What's new

The UX of Scientology

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
The UX of Scientology.

An interesting article. To the extent one is tempted to disagree, one (and particularly non-exes) may, or may not, learn something.

Medium: The UX of Scientology

https://medium.com/@ursulalanemullins/the-ux-of-scientology-ce1ee6d6de71#.4wmfr4ft1

* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

Ursula Lane-Mullins

16 hrs ago

The UX of Scientology.

As a UX designer, I’m very perceptive to the experience of digital and physical things. In fact, my interest in user experiences of physical things and people as opposed to digital experiences once led to a blog about shit user experiences where I complained about the tax man and bus drivers amongst other generally shit encounters I had with people. It doesn’t exist anymore so don’t try and look it up, just know it had good intent and a lot of slate.

But here’s the thing, not all experiences are shit.

We have good experiences all the time. What I’m interested in is the dynamics behind what makes an experience terrible and what makes one great. What multitude of factors have come together to make you feel a certain way?

Walking down Hollywood Boulevard just recently, I was approached by two friendly pant-suiters who asked me if I wanted a “Free Personality Test”. They handed me a brochure that said “Your future is determined by your IQ and personality”. I saw that it was an Oxford capacity analysis but it also said Scientology. So I asked what the relation was between religion and IQ and they explained that Scientology could improve my intelligence.

Bold statement. Could it also improve my personality?

Curious enough, I went in and I came out with more questions than answers. But I also thought a lot about the overall experience of my encounter with Scientology.

So here is a fully fledged UX review of Scientology based on Jakob Nielsen’s 10 usability heuristics for design.

Note: this review looks at the entire experience, which was the initial encounter and personality test, as well as an introductory course on personal efficiency.

* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *

Headings, minus discussion:

Visibility of system status 1/10

Match between system and the real world 2/10

User control and freedom 9/10

Consistency and standards 5/10

Error prevention 3/10

Recognition rather than recall 3/10

Flexibility and efficiency of use 9/10

Aesthetic and minimalist design 10/10

Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors 9/10

Help and documentation 9/10

Onboarding

Communication

Paper
 

Dave B.

Maximus Ultimus Mostimus
#11

Bank Account after too long a time involved with $cientology.

- $403,396.35
 

OutToe83

Patron with Honors
This actually makes a very good point: The ONE thing the Cherch really does well is enrolling people who haven't been warned off into beginner indoctrinating courses.

Right at the end, she says. "I don’t think I made any errors. I mean, I asked a lot of questions and challenged a lot of things, and at no point did anyone refuse to answer my questions or ignore them. In fact, I found people to be completely transparent with all the hairy questions I threw at them. I would even see how far I could go with some curveballs and even then they were cool. If I refuted anything they told me, they responded with “I understand.” No one else I know responds to my banane questions like that, so 9 points."

She probably did ask some good questions for someone who didn't know what she was getting into; but as a beginner, she didn't know to ask questions like, "How come there's no scientific evidence of intense volcanic activity or numerous nuclear bombs detonated on Teegeeack...er, I mean Earth 75 million years ago when Xenu trapped us all here?"

A large number of nuclear bombs would have left traces of radioactive isotopes that would still show up in places, even 75 million years later. For contrast, Google "KT Boundary Layer", evidence of a (real) planetary disaster event that happened 65 million years ago. I suppose we (as thetans) occupied dinosaurs for the 10 million years in between those events? That's a question I might have asked. My point being that, unknown to Dr. Hubbard, major cataclysmic events of that magnitude LEAVE EVIDENCE that we now know how to look for, much more so than when he first made this crap up. ((BTW, I'm really glad that he said 75 million years and not 65 by sheer good luck.))

Another good question that she didn't know to ask is what town/city Sequoia University is near.

Or perhaps whether the trains on Venus run on time?
Given the amount of time and OTs created since Dr. Hubbard mentioned his visits to Venus and observations of the natives, has anybody else visited while out-of-body and could fill us in how the 96% CO2 atmosphere at 92 time the pressure of ours at sea level, and over 900 degrees F at times have affected the culture of native Venusians? Do they put on extra layers of clothing when the temperature drops down to a mere 700 degrees? What are their clothes made of? Blue asbestos, perhaps? (I understand that Beloved Leader COB has decreed that blue asbestos is not hazardous?)

I don't suppose in her beginner courses she came across LRH's assertion that not smoking causes cancer. So she hasn't yet run into the facet of $cientology where you basically have to reject the validity of scientific research to accept faith in Ron's Scripture.

BTW, I don't want to give the impression that I reject her evaluation. The UX eval is based on UX solely and not the value of the service or product being sold. I'm just saying that my guess is that she didn't know any really awkward questions to ask--questions that wouldn't BE awkward if there were any substance to $cientology.

(BTW, Notice I said "$cientology", not the Church of $cientology. Those few questions I just posed challenge the foundation of $cientology itself, including all stripes and flavors; not just how the "official, authorized" Cof$ is managed.)
 

Gizmo

Rabble Rouser
So much material here.....

Oxford ? As in Oxford in England ?

What are the state licensed qualifications od\f the persons evaluating this test to me ?

What recognized mental health organizations have approved this test ?

How does a church get into these kinds of evaluations for people not even part of their religion ?

. . . . and so many more OBVIOUS questions that leave these loons pissing in their white pants.
 

Helena Handbasket

Gold Meritorious Patron
A large number of nuclear bombs would have left traces of radioactive isotopes that would still show up in places, even 75 million years later. For contrast, Google "KT Boundary Layer", evidence of a (real) planetary disaster event that happened 65 million years ago. I suppose we (as thetans) occupied dinosaurs for the 10 million years in between those events? That's a question I might have asked. My point being that, unknown to Dr. Hubbard, major cataclysmic events of that magnitude LEAVE EVIDENCE that we now know how to look for, much more so than when he first made this crap up. ((BTW, I'm really glad that he said 75 million years and not 65 by sheer good luck.))
It is acknowedged that radioisotope dating is not too accurate. There are uncertainties with the rates of decay, the starting level of background radiation, and the measurement of the low amounts of radiation left. A 15% error is not unreasonable.

Helena
 

Jump

Operating teatime
It is acknowedged that radioisotope dating is not too accurate. There are uncertainties with the rates of decay, the starting level of background radiation, and the measurement of the low amounts of radiation left. A 15% error is not unreasonable.

Helena


Maybe for one measurement - but not for repeated measurements worldwide over many decades.
 

OutToe83

Patron with Honors
It is acknowedged that radioisotope dating is not too accurate. There are uncertainties with the rates of decay, the starting level of background radiation, and the measurement of the low amounts of radiation left. A 15% error is not unreasonable.

Helena

If you're referring to the difference between the imaginary Xenu event of 75Ma (million years ago),[SUP][[/SUP] ago and the KT Boundary event of 65Ma, the KT event wasn't originally dated by radioactive isotopes, but by geological layers, to ~65 Ma, with radioisotope dating yielding a more specific age of 66.043 ± 0.011 Ma. The age uncertainty is considerably less than 15%. In any case, it's corroborated by geological dating in many, many places, as Jump said.

The worldwide KT Boundary Layer is very solid evidence that compelled a skeptical scientific community to acknowledge the validity of the giant comet collision theory. As it happens, there was a spate of widespread volcanic activity at roughly the same time, but NOT 10Ma earlier--ironically, if Dr. Hubbard had admitted to uncertainty or vagueness in His story and dating--in other words, if he hadn't been so specific about events and dates-- He could have claimed to have been referring to the KT Event that was discovered later on. But scripture is scripture and His absolute certainty about His whole-track memory ("Don't question LRH.") locked Him into His story.

I love the irony! :happydance:
 

F.Bullbait

Oh, a wise guy,eh?
High marks were given for #3...



User control and freedom

Users often choose system functions by mistake and will need a clearly marked "emergency exit" to leave the unwanted state without having to go through an extended dialogue. Support undo and redo

.


I guess the use of "extended dialogue" hasn't hit home yet or the lack of a clearly marked "emergency exit".


These were the first things I noticed about CoS.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
If you're referring to the difference between the imaginary Xenu event of 75Ma (million years ago),[SUP][[/SUP] ago and the KT Boundary event of 65Ma, the KT event wasn't originally dated by radioactive isotopes, but by geological layers, to ~65 Ma, with radioisotope dating yielding a more specific age of 66.043 ± 0.011 Ma. The age uncertainty is considerably less than 15%. In any case, it's corroborated by geological dating in many, many places, as Jump said.

The worldwide KT Boundary Layer is very solid evidence that compelled a skeptical scientific community to acknowledge the validity of the giant comet collision theory. As it happens, there was a spate of widespread volcanic activity at roughly the same time, but NOT 10Ma earlier--ironically, if Dr. Hubbard had admitted to uncertainty or vagueness in His story and dating--in other words, if he hadn't been so specific about events and dates-- He could have claimed to have been referring to the KT Event that was discovered later on. But scripture is scripture and His absolute certainty about His whole-track memory ("Don't question LRH.") locked Him into His story.

I love the irony! :happydance:


The discrepancy between 65M and 75M years ago is rather easily accounted for. My calculations have confirmed that the 10M disparity is simply due to Dr. Hubbard's e-meter not having a full charge that particular day.

Ergo, the Xenu story is quite true, and so forth, on this planet.
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
The UX of Scientology.

An interesting article. To the extent one is tempted to disagree, one (and particularly non-exes) may, or may not, learn something.

Medium: The UX of Scientology

https://medium.com/@ursulalanemullins/the-ux-of-scientology-ce1ee6d6de71#.4wmfr4ft1
Thanks for the link, CommunicatorIC. I read her whole article. Very interesting. I smiled at a point (I highlighted it) near the end:

Communication

People actually listen and talk to each other. They look you in the eye and they wait until you finish talking before [they] start speaking. They seem like they’re genuinely listening to you and they communicate on a level I’ve never seen before that I can only describe as sophisticated and engaged.

There was one point where I was observing two people talking in front of me, and I’ve never seen people talk like that before. It would have seemed like a normal conversation to anyone else but something was really different. It’s like they've been educated in how to actually talk to people. I can’t say the same for a lot of people.

With regard to the highlighted bit, hah, if she only knew!

She doesn't mention how many other public were there. Do we know which org it was?

Paul
 

Helena Handbasket

Gold Meritorious Patron
... the KT Boundary event ... wasn't originally dated by radioactive isotopes, but by geological layers, to ~65 Ma, with radioisotope dating yielding a more specific age of 66.043 ± 0.011 Ma. The age uncertainty is considerably less than 15%. In any case, it's corroborated by geological dating in many, many places, as Jump said.
So, in the absence of radioisotope dating, what exactly IS geological layer dating? If it's by seeing which fossils are in the layer, how are the dates of those "marker" fossils established? Usually by saying such-and-such a fossil is from xxx MYA, a date determined by radioisotope dating some samples.

Then again, LRH said the date of OT III was "75 million yars ago, a bit less". Maybe he meant 8.957 million years less. :biggrin:
Helena
 
Top