The opposite is true: I linked it _indirecly_ with Hubbard. I said "result of his works".Let me get this straight. You have mentioned the "kid sit" in disparaging terms and linked it directly with hubbard.
The opposite is true. Hubbard _SHOULD_ be criticized and exposed. I consider one of the main problems with the Church that EXPOSURE and COMPETITION is missing. The way Hubbard planned it was a mistake: An unscrutinized monopoly.It seems to imply that hubbard should not be criticised
Eyewitnesses like DartSmohen or Alan do an important and priceless job.
Hence this forum is so good because it offers exposure (the DartSmohens here) AND it offers competition (the Freezoners here). That weakens the Church exactly where it should.
But after all criticism is said one should not forget that the criticized man (Hubbard) isn't around to defend himself or to set things straight. It's like with Larry King: In the beginning of the show they may advertise the show by mentioning some conspiracy, some accusation or some upset. Then comes the guest and sometimes it's only 1 sentence that explains everything.
In other words: Since Hubbard isn't around one should assume a rather neutral or benevolent attitude when reading criticism, especially since most of Hubbard's offences LEAVE INDEED room for speculation and are not pinpointable like "murder".