funny, beautiful and one of the few greatly undervalued actresses in the u.s..
Mark A. Baker
I loved her in the two Richard Dreyfus movies 'Let It Ride' and 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind'. She is underrated.
Hatshepsut
Crusader
Terri Garr has that fun to be with personality. She is sexy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-gCGZJ8V0w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-gCGZJ8V0w
CarmeloOrchards
Crusader
Hatshepsut
Crusader
The cat likes to shred paper. My flat desk calendar is confetti. I really wanted some of us to follow up on the Ls materials vid that AnonKat posted over there. I guess its going to be poooh poooohed. Sometimes I do not know sarcasm when I read it. Then I have to go back and edit my reply to more acurately represent my views.
Hatshepsut
Crusader
thetanic
Gold Meritorious Patron
Even I lusted after her, and I'm straight.
MS is a horrible disease to live with, and I hope she doesn't suffer much.
lkwdblds
Crusader
Those seem to be very impressive wins!
Hi Hats! I just awoke at 4:30 AM and decided to catch up on this thread before going back to sleep. I wanted to make some comments about what you came up with in your handling. This is just conversational discussion. Uncovering a hidden game going on which was designed with the intentiion that you not win, seems to me to be a major win. Also finding it was a battle of opposing identities taking place in your space seems quite major! You must have had some big changes after spotting all these things going on in your space and though you did not mention handling these things, I am assuming that you took care of doing that as well. Surely, wins of this magnitude must have caused a big change for the better in your outlook. Would you mind commenting on what doing all this did for you. Also, is there a link you could supply to the L's videos?
Just for the hell of it, I ran those love processes which Carmelo posted on myself today; you know, "What could love do for you?, what could you do for love?" et. al. I had a blow out win on Flow 1. I looked at love through many of the ways in which love is manifested including lust, ego, sexual sensation and also emotionally through caring for someone, having a reason or something to live for, the love one has for his/her spouse, lover, close friend, children, parents, pets all these things. I was seeing a lot but it was mostly analytical and I was not penetrating more deeply than what I already knew consciously. It was on the love I had intrinsicly for my children that I was able to look deeper.
LOOKING AT LOVE AS BEING MORE GODLIKE - I looked at individuals being Godlike and attempting to be more Godlike. Obviously, a God type of Cause would not have anything akin to sexual sensation but a Godlike entity creates other life forms which are fractals of itself and each creation is a mini God in its own right. I saw that there was a parallel in humans that to be more Godlike they could create children's bodies and then nurture and raise the spiritual entities which were controlling those bodies. This would definitely be Godlike. But what about those beings that could not or did not want to have children. Well they could create good friendships or partnerships or they could create music or art or other aesthetics; they could nurture and breed pets, flowers, trees, plant life and so forth.
Thats when I blew out, seeing that love involves the creatiion and nurturing of other life forms and other forms of expression and that the possiblilities available for beings and things to love is virtually unlimited. Of course when one receives love from another life form, that is also a major part of what love can do for you. On that first flow, we reap rewards both from giving love to others and receiving love from them, usually but no always in return for the love we have given. Sometimes, we are just loved for being ourselves without doing anything!
Lakey
Hi Hats! I just awoke at 4:30 AM and decided to catch up on this thread before going back to sleep. I wanted to make some comments about what you came up with in your handling. This is just conversational discussion. Uncovering a hidden game going on which was designed with the intentiion that you not win, seems to me to be a major win. Also finding it was a battle of opposing identities taking place in your space seems quite major! You must have had some big changes after spotting all these things going on in your space and though you did not mention handling these things, I am assuming that you took care of doing that as well. Surely, wins of this magnitude must have caused a big change for the better in your outlook. Would you mind commenting on what doing all this did for you. Also, is there a link you could supply to the L's videos?
Just for the hell of it, I ran those love processes which Carmelo posted on myself today; you know, "What could love do for you?, what could you do for love?" et. al. I had a blow out win on Flow 1. I looked at love through many of the ways in which love is manifested including lust, ego, sexual sensation and also emotionally through caring for someone, having a reason or something to live for, the love one has for his/her spouse, lover, close friend, children, parents, pets all these things. I was seeing a lot but it was mostly analytical and I was not penetrating more deeply than what I already knew consciously. It was on the love I had intrinsicly for my children that I was able to look deeper.
LOOKING AT LOVE AS BEING MORE GODLIKE - I looked at individuals being Godlike and attempting to be more Godlike. Obviously, a God type of Cause would not have anything akin to sexual sensation but a Godlike entity creates other life forms which are fractals of itself and each creation is a mini God in its own right. I saw that there was a parallel in humans that to be more Godlike they could create children's bodies and then nurture and raise the spiritual entities which were controlling those bodies. This would definitely be Godlike. But what about those beings that could not or did not want to have children. Well they could create good friendships or partnerships or they could create music or art or other aesthetics; they could nurture and breed pets, flowers, trees, plant life and so forth.
Thats when I blew out, seeing that love involves the creatiion and nurturing of other life forms and other forms of expression and that the possiblilities available for beings and things to love is virtually unlimited. Of course when one receives love from another life form, that is also a major part of what love can do for you. On that first flow, we reap rewards both from giving love to others and receiving love from them, usually but no always in return for the love we have given. Sometimes, we are just loved for being ourselves without doing anything!
Lakey
Terril park
Sponsor
Blondes ain't my item but Teri Garr is someone I've had serious lust issues about in so many ways. The woman is brilliant, funny, beautiful and one of the few greatly undervalued actresses in the u.s..
Mark A. Baker
She's one of my favorites.
Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
Terril park
Sponsor
Nice to know I can still trust your judgement about SOME people.
Mark A. Baker
First time I ever saw her interviewed, such a delight.
lkwdblds
Crusader
There lack of empathy can be turned to one's advantage
I saw a Psychiatrist 5 times in 1967 for supposedly 1 hour sessions which cost me $25.00 per hour. It was a black guy name Dr. Ellis E. Toney on La Cienega Blvd. near Wilshire in L.A. I asked him to prescribe me something and he prescribed librium. Every session I talked about my 2D, who I dated and how it went and what my thoughts were.
Dr. Toney, fell asleep literally on two of the 5 sessions and was yawning heavily in the last 4 sessions. He ended off early every time after 40 to 45 minutes. I was pissed and after the fifth session I told him that I had decided to quit. I refilled the librium prescription for one year and then it ran out. I didn't take the librium daily but only before I went on social engagements or if I had an interview with my boss at work or had to give a little talk to a small group of felllow employees.
Shortly after my prescription ran out in 1968, Librium fell into disuse and was replaced by Valium but I never took that, only one year of librium and only then before dates or special events, using it to calm me down.
When I went to Flag the first time, in late 1977, they made a big deal about me having a "Psych History" and having taken "Psych Drugs". They suggested that was the probably the reason why I did not make the grade at the Apollo. THAT WAS THE "LAMEST" WRONG WHY I EVER HEARD. A few staff at Flag remembered me from the Apollo days, in 1973, only 4 years earlier, and they told me that the entire Flag Bureaux where I was posted as Programs Chief turned out to be completely incompetent and out Ethics and LRH dismantled the entire Bureaux and put all of the Chiefs on the EPF or maybe even the RPF which was just starting at about that time. I think David Light, the Reg, may have revealed this info to me and 3 or 4 other people mentioned it as well.
USING FLAG'S LACK OF EMPATHY TO ONE'S ADVANTAGE
Going through Flag's various regging stations for the next 15 years, I could often get through the Sea Org Recruiter instantly by just mentioning that I had a Psych History and had taken Psych Drugs. Being told that, they eagerly signed me off. Sometimes I would try and reason with them and not mention the "psych" history and use the fact that I had already been in the Sea Org and did not like it. I had paid my Freeloader debt and was out. No amount of arguing with the recruiter would have any effect, they just kept applying a hard sell so then I would spring my Psych History and Psych Drugs story on them and they coud not sign me through fast enough.
CRYING WOLF IN SEA ORG RECRUITMENT - AN EASY LIE TO SEE THROUGH
In all the 30 plus years I was active in C of S, when the Sea Org Recruiters appeared and someone mentioned bad experiences in the S.O. from a previous time period, the recruiter would give you a wisened and in the know smile. The line they gave, never really changed over the next 32 years and that line was, "Yes, I've heard the stories about the overboarding and the chain locker of the old days but nowadays all those things have been handled; today's Sea Org is totally spot on. This litany was recited in 1971 about 1968's Sea Org and in 1973 about 1971's Sea Org and in 1977 about 1973's Sea Org and later in 1998 when my Son was being recruited, it was recited again about all the earlier days before 1998. I am sure that the current crop of recruiters when told how bad things were in 1998, just smile and say confidently, "Oh yes, I have heard those horror stories from 1998 but here in 2010, I assure you that old those old problems have been handled and the all the SP's that caused them have been off loaded."
The Sea Org experience was always no good, except perhaps at the very beginning when it was actually an elite team of OT's. From the stories we hear of that era, it was pretty rough and tumble but there was a lot of comraderie and purpose present and many people consider it a sort of Golden Age. After that time, every era stunk but each era acknowledged readily that earlier eras were bad but that their new modern era had handled all the problems and that things were now wonderful. ITS JUST THE BOY CRYING WOLD SYNDROME IN A DIFFERENT DISGUISE, A DOG CHASING ITS TAIL IN A CIRCLE.
Lakey
I saw a Psychiatrist 5 times in 1967 for supposedly 1 hour sessions which cost me $25.00 per hour. It was a black guy name Dr. Ellis E. Toney on La Cienega Blvd. near Wilshire in L.A. I asked him to prescribe me something and he prescribed librium. Every session I talked about my 2D, who I dated and how it went and what my thoughts were.
Dr. Toney, fell asleep literally on two of the 5 sessions and was yawning heavily in the last 4 sessions. He ended off early every time after 40 to 45 minutes. I was pissed and after the fifth session I told him that I had decided to quit. I refilled the librium prescription for one year and then it ran out. I didn't take the librium daily but only before I went on social engagements or if I had an interview with my boss at work or had to give a little talk to a small group of felllow employees.
Shortly after my prescription ran out in 1968, Librium fell into disuse and was replaced by Valium but I never took that, only one year of librium and only then before dates or special events, using it to calm me down.
When I went to Flag the first time, in late 1977, they made a big deal about me having a "Psych History" and having taken "Psych Drugs". They suggested that was the probably the reason why I did not make the grade at the Apollo. THAT WAS THE "LAMEST" WRONG WHY I EVER HEARD. A few staff at Flag remembered me from the Apollo days, in 1973, only 4 years earlier, and they told me that the entire Flag Bureaux where I was posted as Programs Chief turned out to be completely incompetent and out Ethics and LRH dismantled the entire Bureaux and put all of the Chiefs on the EPF or maybe even the RPF which was just starting at about that time. I think David Light, the Reg, may have revealed this info to me and 3 or 4 other people mentioned it as well.
USING FLAG'S LACK OF EMPATHY TO ONE'S ADVANTAGE
Going through Flag's various regging stations for the next 15 years, I could often get through the Sea Org Recruiter instantly by just mentioning that I had a Psych History and had taken Psych Drugs. Being told that, they eagerly signed me off. Sometimes I would try and reason with them and not mention the "psych" history and use the fact that I had already been in the Sea Org and did not like it. I had paid my Freeloader debt and was out. No amount of arguing with the recruiter would have any effect, they just kept applying a hard sell so then I would spring my Psych History and Psych Drugs story on them and they coud not sign me through fast enough.
CRYING WOLF IN SEA ORG RECRUITMENT - AN EASY LIE TO SEE THROUGH
In all the 30 plus years I was active in C of S, when the Sea Org Recruiters appeared and someone mentioned bad experiences in the S.O. from a previous time period, the recruiter would give you a wisened and in the know smile. The line they gave, never really changed over the next 32 years and that line was, "Yes, I've heard the stories about the overboarding and the chain locker of the old days but nowadays all those things have been handled; today's Sea Org is totally spot on. This litany was recited in 1971 about 1968's Sea Org and in 1973 about 1971's Sea Org and in 1977 about 1973's Sea Org and later in 1998 when my Son was being recruited, it was recited again about all the earlier days before 1998. I am sure that the current crop of recruiters when told how bad things were in 1998, just smile and say confidently, "Oh yes, I have heard those horror stories from 1998 but here in 2010, I assure you that old those old problems have been handled and the all the SP's that caused them have been off loaded."
The Sea Org experience was always no good, except perhaps at the very beginning when it was actually an elite team of OT's. From the stories we hear of that era, it was pretty rough and tumble but there was a lot of comraderie and purpose present and many people consider it a sort of Golden Age. After that time, every era stunk but each era acknowledged readily that earlier eras were bad but that their new modern era had handled all the problems and that things were now wonderful. ITS JUST THE BOY CRYING WOLD SYNDROME IN A DIFFERENT DISGUISE, A DOG CHASING ITS TAIL IN A CIRCLE.
Lakey
Last edited:
Hatshepsut
Crusader
The change has been in mom. Instead of dramatizing some old game where I am the 'the enemy' she how grants me beingness to do whatever I want to do. I have to admit that I was angry last week when I spotted all the uncomplimentary beingnesses I was wearing because my mom had the power to write on the slate of WHO I am. I was crying. I didn't want any relationship. Any communication. I actually (I'm not very mature) tried pushing the envelope...I played on the laptop right out in the open instead of being 'engaged in industry.' NOPE. Still she exuded warmth. Thats when I realized my ARCX from being treated that way needs to be handled. I had accepted the enemy challenge. Its hard for me to unsink my teeth.
Mom had some charge on a past life of ours together as sisters. She was very Puritan and I stold her man. It ruined her life. I got these images from her. It took place in Southern Ohio in something like the early 1700s. I had been trying to help handle it for her remotely. She needed for me to 'lose' and was running this game on me. I did not spot it at first like I said. She is 80. She has this summer been walking around the house in her short shorts with the split up the side. Wearing her tiny tank tops with her push up bra....but all in a Puritan way.
She seemed to be parading for me demonstrating that she was still desirable and senual. I only cared to the extent that the intention was to try to punch home that 'she' was in a winning valence regarding being valuable/attractive to men. She was trying to finish out a cycle which I'd already closed the book on. But there was more to this...What I found is that if someone has locked on to you as an ENEMY in their game, you represent something that they have probably been opposing for a LONG time. When this caught my awareness a couple of major identities came up immediately. A lot of it had to do with religion and purgatory for the soul. I browsed over what identities I had had in the past that had opposed those mom was acting through in her lives. I picked up what should have been noticed right in front of my face.
I got tweaked into a recall of one of my own goals. One that would sabotage hers. The two of us actually have basic opposing identities on the track. ( which I'm sure will turn out to be the 'same' goal in the end.) NOT necessarily dramas with each other. We further extremely different agendas. I have not discovered a perfect goal/ anti goal pair here. ( identities defined by this type in lock step are good to find
) I learned this from Aspectics. Mom has been involved it seems in operations to help the souls of men by coralling beings in the afterlife and assigning counseling and directing channels. I am the great destroyer of corall fences.
I I do have to mention that when I woke up I seemed to be keenly aware of a STATIC presence. Another presence in my head. Not a mass. Not a flow state around my body. But someone trying to run things. How dare anyone try to run me.
I'm having to make a list of WHO IS RUNNING THINGS. I didn't expect my investigation of my goals and opponents to lead me behind the entire stage, props and all. This is turning out to be a hot item. I'm runnning into uncharted territory. Gotta go....mom's calling me to breakfast. I smell bacon!!
Hatshepsut
Crusader
Lakey, the Trey Lotz L's videos are over on the Freezone Convention thread posted last week.
RogerB
Crusader
Lakey, my Dear,
I don't know what follows on this thread, so your questions regarding this might have been addressed: but here is a little tech point on what is going on that can upset or miff a person when you repeat or interpret stuff back to them . . . . .
In this example here between you and FoTi, she is getting OFF what she is writing, expressing . . . . the last thing in the world anyone wants when they are getting stuff off is for someone to give it back to them! And worse, to start interpreting it and telling what they said. (That is eval, and also can act as though you are invalidating their cause as originator of the comm.)
Let 'em get it OFF.
Simply ack . . . one can add a degree of emphasis to the ack with such things as: "Wow! That part where you said (blah) really indicated/got thru to me, or such" . . . . but that's not telling them what they said nor interpreting it . . . . it is saying how real what they got off was to you. Big difference.
And, of course the risk of interpretation is an altering of what the person is attempting to get off . . . so what they actually said doesn't get duplicated and thus does not get off! And of course the person is left feeling incomplete! The comm did not get across . . . . if you really want to piss people off, constantly alter what it is they are trying to communicate to you. It kills comm . . . remember the key part of comm is duplication!
You see this over on the other threads that descend into flame wars . . . some of the idiot nasties constantly engage in altering what it is they are commenting on and then criticize the originator for having originated/said something they didn't say. You can see this going on currently on the " How reliable is our scientific approach?" thread. That is, the originator said "A" and the nasty tells him he's an idiot for having said "b," when he didn't.
In the old days when I was doing serious TRs and training processors, one of the things I found was that it is very often very upsetting to a student to have the coach repeat the question back at the student . . . that is, student uses the question: "Do birds fly" . . . .and you instantly only repeat it back at him/her.
Rog
RogerB
Crusader
Yes, one can OD on potassium . . . that is why the FDA limits supplement pills to only 99mg dose. Four "Huge" ones at once would put you into that ball park of OD. And it will affect the heart.
Rog
lkwdblds
Crusader
Wow, Hats, thanks for all your data AND INCITES!!
Thank you Hats. I asked you for some data on your handlings and wins and you supplied me and our thread members with a tremendous amount of acutal data relating to your time track and your "case" plus a boatload of incites which you have been able to put together regarding all of this somewhat complex scenario. To use FoTi's description of my speech patterns, "What you are saying" is that you are a "heavyweight" spiritually and that you have things well in hand. What I am saying is that you have great perceptiveness and great critical thinking skills and a real ability to stand back at a distance and analyze what is going on in your space. IT IS ABSOLUTELY REMARKABLE THAT YOUR MOTHER'S CASE HAS CHANGED FOR THE BETTER BY YOU RUNNING YOUR OWN CASE. Its amazing the degree to which you two have been involved in this and other lives.
Hats, I believe you and I both share one major trait in common that is not too common on ESMB. We both don't mind putting up specific data concerning our own cases on ESMB and doing so in great detail and in volume. I have benefitted greatly casewise from doing this. There is also an entertainment value from doing it and also an educational component. Others get educated when they read true and unedited case histories wrtten in real time by the person whose case is being discussed!
Look, I developed a name for myself as lkwdblds aka Lakey Lakewood, a guy who tells it like it is and will basically state anything that comes to mind. People sense that everything I say is true and I built a following just doing that. Talking straight and to the point. You seem to share this entire persona with me. There is a downside to it, for a while I blabbed too much and almost blew security for a couple of friends but I quickly handled that outpoint.
It is interesting that you are running into unchartered territory. It appears to me that you have what it takes to solve things that occur in unchartered territory. If you don't, unfortunately, I won't be able to help you as it is uncharted for me as well but there are people of this thread who will be able to help you. That has already been proven to be the case. Good luck with your further pursuit into this area and please write us updates as you see fit.
Lakey
The change has been in mom. Instead of dramatizing some old game where I am the 'the enemy' she how grants me beingness to do whatever I want to do. I have to admit that I was angry last week when I spotted all the uncomplimentary beingnesses I was wearing because my mom had the power to write on the slate of WHO I am. I was crying. I didn't want any relationship. Any communication. I actually (I'm not very mature) tried pushing the envelope...I played on the laptop right out in the open instead of being 'engaged in industry.' NOPE. Still she exuded warmth. Thats when I realized my ARCX from being treated that way needs to be handled. I had accepted the enemy challenge. Its hard for me to unsink my teeth.
Mom had some charge on a past life of ours together as sisters. She was very Puritan and I stold her man. It ruined her life. I got these images from her. It took place in Southern Ohio in something like the early 1700s. I had been trying to help handle it for her remotely. She needed for me to 'lose' and was running this game on me. I did not spot it at first like I said. She is 80. She has this summer been walking around the house in her short shorts with the split up the side. Wearing her tiny tank tops with her push up bra....but all in a Puritan way.
What I found is that if someone has locked on to you as an ENEMY in their game, you represent something that they have probably been opposing for a LONG time. When this caught my awareness a couple of major identities came up immediately. A lot of it had to do with religion and purgatory for the soul. I browsed over what identities I had had in the past that had opposed those mom was acting through in her lives. I picked up what should have been noticed right in front of my face.
I got tweaked into a recall of one of my own goals. One that would sabotage hers. The two of us actually have basic opposing identities on the track. ( which I'm sure will turn out to be the 'same' goal in the end.) NOT necessarily dramas with each other. We further extremely different agendas. I have not discovered a perfect goal/ anti goal pair here. ( identities defined by this type in lock step are good to find
Mom has been involved it seems in operations to help the souls of men by coralling beings in the afterlife and assigning counseling and directing channels. I am the great destroyer of corall fences.
I do have to mention that when I woke up I seemed to be keenly aware of a STATIC presence. Another presence in my head. Not a mass. Not a flow state around my body. But someone trying to run things. How dare anyone try to run me.
Gotta go....mom's calling me to breakfast. I smell bacon!!
Thank you Hats. I asked you for some data on your handlings and wins and you supplied me and our thread members with a tremendous amount of acutal data relating to your time track and your "case" plus a boatload of incites which you have been able to put together regarding all of this somewhat complex scenario. To use FoTi's description of my speech patterns, "What you are saying" is that you are a "heavyweight" spiritually and that you have things well in hand. What I am saying is that you have great perceptiveness and great critical thinking skills and a real ability to stand back at a distance and analyze what is going on in your space. IT IS ABSOLUTELY REMARKABLE THAT YOUR MOTHER'S CASE HAS CHANGED FOR THE BETTER BY YOU RUNNING YOUR OWN CASE. Its amazing the degree to which you two have been involved in this and other lives.
Hats, I believe you and I both share one major trait in common that is not too common on ESMB. We both don't mind putting up specific data concerning our own cases on ESMB and doing so in great detail and in volume. I have benefitted greatly casewise from doing this. There is also an entertainment value from doing it and also an educational component. Others get educated when they read true and unedited case histories wrtten in real time by the person whose case is being discussed!
Look, I developed a name for myself as lkwdblds aka Lakey Lakewood, a guy who tells it like it is and will basically state anything that comes to mind. People sense that everything I say is true and I built a following just doing that. Talking straight and to the point. You seem to share this entire persona with me. There is a downside to it, for a while I blabbed too much and almost blew security for a couple of friends but I quickly handled that outpoint.
It is interesting that you are running into unchartered territory. It appears to me that you have what it takes to solve things that occur in unchartered territory. If you don't, unfortunately, I won't be able to help you as it is uncharted for me as well but there are people of this thread who will be able to help you. That has already been proven to be the case. Good luck with your further pursuit into this area and please write us updates as you see fit.
Lakey
FoTi
Crusader
The following is a quote from Lakey's post back to me.
.
"I make no effort to interpret, only an effort to condense and paraphrase before acknowledgeing.
Suppose you post on this thread....."I went out to dinner with Evy. We had a wonderful time." Then I read your post and I comment..."What you are saying is that you went out to dinner with Evy. I'm glad you had a good time, Lakey."
This is not a realistic example. When I use the "what you are saying" line, I usually paraphrase a long and sort of complicated phrase into a shorter and simpler phrase. If you say, Mom and I went to the org together, I would never use the "what you are saying" phrase.
Or...say you post..."When I was on the Apollo, I saw a lot of things there that should have never happened." Then I read your post and I comment....."As I see it, what you are saying is that when you were on the Apollo you saw a alot of things there that should have never happened. Thanks for telling us about your experiences on the Apollo, Lakey."
No, no, you are missing the point! I might say that my new senior on Flag, Sandy, just told me one word, "Start!". I protested that I was just in training since I had just today started my Data Evaluators' Course, and had no training in what to do. Sandy then repeated "Start!" and I said, okay, could you please give me your Hat Write Up so I can check out the flow and command lines around here. Sandy said, "God Dam It! THere is no fucking Hat Write Up, just fucking Start!" I then said, this is the Flagship, the highest of all Orgs, how could there not be any Hat Write Up for a major post such as this. Sandy said, "God Dam it. Either fucking get started right now or I am sending you to Ethics". I sat there stunned not knowing what to do.
After all that, an astute reader might say, "So what you were saying is that the Flag Ship with Hubbard on Board was not on policy as you had been led to expect and heavy force was used to get newer people to take the fall when the entire activity collapsed. FOR ME, I WOULD HAVE FELT RELIEF THAT SOMEBODY DUPLICATED WHAT I WAS SAYING, CONDENSED A LONG RAMBLING DISSERTATION INTO JUST A COUPLE OF SENTENCES AND TOOK THE TROUBLE TO ACKNOWLEDGE ME.
Your above paragrahs are not what I do, I don't just repeat the exact sentence but shorten and paraphrase many longer sentences so your above question is not relevant.
What's a simple acknowledgement to you?
TR 2 says to give an appropriate acknowledgement. In my example above about Sandy using profanity and acting irrationally and me being all confused as to how to act or how to respond to her, just saying "good" of "okay" is not appropriate and comes across as being robotic.
How do you normally talk to people when they tell you something? Do you repeat back to them what they said?"
Acknowledging a person and clarifying what a person is saying are two different things. If you don't understand what I'm saying or you wish to clarify for yourself what I said because you are unsure, then I understand why you might do that with a clarification to me that you aren't sure you got what I said, then it might not bother me when you do that. It does give me the feeling that you aren't sure that you understood what I said. If you want to acknowledge what I write a simple ack will do and if you want to discuss what I'm saying that's okay too. I don't like people repeating back to me what I said unless they don't understand and want me to clarify, which I will normally do my best to accomodate them.
I never saw anything in the comm cycle or auditor's TRs that said to repeat back to the person what they just said to you. I find it irritating. It also makes me feel like I'm talking to a parrot, not a human being. Parrots repeat stuff back to you but they don't understand what they are saying usually. I never did it with a PC or in real life situations nor have I ever had an auditor do it with me.
According to what you wrote in the top part of this post, I understand according to you I am not a very astute reader.
.
"I make no effort to interpret, only an effort to condense and paraphrase before acknowledgeing.
Suppose you post on this thread....."I went out to dinner with Evy. We had a wonderful time." Then I read your post and I comment..."What you are saying is that you went out to dinner with Evy. I'm glad you had a good time, Lakey."
This is not a realistic example. When I use the "what you are saying" line, I usually paraphrase a long and sort of complicated phrase into a shorter and simpler phrase. If you say, Mom and I went to the org together, I would never use the "what you are saying" phrase.
Or...say you post..."When I was on the Apollo, I saw a lot of things there that should have never happened." Then I read your post and I comment....."As I see it, what you are saying is that when you were on the Apollo you saw a alot of things there that should have never happened. Thanks for telling us about your experiences on the Apollo, Lakey."
No, no, you are missing the point! I might say that my new senior on Flag, Sandy, just told me one word, "Start!". I protested that I was just in training since I had just today started my Data Evaluators' Course, and had no training in what to do. Sandy then repeated "Start!" and I said, okay, could you please give me your Hat Write Up so I can check out the flow and command lines around here. Sandy said, "God Dam It! THere is no fucking Hat Write Up, just fucking Start!" I then said, this is the Flagship, the highest of all Orgs, how could there not be any Hat Write Up for a major post such as this. Sandy said, "God Dam it. Either fucking get started right now or I am sending you to Ethics". I sat there stunned not knowing what to do.
After all that, an astute reader might say, "So what you were saying is that the Flag Ship with Hubbard on Board was not on policy as you had been led to expect and heavy force was used to get newer people to take the fall when the entire activity collapsed. FOR ME, I WOULD HAVE FELT RELIEF THAT SOMEBODY DUPLICATED WHAT I WAS SAYING, CONDENSED A LONG RAMBLING DISSERTATION INTO JUST A COUPLE OF SENTENCES AND TOOK THE TROUBLE TO ACKNOWLEDGE ME.
Your above paragrahs are not what I do, I don't just repeat the exact sentence but shorten and paraphrase many longer sentences so your above question is not relevant.
What's a simple acknowledgement to you?
TR 2 says to give an appropriate acknowledgement. In my example above about Sandy using profanity and acting irrationally and me being all confused as to how to act or how to respond to her, just saying "good" of "okay" is not appropriate and comes across as being robotic.
How do you normally talk to people when they tell you something? Do you repeat back to them what they said?"
Acknowledging a person and clarifying what a person is saying are two different things. If you don't understand what I'm saying or you wish to clarify for yourself what I said because you are unsure, then I understand why you might do that with a clarification to me that you aren't sure you got what I said, then it might not bother me when you do that. It does give me the feeling that you aren't sure that you understood what I said. If you want to acknowledge what I write a simple ack will do and if you want to discuss what I'm saying that's okay too. I don't like people repeating back to me what I said unless they don't understand and want me to clarify, which I will normally do my best to accomodate them.
I never saw anything in the comm cycle or auditor's TRs that said to repeat back to the person what they just said to you. I find it irritating. It also makes me feel like I'm talking to a parrot, not a human being. Parrots repeat stuff back to you but they don't understand what they are saying usually. I never did it with a PC or in real life situations nor have I ever had an auditor do it with me.
According to what you wrote in the top part of this post, I understand according to you I am not a very astute reader.
Last edited:
FoTi
Crusader
Thanks for posting this hat.
- Status