welcome-image-wide
blog-header

By Lana Mitchell

Thank you to all who filled out my recent survey (yes, I was the author for those who were unsure). We had over 100 survey results in less than two days. As I believe the way forward for the field is open communication lines – no hidden data lines or mystery -- I wanted to make the results known to all. Here they are:

Question 1: As a Scientologist, independent of the Corporate Scientology Network, do you feel you are part of a cohesive group?

YES -  23.2%    (23 responses)

NO -  49.5%    (49 responses)

OTHER – 27.3%   (27 responses)

                Detail on OTHER responses include – not a Scientologist anymore (4), unsure/indecisive (10). Don’t like groups or the natter/noise (3), yes but only in a few respects (10).

Question 2: If an international Independent Scientology membership group was formed (with a very low annual fee) to build independent delivery groups worldwide, and introduce new people to LRH, would you be a member?

YES -  44.0%    (44 responses)

NO -   17.0%  (17 responses)

DEPENDS -  39.0%   (39 responses)

                Points the DEPENDS responses wanted were:  Purpose/Policy and Charter of such a group agreed with (4), services and products of the group (2), standard LRH tech delivery (12), transparency with finances (2), trusted leadership (4), pro-LRH  (10), not nattery/noisy (2), expectations of group members clear and agreed on (2), how it would not be a repeat of Corp Scn betrayal (3), not a formal brick and mortar group – but something more fluid or virtual.

Question 3:  What do you need at this time, to assist you in moving forward?

Nothing needed at this time  -   35 responses

A support network to communicate with –   35 responses

Training to move up The Bridge -  27 responses

Auditing to move up The Bridge – 23 responses

Review auditing to handle bypassed charge and/or out-tech  - 14 responses

Options to earn a steady income based on a specific industry you have experience in – 13 responses

Options to earn a steady income based on using/applying/disseminating LRH tech – 12 responses

Training/internship as a Scientology delivery terminal (auditor, supervisor, wordclearer, C/S, etc – 10 responses

Options to handle severe debt – 8 responses

Legal Assistance – 4 responses

Help from a field chaplain – 2 responses

Other --  group needs to be formed from the ground up – grass roots up, rather than management down – 2 responses

Question 4. Is there anything else you want known?

61 responses. New points raised (other than what is already covered above) were:

Having a stable and trusted auditor certification and Qual line

Knowing where delivery terminals are located and how to get in touch with them

Setting up good courserooms for SOLO 1 and OT 6

Getting the problem of training over long distance tackled

Field events and social events

----------------------------

Purpose.... and a new question

I must admit, I had felt somewhat alone in my desire to move forward in some capacity with the 3D for the 4D. I had formed a somewhat cynical view of the scene – but this survey opened my eyes to the fact that there is indeed a very 3rd and 4th dynamic oriented group of Scientologists existing outside of Corp Scientology, who want to see standard tech carry forward into the future. To get 100 answers in just under 2 days shows that there are MUCH MUCH larger numbers that are out there who would add to these survey responses - and undoubtedly, have similar answers.

To see that so many people have such feelings or views was truly revitalizing for me. Like so many others – I dedicated the better part of my adult working life to 24/7 Scientology – and it was a purpose that kept me there, regardless of the hardships, problems, injustices, and suppression encountered.

So, IF a group is to be formed  in the future – then purpose  is the underlying factor.

WHY would we want to form such an alliance? For what reason? To accomplish what?

 I think that if there is to be a group, it can only be formed with agreement on purpose or at least similar realities on purpose.

One person in the survey pointed out that what is not really needed is a group -- but a guild (definition: an association of persons formed for mutual aid and protection and/or for a common purpose). I tend to agree. I think if there is to be a group/guild, then it can only be formed with agreement on purpose - or at least similar realities on purpose.

So – let’s get the dialogue happening.

Here is the next survey over the next 48 hours  – What could or should be the purpose of a newly formed Scientology guild/group be?  Please place your answers in the comments below, so all can see, and all can take part in the discussion. And direct others here, so they can take part in the conversation.

Sincerely, Lana

Comments   

 
steve
+1 # steve 2013-03-10 04:07
To foster and support the delivery of Scientology as developed by LRH.
To unite and inform members of what is going on in the Scientology universe.
This would include the development and support of a certification authority.

This could be a professional organization just like any other extant in the world today. But it would not be a restrictive system like a guild where certain designated master craftsmen call all the shots. The Scientology profession should be one where anyone at all could study, learn the skills and obtain a certificate free from any arbitrary considerations except "can he competently do it".
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-03-10 04:19
Steve -- I agree particularly on the certification line. Having a simple line where a person can complete a checksheet, submit evidence of their TRs, metering and admin, and get any needed cramming or correction, would result in standard auditing being possible across the world. It also gives people certainty that they can ask for a certified auditor, and have confidence in that certificate.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Jose
0 # Jose 2013-03-10 04:13
SCN is already there, so for me in any case the group would be needed to coordinate and make an strategic plan in order to recover the original purpose of the org and make it actually available for people - One more thing is that the way I see it, the purpose of LRH never was that everyone have to study everything he said, but instead, to rehabilitate people so every one can be its own source. So I see a need for "cleaning".
And the last is that I see the org MUST keep the standards and and follow KSW but also see the initiative of others, so for me it would be ok and not suppressive the fact that (out of the orgs) a person try some processes of his own - of course he should state the source of it, but I think that's a right too.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
calvin b. duffield
0 # calvin b. duffield 2013-03-10 07:56
Yes, indeed Lana, we're getting the "nuts" bolts, screws and washers,of"ORG" formation being emptied out of boxes,all over your living room table,(just my li'l ol' view here!)

Dror Academy in Israel, appears to have taken off with full delivery of both sides of the "Bridge" and making a mighty fine effort of it, too!

Without such "organization" per se, it is difficult to see how much inroad can be made, in globally significant numbers!

Be it in the form of missions(franchises)
privately funded academies, or sponsored
integrated centers, any of these establishments are required to deliver training, qual, and internships to achieve STANDARD auditing results and prevent the inevitable squirreling that occurs from non-duplication and failure to understand the imperatives to KSW.

The other, perhaps more important aspect
may just be, that as human beings, we thrive best in an environment of positive control, where distractions and disruptive elements are minimized, and focus is kept on making positive gains in a productive, friendly environment, a la
the above tried, tested and proven models
which Ron had developed at great personal
cost in terms of trial and error.

Although there is huge room for marketing Scientology globally, in terms of tried and tested formulae, there is ALSO room to break through with fresh ideas and creative approaches, based on clear and convincing results.

With the sheer scale and ingenuity of creativity from the likes of Steve Hall, Dan Koon,Mark Shreffler, and other liberated high tone spirits, such as yourself, (and truly, countless others of
goodwill and passion,) there has never been a better time to focus on the re- launching of the Scn Movement!

Bold moves now required, the tribe needs to meet under ...( uh oh here's that unmentionable reactive dirty word again-)

......... (proper) LEADERSHIP!!!

( Sigh,) What Ron went through, just to invent "the wheel" of de-aberration!

Come on guys, (Scn AXIOM ); COMMUNICATION IS AS EXACT AS IT APPROACHES DUPLICATION.

We just go on doing what WORKS!

ML, Calvin.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
calvin b. duffield
+1 # calvin b. duffield 2013-03-10 14:22
Just to get a real "feel" of what we're talking about here,Google up;Scientology
Advanced Ability Center - this video will show you what kind oestablishment is possible -- and the atmosphere that can
be re-created for your loved ones,friends
and in fact anyone who is interested in making a better world today and tomorrow.

ML, Calvin.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Shreff
+2 # Shreff 2013-03-10 09:45
To Improve conditions across the dynamics.
To train everyone who wants to help
To remove all barriers of case so we can accomplish this.

The Guild System was the WHY of The Renaissance in Italy and is a marvelous idea. The idea should extend to a Manager's Guild and a Counselor's Guild and an Ethics Guild and so on. These groups working in coordination could generate other service groups and actually be contact points with the fourth dynamic, introducing the tech to people in these fields and training them as requisite to promotion in the guild.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Thoughtful
+1 # Thoughtful 2013-03-10 13:42
Shreff, Where can we learn more about the Guild system? Do you know of any websites, for example, that lay it out? I've never seen one in operation so am not familiar.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Mark Shreffler
0 # Mark Shreffler 2013-03-10 17:09
Hi Steve,
This site will get you started. I had a professor in college who was crazy excited about this stuff, and with good reason. It basically put Qual in to a profession and a standard of expectation through it's Apprentice, Journeyman, Master structure. Formal education countered for nothing. One was measured by his productivity in each area. It was pretty cool. There are guilds today all over (The Masons, for example) but most are social organizations.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M.
0 # Lana M. 2013-03-10 18:10
learner.org/.../florence.html

Here is the site Mark was referring to above.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Kate
+2 # Kate 2013-03-10 12:34
In addition to what is above, it would be nice to have a group (or collection) of people to creative alternative OPEN and HONEST good work/help groups....something beyond wearing yellow t-shirts and passing out TWTH. There are so many ways to help, it would be cool for indies to be, do and say something useful instead of grabbing a PR moment or forming another group, but then deny connection to the indie movement.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Mike Laws
0 # Mike Laws 2013-03-10 14:02
That is a very good point, and for me is what the game was about, good people doing good works for no other benefit than itself. There are some people, like Scott Campbel, that are today doing work like volunteer ministers should!
This would have to be an essential component of any group I support. Can't just be about money and personl gain.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Jim Logan
0 # Jim Logan 2013-03-10 16:11
Kate,
I agree, and for the past some twenty years plus I've been out and about 17 of those I hadn't told but a handful of the hundreds of people I worked with that I was a Scientologist. I still did what I could in the community (worked with the Police Cadets), or at the wharf (I was a Senior Dockside Monitor of several fisheries) or on the river as a Guide, to apply my skills, with the help in management with the Data Series, Contact Assists, TWC, even running Locks, Secondaries and a Narrative Engram or two. When DM finally cut off any slight hope of completing the steps needed to get back in comm with those "in" that I love, then I met up with my Scientology friends and began the work I do today, openly, and directly auditing, training and posting on these various websites.

Anyway, not to make out I'm a model of everything, but to agree with you completely, just doing it is what is important, from whatever position you may be in, and can do something to move along the Dynamics.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Kate
0 # Kate 2013-03-12 04:33
Jim-
Thank you for telling me what you've done. It’s helpful and I like what you describe- about using tech directly.

It would be great to hear more how people are creating service-base moments and projects or participating in them. (Beyond “normal” auditing delivery). I would love an area, group or data base about this, I can’t set it up, but I would happily contribute and connect with the group that’s doing it.

The stories I've heard where more effective action (and transparency) is taken, seem more like yours- indies going out on their own, bucking the system as it were, to create a better and more real effect, using the tools you know and have.

I live out of the US and for one project, I remember setting up a vigil in my city after 9/11- it went SO well (national coverage plus it was very meaningful for everyone plus it pulled together multiple cultures, government and media sources, etc). The guy who helped me put it together, behind the scenes, was an amazingly- head -on -straight OSA person (!) However, both of us were very careful to leave out the fact that I was a Sci or that he was in anyway involved.

I realize that transparency is always an issue and delicate in certain circumstances, however, I felt funny about this at the time. But the elements to put together the event were moving so quickly there wasn't time for me to reflect on and handle this aspect. I was more occupied with getting embassy officials, artists, permission to use the venue, etc. So I took his advice (which was brilliant for the action, btw).

However, in retrospect didn't my OSA friend and I create a kind of “withhold” for everyone else by feeling we had to hide?? I wonder (and hope) in the indie field there will be some space to undo this type of behavior/feeling, since the main message has always been to help ourselves and others. It would be cool to set up a resource for those of us who work in this area for some way to connect back up, share ideas, get over any past effects and past limitations for these relief efforts and projects.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Mike Laws
0 # Mike Laws 2013-03-10 14:00
There are many other concepts that must be evaluated and considered, looking at the past history of the COS.
Who makes who an expert? How is authority bestowed? Who succeeds who? Is this an elected system, or a benevelant monarchy? Who makes the monarchy? What is recorse against the "governing body" if it runs amuck? How are finances handled transparently?
Is this governed by laws or LRH policy or what. How are governing policies decided when there are, for example LRH policies that seem to contridict each other and are open to different interpretations?
What about liabilities? The COS shields itself from liabilities in the US through first amendment protections. Take the purif, there are at least 100 cases over the years of death or organ damage or failure from people on the purif. The cause is not discussed, standard or not ... but liability is created, marriage counseling that turns bad and is used by one party to hurt another, etc. etc. The practicioner has liability, but the certifying agency has liability. I don't believe anyone would insure this type of activity ... we are independants practicing scientology better than the COS, so cover our liability ... has high risk written all over it!
My big issue with any consolidation or structure is that I am not willing to give anyone the absolute trust and loyalty I gave the COS for 2/3 of my life. I don't know many today that would.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-03-10 15:16
Mike,
I hear you -- and these are ALL very valid points that have to be taken up. One by one, and resolved.
My own consideration is that if we can get the purpose right - then from there the design of the structure (whether rigid or fluid) and the policy of the group can be worked out. It is like working it backwards from BE - DO - HAVE. We can't work out what group should BE if we have not worked out what we want to HAVE - and from there, what we want to DO.
The Corp Scn structure had many purposes, and one of them was to keep and build the monetary reserves to protect the religion into the future. Well we have no monetary reserves and frankly I don't see that this would be a purpose of this guild/group - so that changes everything from the onset. The purpose, as I see it, is very fundamentally about making Scientology AVAILABLE to everyone - standard Scientology, the Ron-brand. So that requires a VERY different structure and use of the internet and technologies available now in 2013. That is my 2 cents. Do you reckon something like that would actually achieve what Ron and so many of us had postulated?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Jim Logan
0 # Jim Logan 2013-03-10 20:47
Mike,
Any group is a created agreed thing, and like any group, from 2D on up, has to be created continuosly to even exist. I think what happened over the past years with the CofS group at the top of it, was that the contribution factor of a member to the creation of the group was discounted and instead of individuals agreeing and creating a group, it became an automaticity, something other-determined and no longer the responsibility of individuals.

Whatever the group is, it is something that each member has a stake in, individually as well as a group member. Their contribution to the present time creation of that group is vital. Otherwise they are just going along for the ride on somebody else's determinism, allowing the "God" of that universe to be the thinking of the whole thing.

I had a chat with Hank Levin a few years back while checking out the Clarity Meter. He commented that as an individual practioner of the technology of Scientology (albeit not expressed as that)that he had come to the personal realization of the value of a tremendous amount of the knowledge in Scn policy.

There is a vast amount of experience in Scn policy, that I'm sure evaluated in present time, could prove to be a really good mousetrap so to speak.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
vertsurblanc
0 # vertsurblanc 2013-03-10 14:05
Missed your survey but here is my opinion.

This is a HUGE subject. We have been trundling down the whole-track for eons. We found Scientology with LRH and later the Church he created. We ‘lost’ Scientology and now find it again in all its imperfections on this and other blogs and groups; all in one lifetime. Somehow the church, as it has become, has been lost. We are at sea, in a way, out here with disparate ideas, groups and purposes. How improbable is such a scenario?? It’s too true nevertheless.

It is axiomatic that goals are senior to purposes. LRH also states this. Without a clear long-term vision the purposes can be expressed, as they are here, all over the place. In purposes expressed so far, we see reference made to the orgs and how they should be or to the tech or to KSW, as it applies outside the church.

So, what is the goal? I have no flippin’ idea, but I can imagine a couple.

1. If the long-term goal is to re-claim the Church at some point, then what we do as independents should be to keep the tech alive and well and delivered as standard processes until we get to the point when re-claiming becomes feasible.

This goal would imply that one of the very important products of this group, with this goal, is to add numbers to those who leave the church. Add hundreds to the group outside, and build a momentum of numbers and take lower strategic actions that act as catalysts to the reformation and re-claiming of the church. This would mean that as it grows actions of a ‘mutinous’ nature may occur. These actions may include meetings, conferences, legal actions, PR activities, and so on. These actions, beside continuing delivery, may bring about the changes and weakening of the church control, so that reclamation is feasible.

The goal itself will guide the purposes and the eventual strategies that follow.

2. If this is not the goal, then it could be along the lines of creating a broad international association of groups that deliver the tech in its agreed-upon way, and this broad group parallels the church it its activities, as a separate organization that settles down and works out its policies. The church, post-Miscavige, may end up being something else.

This goal ignores the machinations of the church and gets hold of the tech in deliverable form and works on this and produces checksheets and packs and courses and dissem tools and so on. It creates its own operating basis and lets the church weaken on its own. This too would mean getting many, many more to join the ranks of this movement, as is true for the previously stated possible goal above.

3. If we add a longer time to all of this, 50 years maybe, and glance over at Christianity, we may see similar separation and development. A Ron’s Org group; a more loosely defined Free-zone group; a USA Independent Association; an Outback group and who knows what else in the next 10 to 50 years. Clearly, this has started to happen. This means your goal could be to get your group going as its own identity and to let the others became what they become. I do not think that controlling those groups is wise or can be done. Let them be, but grow your association or guild. This recognizes that many disparate groups, with different styles and approaches, is what is probably going to happen. Your goal, in this case, is tempered by this reality. This means NOT attempting to hold on to the previous idea of Scientology being a single large group.

What we do now will influence any of those outcomes.

As a sub-product, to put it one way, of the above goals, and what I can agree to at this stage of my dilemma is to encourage more and more existing Scientologists to see what is wrong in the church and to withdraw their support and to add to the momentum of the independents. This statement will probably get a general broad agreement from all current independent groups. This is a point of agreement and a way forward for all of them.

Lana, if you speak on behalf of all independents, you are probably going to end up with so many varied opinions it may be tough to navigate through it all. Those chatting on Marty’s blog are good people. So too are those on your blog.
My opinion is that one of the things you can do is to carve out what you want to do and to let this be known broadly. This approach leaves open the door to the demise of the church and if that happens then it may very well be a wise move to take on some of the fallout of that happening, at that point in time. So the goal becomes conditional. If at the time the church implodes, if it does, then your longer-term goals includes the possibility of jumping back in and assisting the church’s reformation?

Questions that cover policy, once the goals and purposes have been clarified, and may need consideration, may include:

•Do you want to clear the planet?
•Do you want to practice disconnection?
•Do you want to disseminate Scientology as the only way one can achieve enlightenment?
•Do you adopt Knowledge Reports as part of your approach to ethics?
•Do you adopt 100% of all admin tech and 100% of all ethics tech as used by the church?
•I am sure there are many more that may need consideration

The adoption, or not, of these policies may influence who you attract to your group or who is repelled by it.

What you ask, when I review your questions, brings up all of the above, unfortunately.

In amongst what I have said above, and what others no doubt could add with deeper insight, are things the various groups can all agree upon. Maybe one way of proceeding is to find what these things are. I am sure your survey and subsequent question will bring more insight into what these broad agreements may be.

All of my sometimes ramblings above, are not definitive statements of a comprehensive approach but it is my opinion and definitely needs more careful thought. It is what I was thinking when I read your comments above, so offer it here as a shot at this weighty issue.

Greenonwhite
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-03-10 15:38
Green on White -- I really appreciate you bringing up these points. You are right that goals are above purpose on an admin scale. There is certainly a mis-mash of all kinds of groups existing outside of the Church, and the effort here is NOT to try and round them all up and put them in boxes, or try to make them conform to boxes. I think, much like some of my children's toys -- once they are out of th e box and assembled and then disassembled and recreated in different shapes and sizes, they don't ever seem to fit back in that original box again.
There is no question that anyone who can blow the whistle on human rights violations, illegal activities, etc. within the Church should do so. There is a moral obligation, from society to do so. Many of us have done that and will continue to. The datum that Scientology is a self-correcting body of work is only workable if there is no self-appointed SP dictator who has corrupted justice lines and removed all other persons of worth.
But the original conversation that started this all up was not about over throwing the Church - they are on their own downward spiral, and the violations and departures from LRH tech, admin and ethics will seal their coffin in time. It is happening already as demonstrated in the drying up of new public in, financial hardship of the Idle orgs, etc.
But here we find ourselves, outside in this sea (as you put it) and many of us (myself included) want to see that there are Scientology services that my young children will be able to avail themselves of, as they get older. Many of us want to continue to move up The Bridge. Many of us want to go back to the original philosophy and aims of Scientology - not the corrupted DM version.
There are broad agreements out here - and I am looking to get those communicated and get dialogue on them occurring -- and from there, this rabble can move ahead in whatever way.
This is not about control. This is not about dictating to others what they should or should not be doing.
This is about making Scientology available - the Ron's brand Scientology - to current and future generations.
Hope that clarifies.
I would love to hear what others think and feel on this. That is why I invited all to comment.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
vertsurblanc
0 # vertsurblanc 2013-03-11 14:58
Thanks for the ack Lana.

I see you are still going for purpose first and all I can do is assume is that you have a goal figured out?

So can you let me know, what is your goal?

Thanks
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-03-11 15:52
Thanks Green on White. Yes, I am TR3ing to get the purpose named.

I am operating off two basic LRH policies. The first is HCO PL 24 Sept 1988, PR Series 43, PR AND PURPOSE. In this policy LRH states:
"The common denominator of these things is at the top of the admin scale: It is purpose. Programs are written to achieve a purpose. To coordinate, one must have a purpose to coordinate to."

Secondly, is HCOPL 6 Dec 70 THIRD DYNAMIC DE-ABERRATION, which lists the points of an admin scale and states:
"This scale is worked up and down UNTIL IT IS (EACH ITEM) IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH THE REMAINING ITEMS." Please note, it does not state that you must have the goal named first. LRH makes it clear that each of the items on the admin scale must align and be worked up and down till they do -- and this action de-aberrates a group and allows them to achieve what they want to.

LRH goes on to detail it further in the same policy stating:
" As the universe is full of beings and one lives with them whether he likes it or not, it would be to anyone's interest to be able to have functioning groups.
"The only way a group jams up and (a) becomes difficult to live in, and (b) impossible to filly separate from, is by random and counter-purposes.
"If one thinks he can go off and be alone anywhere in this universe he is dreaming.
... "This all we can do to survive even on the first dynamic is to know how to handle and be part of the third dynamic or fourth dynamic and clean it up."

Lastly -- there is one more reference that is vital to the current circumstance, and that is HCO PL 14 January 1969, Target Series 1, OT ORGS. "STOPS ALL OCCUR BECAUSE OF FAILED PURPOSES. BEHIND EVERY STOP IS A FAILED PURPOSE. A stuck picture or a motionless org are similar. Each has behind it a failed purpose. THERE IS A LAW ABOUT THIS -- ALL YOU HAEV TO DO TO RESTORE LIFE AND ACTION IS TO REKINDLE THE FAILED PURPOSE. THE STOPS WILL AT ONCE BNLOW. That law (it comes out of OT VIII materials) is so powerful it would practically revive the dead! It applies to orgs. It applies to cities or nations. When you diverge from a constructive purpose to "stop attacks", the purpose has been abandoned. You get a stop. The real way to stop attacks it to widen one's zone of responsibility. And pour the coals on purpose. Thus all attacks one makes should be in THE DIRECTION OF ENLARGING ONE'S SCOPE AND AUGMENTING BASIC PURPOSE."
(please note the capital letters above are per LRH -- not my own interpretation of the references)

So... you are correct, we need to know what the goals are, but purpose is primary, and once we have established that, we can work the admin scale up and down (including working out policy) till all is in alignment -- including goal/s.
Does that clarify for you?

What do you see the basic purpose to be?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
vertsurblanc
0 # vertsurblanc 2013-03-12 15:00
Oh well. The purpose will depend on the goal. The reference you quote states the seniority of the terms. Goals, most senior.

So we see it differently.

No worries.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
vertsurblanc
0 # vertsurblanc 2013-03-11 16:43
I suggested one below.

Greenonwhite
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Silvia Ll
0 # Silvia Ll 2013-03-10 14:36
Well I happen to be at Dror Center and yes, it is easier to get things done in a group where a common purpose exists. It is not serious, public comes and has wins, staff are relaxed and friendly.

Dror Center was not too long ago expanded with the assistance of Claudio and Renata Lugli where NOTS tech delivery was started and also the Solo NOTS Course was implemented. Thanks to Claudio's supervision the auditors started to deliver NOTS.

One point of magnitude, as I see it, is the application of LRH Tech, meaning, the purpose of me being here is to do Qual actions of the new two NOTS Auditors. They themselves are very good, honest and standard; their pcs are winning but now, thanks to the insistance of Dani to ensure his Center delivers ONLY standard tech,some Qual actions were done on these auditors: basically W/Cing, handling any MUs found and lots,lots of drilling. Before they were good,now they are even better and most importantly, they are "FNing Auditors".

Thus, the PURPOSE of the Guild should include the service to assist, with Qual unlimited actions any auditor, C/S, staff member or any Scientologist that wants to obtain results. After all LRH says on HCO PL 31 Jul 65 Purpose of the Qualifications Division: "The prime purpose of the Qualifications Division is: To ensure the results of Scientology, correct them when needful and attest to them when attained"

Dror Center is stable and expanding as there is a team working to achieve so, being this Dani and Tami Lemberger as its representatives doing anything needed to ensure standard LRH gets applied;being because Claudio and Renata Lugli took the time to come here and help in establishing the AO and NOTS delivery, being because Qual is now being established-the point is there is a team with a common purpose doing Scientology.

Thus the guild's purpose should embrace "Making others regain their self determinism through honest and precise application of the applied philosophy of LRH" or similar wording.

One person alone wont make it, sooner or later power shared with others makes you stronger, so we should cover in the guild "Unite Independent Scientologists in the dissemination, use and products of Scientology Applied Philosophy" and finally "A better world for honest beings"

Hope this helps.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-03-10 15:52
Silvia --your point about making others regain their self determinism through honest and precise application of the applied philosophy of LRH is spot on.
In a conversation I had with Wendy Honnor (hope she does not mind me using her name) she brought up that the way you create vast chapters of auditors (and she HAS done it) is by helping people to know and understand and apply LRH tech, to assist them to get great results using it, to answer their questions and to make it a safe space to ask those questions.

This is very real to me, as an auditor myself, as I train and audit, there are MANY questions that come up. I am lucky as Jim Logan is nearby and he can always point me to the right reference, find the MU or drill me on that specific technique till I have that certainty. But we need that on a worldwide scale -- and we need the space to be safe so that someone learning can ask the questions and not feel they are going to be attacked or made wrong or targeted or declared a "squirrel". It is not all about doing it 100% right or you are outcast. It is about inclusion and making it easy for people to pick up a reference and give it a go. Have a win on it, and improve their application of that reference by continuing to use it and apply it. You make auditors by auditing.

When you are are working to get delivery occurring the emphasis has to be on training and correction -- not some weird strict RTC interpretation of KSW, which has turned the auditor TRs of Corp Scnsts into hard-chrome steel (when Scn tech only works with ARC).
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Jim Logan
0 # Jim Logan 2013-03-10 17:39
On the last para here, the rigid, mechanical, cold-chrome steel "TRs" that are de rigeur in DM Tech (c), the following belies that false beingness in an auditor:
"Now, the whole subject of auditing is only a subject as long as it is a live subject, therefore. And when it ceases to be a live subject and becomes itself a mechanical subject, it ceases to be a subject. It ceases to be anything more than a wound-up doll. Unless we have ARC at work in the auditing session, unless we pay some attention to the realities
of the session, we don't get anywhere with the session-because we don't understand what we're doing. Okay?" from lecture, Affinity, Reality and Communication, 13 Oct 55, 4th London ACC.

The basic of why auditing works is in Axiom 51. To "train" to anything else, as done by DM's robotic nonsense, is just...aside from diametrically opposed to the whole action, it's as dumb as my arse.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Mark Shreffler
+3 # Mark Shreffler 2013-03-10 17:44
My experience over the years with forming groups is that when I supplied the purpose and sold it to a room, the group would last until I went off to do do something else. I finally realized that people have their own purposes, and if you can discover these and harness them together in a group, each has his own reason for being there. We help each other achieve our purposes.

Get a room full of auditors together, they have the purpose to audit. Get them auditing, and associating with people who's purpose is to deliver introductory seminars. Throw in a few who love to enlighten and orient people, and others who love to Market.

We delivered Tone Scale seminars in Cairns every 7 weeks for six months to full rooms. From these seminars we invited attendees to Book One seminars because people could "resolve their tone levels" with Book One. We got graduates co-auditing. We kept that going. We did not sign them for anything else. They just co-audited.
I left when the group had 65 co-auditng pairs and was winning like mad, with many moving off the top to higher steps by their own originations. Had it not been killed by over-regging that occurred after I left, it would be expanding to this day.

It was all very organic. We were not solving problems anticipated from our past. We were just letting the thing grow by its own popularity. Thats what Ron did in the 50's, and that's what I have seen many successful operations do since: get a public winning on something they are already inclined to do. Get them to help each other. Keep feeding the thing with new public.

Organize as you go. The basic platten is in handouts and workable promo pieces. Share successful actions. Grow.

Contact people. Get them winning. They bring their friends. Get them winning. Do it again. As it grows you recruit from the group to handle the needed admin.

Parents who learn as much from their kids as their kids do from them have happy kids. Parents who try to plan every move stifle the excitement of discovery. I think this is an essential aspect of the nature of new groups - the wonder of watching someone WIN, and nurturing it.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Silvia Ll
0 # Silvia Ll 2013-03-12 13:41
Thanks Lana and you are right. Here at Dror the auditors are already very capable, dedicated and standard. The Qual actions we have taken has caused them to become even better. Thanks for the work of Claudio and Renata Lugli in setting up the AO at Dror they have been able to provide training for Solo Auditors inclusive Solo NOTS Auditors who are wining. The pcs now in OT V are also moving on and ready to go on Solo NOTS. The point is that it is a team activity, many Indies have helped to make Dror an excelent center and putting a little of LRH's qual made the space shine and win even more/Scientology is being delivered for real.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
calvin b. duffield
0 # calvin b. duffield 2013-03-11 02:29
Silvia, thou speakest from the trenches of the honorable soothsayers. Verily, doest thy thinkest, that a time shall come to pass, when, like thee, others shall glean for themselves,the discipline of the trade?

I lookest on, to the sages and others, that
lend grace to these tomes, and now feel compelled to request of thee..........

..Pray tell, with all the goodwill that
prevails in our midst, WHERE might we assemble, that I can bring my children and grandchildren and friends, that they might partakest in the wisdom and friendship to be shared amongst us all?

Seeing, touching, experiencing the fullness of persons of goodwill,seemest better to me, than symbols on a piece of parchment, though the script and ink may be conveyed with taste and beauty.

I hearest and understand thy words passed on from thy mentor, when thou speak of the destruction caused by the mis-spoken
and especially the mis-understood word.

How shall we see for ourselves,when a student amongst us, has fallen by the wayside, or departs, if we be not present to witness the stumbling event, or the disarray in the mind of the person, all because of the MISUNDERSTOOD word?

I hearest but little, bespoken by the respected guests present, of the simple
words of thy great mentor, who uttered
the following advice be taken, to put to rest the quandary of ...WHAT to do?

His simple advice was to;

.....Put an ORG (meeting place) there!

Doest thou agree?

ML, Calvin
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Silvia Ll
0 # Silvia Ll 2013-03-12 13:46
Yes Calvin'this Dror group already has excelent auditors and the little bit of qual actions we did (clear MUs and drills) has gotten them to become even better. The AO group was started by Claudio and Renata Lugli and we should thank their great work in establishing this for Dror Center. The Solo NOTS auditors are wining and the Dror AO is a Center to be emulated-there is a simple truth behind its success: they use and aplly LRHs tech.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
levinia
0 # levinia 2013-03-11 06:09
Excuse me, but I´m an auditor since over 20 years. Of cause to be in a group where all the Org-posts are filled is the ideal scene.... But this we don´t have right now. But as an auditor I should know, if I have MUs. if I miss tech, if I´m uncertain on applying it.. as an auditor your ethics has to be in very much. So as I saw in Dror, they really got great products....So I believe in these auditors and I believe their C/S for not using non-standard tech. So how can you just undercut their products by your comment on this blog? What was your purpose to make this coment? Most of the indis are "old" scientologists and they know how to get the tech or how to correct themselves. We are now in a state of pioneers and I think the best to do is just to produce, means as an auditor to audit, and as I said before, right now we don´t have the great Orgs, but we have great trained terminals you can ask if you feel unsure about something.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Dani Lemberger
0 # Dani Lemberger 2013-03-13 05:36
Hey Levinia, Silvia did not intend to "undercut their (Dror's) products by your comment on this blog". Silvia is here, working with us, it's going great. Some of the wording on her comment is not of my liking, but her work here speaks for itself. Also, Silvia has her own view of things. A luxury we're all entitled to, having escaped "The Tyranny of the Single View."
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Andrea Albrecht
+2 # Andrea Albrecht 2013-03-10 18:57
I think the purpose should be to align all resources we have. There is a place we can get the certifying done, cool. We have auditors and sups in volume, let us use them. We have the Tech, let's apply it. We have the rating system scientologyreviews.com/, supports qual functions. Now! All we need is to get them all together, and we could set up a virtual org board and everyone can take over what he likes and as much as he likes – as a volunteer. Shoulder to shoulder! Come on! And whatever you might think now, do not use the word "but"! It is as simple as that!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Worsel
+1 # Worsel 2013-03-10 19:24
I would include the definition of the product to have a purpose that arrives somewhere.
Something like "bettered conditions in one or more members of the dynamics through utilizing LRH-tech."
A bettered condition I would define as a more self-determined state of that member, greater freedom or negatively expressed: less oppression.
Purpose would be then: to bring that about.
Having and understanding the tech required, training, cramming, communication, creating or locating terminals for help, all being sub products, then.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
SKM
0 # SKM 2013-03-10 20:32
I wouldn't concentrate to much in bettering conditions as a group as this is, IMHO the natural thing which happens when Scientology is applied to individuals. As Jim Logan stated above from his time when he didn't even let people know he was a Scientologist.

I think the best thing to do should be in strenghtening the training line up and the delivery of the tech itself. Don't be concerned too much about dissemination - it's an inevitable thing, when Scientology is combined with ARC.

I'd like to acknowledge Dan Koon and the people who create >>Independent Checksheet Foundation
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
SKM
0 # SKM 2013-03-11 07:32
This doesn't mean dissemination is not important - of course it is. But I think the best dissemination is word of mouth.

Good communication between the people who are interested in the application and study of Scientology right now, will determin how well Scientology is disseminated in the future.

At this moment I am particulary interested in proper checksheets and packs for training. That's why I find the work from the Independent Checksheets Foundation so valuable.
It would be great if there was a way to get in comm with them easily, ask questions and provide some help.
Maybe even establish a network so the checksheets and compiled packs would be translated to other languages.
Internet can help to overcome physical distances so the work could be done with remote volunteers and helpers.
The ICF could be expanded into a Independent Compilations and Translations Foundation for Checksheets and Materials.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Maureen
0 # Maureen 2013-03-10 20:41
Un-GAT auditors, a qual action and then make auditors to deliver LRH Scn.
Get comm lines in so auditors have C/S's and quals so they can fix anything needing fixing and ready to deliver.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Ingrid Smith
+1 # Ingrid Smith 2013-03-10 23:58
I will answer more in depth when I have a little more time.I really enjoyed everyone's response.I do want to say that I got in on a 4th Dynamic ruin and the purpose of clearing the planet, the galaxies was and still is very much my purpose. I know Ron created a 3D tech to accomaodate such a vast purpose.
At this point we are very much in need of getting back on our feet. Eventually we can shine up our initial purposes again.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Theo Sismanides
+2 # Theo Sismanides 2013-03-11 06:02
This is something special to me here. This is why we all got into Scientology and this was/is our main purpose.

So Revitalizing the purpose (which already exists in the writings of LRH) is how I see we should go about.

Simplicity is important and LRH had his unique way in that. I don't think we need to reinstate those things just to say something.

The goals of Scientology are our goals I think. A planet without insanity or war.... This is a vast purpose and it should be pursued.

The only difference between us now and then with LRH is that there is no group which can carry out this purposes and pursue such goal.

For me this new but basic question about purposes and goals can be answered with 3 things.

The BE, The Do, and the Have
The Be

Be a True Group which will revitalize the purpose of Standard Ethics, Tech and Admin in people. Not a squirrel Tech but that Tech which gave us ALL here OUR WINS which obviously others didn't get and so get them to differentiate from that what really Scientology was and is all about.

The DO
The 7 Div Org Board is the Vehicle for such a Group to move on. As I explain further down.


The Have
To "Keep on" Keeping Scientology Working, despite all suppression, other-intentiondeness and counter-intentionedness which exist left and right in the Church and the field.

Many people have been looking for a leader to take on the weight but no such leader ever came up in the field willing to wear those boots.

The group was left to become a disorganized and scattered number of people, who however because they knew the Tech to some degree and had the Internet could still communicate and raise ARC and take some action.

However Time goes by and time as we all know it and life have an effect of ripping things apart. Any good auditor or administrator knows that. Entheta moves in faster than theta can work and deal with and things fall apart.

Lately we see more and more smaller groups being formed up which take on different names and start somehow taking different directions.

So, in looking for a purpose to pursue the goals of Scientology in which (thank God) we all agree as far as I can see in this group, we are looking at the problem of Organization.

This is the only thing that is missing.

From the one side of the spectrum, from Miscavige's squirrel and suppressive management with all kinds of "seniors" (=robots, cold chrome steel Administrators) we have ended up on the other side where "everybody is equal and nobody has done anything more worthwhile than any other so everybody can speak (and harass, oh yes) anybody". Auditors and Executives and administrators and other Hatted people were made to look equal and the same to any anonymous guy who can jump in a group and start harassing them in the worst scenario or in the best, pretend to be of same, equal value. The Auditor who is spending time auditing people is NOT BACKED UP or ACKNOWLEDGED enough and thus an A=A=A occurs presenting him/her as just another person of some given value.

This is insane. We have reactively come down to the level where everybody is a soldier no matter how much hatted, how good and experienced an auditor or I don't what else he has done in and out of Scientology.

However, this is not the way Organizations are built unless we are in the Mexican Army as LRH says (if I remember well it was the mexican army example and I think by now even the Mexican Army does not operate like that) in the Org Board and Livingness.

So to come back to my point the problem is a problem of authority and evaluation (true and sincere evaluation of authorities) and organization of such in a workable scheme. The Org Board and its 7 Divisions is the only proven means to solve such a problem. And is a given thing, except that many Scientologists have not really gotten the best out of it or don't know it in depth.

One cannot live life without ANY authority. One cannot survive amongst a world where everybody is "equal no matter what". You see how democracies have gone down to socialisms and other type of regime with heavy taxing and no production really, rewarding downstats and penalizing upstats. Is that what we finally want?

Even the authority of LRH has been scarred in the Indie Field so the Stable Datum was almost gone. And by not being replaced by another stable datum.

A True Group thus, adhering to the goals of Scientology as laid down by LRH should be our main purpose. And that Group's purpose should be to rehabilitate the stable datum called Scientology and Standard Tech in the hearts and minds of Scientologists who have left or now or in the future leave the church or even new ones who want to join straight to our team. The Church is our Div 6, hahaha, I have said that many many times. They graduate from there to come to their True Group which is a Free Group and a group of OTs to say so. Certificates are not necessarily needed. The members of such a Team are OTs by definition. It's like a new Sea Org is forming. But beware. We know better than repeating the same mistakes.

The Org Board of 7 or 9 Divisions provides all we need to not make the same mistakes of the past.

Should people see that their is suppression at the top or even ineffectiveness, Knowledge Reports exist and in the presence of many such reports action can be taken even on the heads of the Organization.

Why am I proposing the Org Board? First of all I have seen it succeed for a long long time. Qual as LRH says was missing and still was missing in the times of Miscavige... but this was an anomaly and a special case: the Miscavige tyranny.

I have seen myself the Org Board work. Look at Haifa AO now. They have that Org Board. All they did was get out of the suppressiveness and I hear they are doing great.

I can write about the Org Board in more detail but this is not the purpose of this topic. However, there are a couple of things I would like to stress about this org board which probably you all know that it is the Cycle of Action.

I was astonished to see how some higher terminals in Scientology pay so little credibility to this Org Board. How little they know of it. Maybe their trust in it has been smashed by the very bad example of Miscavige's application of it. However they should think that even a suppressive managed to "succeed" with such an org board. For this it is not the org board itself that must be blamed. On the contrary it shows that the org board works even under suppression. The orgs produce a certain theta product. All is not gone in the church.

This is our main vehicle which will carry us along. It does not have to be suppressive, LOL!. On the contrary. It can provide a big, huge scope for Scientologists to act.

I have to cut this down in 2 parts, sorry for the lengthy comment but I think it's worthwhile.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-03-11 09:39
Theo - I too share your belief in the power of the org board itself. My concern has been for some time that the two vital functions (Qual for correction, certification and staff study; and Ethics to handle the PTS/SP phenomena that hits an org) must be dealt with and exist, on an org board somewhere. The functions of that 7 Div org board must exist, however in small chapters, or in a field auditing unit, the hats may have to be held by just a few people.
Regardless -- key FIRST is to establish what purpose there is, for which an org board is required.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Theo Sismanides
+1 # Theo Sismanides 2013-03-11 13:00
Lana, thanks. The purpose is, for me at least, to form up a group of people who can think straight with LRH and rehabilitate those who can't think straight with his writings and think that the man was here just as some writers have been around. The man was here for a different purposed and he put all that not only in writing but into action.

This is our purpose in my opinion. If such a group can't be formed all, and I mean it, though it sounds too serious, IS lost.

The Org Board can serve such a group and such a group will have to take responsibility to serve others. LRH cannot be replaced by one man alone, or even two or three or ten, even. It looks like it will take some hundreds to replace him. And those hundreds better know what he was talking about. Sorry, do I sound like a Kamikazee Indie? Well, I never heard that term from Ron. I am here to remind to people the gains they had from Scientology and LRH.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Theo Sismanides
0 # Theo Sismanides 2013-03-11 13:06
Lana, reading your answer again, I will repeat it. The PURPOSE is to form a group of people who abide by Scientology Technology 100% and thus can and want to apply it. The goals to be pursued have already been stated by LRH and are still valid goals.

The purpose is not just a "nice sentence", is a doable thing and for me it is to form such a group. Thank you so much for being in communication even over a long distance line which makes it harder to communicate.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Theo Sismanides
+1 # Theo Sismanides 2013-03-11 06:03
2nd PART

The TOP of the Org Board IS THE PROBLEM, NOT THE ORG BOARD ITSELF.

The Top is the problem. If a Suppressive, Know Best or a Tyrant enters the Top of the Org Board everything is turned upside down. As we have reverse Dianetics and Scientology we have Reverse Admin. The structure of the org board can be used to punish and keep one small under such a suppressive.

If the Top of the Org Board has a broad view of Administrative Technology lower organizations and entities will flourish and prosper. All this is included in Admin Tech by LRH.

I would rather see in the Top of that Org Board someone(s) who know their Basic Scientology but know the value of Admin than get someone there who is really now a "with Ron but nobody else" Scientologist. As Marty called some Kamikazee with Ron Indies... I think he is referring to such people who in the name of Technology can smash everyone else.

They don't know the value of hatting versus hitting. They don't hat people, they don't grant beingness, they can't see far.

I had an auditor here auditing me and he asked me in a discussion we had about the Tone Level of my new girl friend. And I told him "wow, I haven't thought of it really, all I saw is her potential tone level after she has done some Scientology and I can assure you that IS high". He was astonished and actually found something in all this.

"Administrators" like Miscavige who just get dones with Force alone and threats and such tools are NOT Administrators. They use something else but NOT Scientology Admin Tech.

An executive up in the Org Board has certain qualities. All those things are not that hard to see and be found in people in our group. I would rather have an inexperienced executive like that with an open mind than a "proven senior with stats in the church" who though acted as a robot. HE DIDN'T KNOW THE BASICS. HE HADN'T GOTTEN THEM.

This is not to say that all people or executives acted as robots. This is to emphasize the Org Board, its value and if that executive does get that value. That's all. Even an inexperienced executive can run an org that way and a group. By learning to let people get on with their jobs and not intervening all the time.

I can commend on the Org Board much more because it is a huge subject and it will offer hundreds of opportunities to post people right away on it. But it has to be designed and drawn in a very skilled and experienced way.

And in this I see the value of the Indies and this group. To carry out such a purpose and draw such big of an Org Board starting from the top down as to encompass the many good people who are around and could be taking over hundreds of hats.

No one has done this yet. It is my opinion that if we do that and we all jump in and work on such an org board and assign those hats and people start doing those actions we will have provided Scientology with a new future and a new hope.

I know the task is big but I am afraid that is the only way. To GROW Bigger. Right now we have shrunk maybe down to 100, those who cared to answer the survey. But those 100 can be the core of this whole thing and there is enough good in us to pull it off.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
vertsurblanc
+1 # vertsurblanc 2013-03-11 15:10
Theo,

What about a goal that reflects the goals of Scientology, but in a modified form that is closer to the reality of our small group?

"An international association of Independent Scientologists that, along with all other like-minded groups and organizations, contributes to the creation of a civilization without war insanity (etc)."

"The goals of this association operates to assist all such groups who are interested in such assistance, to make the legal, technological, promotional, and quality assurance aspects of this association available to all members in a cooperative and non-descriptive manner."

One could add that the goals focus on the success of the association and not on the demise of the church.

Below this level, the purposes of this association can then be further defined.

Theo, when we get to policy, we can get really stuck into a kick-ass org board as you describe!

Greenonwhite.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Theo Sismanides
0 # Theo Sismanides 2013-03-11 15:49
Greenonwhite, I totally agree with the goal as stated. It's a broad goal and encompasses other like-minded organizations and groups which is very important. there is a whole 4th dynamic here and the goal encompasses that.

Yes, I am happy you agree on a kick-ass org board.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
vertsurblanc
0 # vertsurblanc 2013-03-11 16:45
Theo. Thanks.

Above I meant "prescriptive" and not "descriptive".

Cheers
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Paul
0 # Paul 2013-03-11 15:40
To clear the planet. To get ethics in on the planet so the fourth dynamic engram can be' audited out. LRH is the goal maker. I think we should just execute what is on the oec. Paul
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
george
0 # george 2013-03-12 00:20
From my experience being on staff and SO, I always felt that as a group Scn was trying to run before it could walk. Orgs which should have been missions, book sellers etc. They werent getting the products of an org.

I look back now and wonder what would have happened if instead of being recruited to staff with no to little reality on Scn, including myself, we were trained then we coaudited up to Clear. How much different would that org have been.

I see the purpose as to first get ourselves up the bridge, then help whoever else wants to go too.

And I see that being done by LRH tech, Im a Ron man and I have a lazy streak, I believe he has done the work lets just run with it.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
+1 # Lana M 2013-03-12 02:00
George -- you certainly have my reality and agreement. Orgs that are no-orgs are a joke. No capacity to deliver, staff who have little training themselves == recipe for what we have now in Corp Scn. The way forward has to be from the ground up -- with co-audits and training people, and from there, building resources as demand grows. Anything else is ass backwards IMHO.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Michael Moore
+1 # Michael Moore 2013-03-12 01:16
Some very important and salient points here from some very knowledgeable people. Under such circumstances I do not see how we cannot be successful.
A group, like an organisation (which it is in some form or other) is composed of lines and terminals. “..to have communications you have to have terminals. The org board is the pattern of the terminals and their flows. So you have to have an org board. And the org board must in truth be a representation of what is in the organization. The org board shows where what terminals are located in the org so flows can occur.” LRH.
The Org Board LRH adopted is one that had lasted over 100,000 years elsewhere in the universe and is therefore quite robust. LRH added the missing ingredient, Qual. So with this we can be sure it will last even longer being self correcting. It fits in with the idea of a third dynamic group of purposes and agreements to those purposes. And, of course a leader for the group is required.
The main issue of course is that this data needs to be actually applied. Fine to have a group but if only a few are active then it is not going to make it as a group. A group is in existence when ALL the participants in the agreed upon group actually participate. In the church it is not correctly applied and the result is wrong lines, disorder, misapplied and non applied tech, no products delivered and the public staying away I droves.
The existing org board can start with three people (using Org Program No1) and expand to reach the dizzy heights of 200 thousand group members.
But there does not need to be just one group. There can be many, hundreds, thousands, millions. If all using the same org board structure and following the philosophy behind it (awareness levers) there is no reason why many groups cannot be successful.
APIS is one group that has strived to ensure there is a repository of the technology and that it is preserved and not altered in any way. It has a structure, an Org Board and many many members sharing the agreements and purposes of the group. It is a group that will be here for the4 duration. But there is no reason whatsoever that other groups cannot be formed up and flourish also.
I would love to see heaps more groups, with purposes and goals and agreements among its members, to get the technology LRH bestowed upon us out and being used by society, more people being educated into how to handle life, more people being audited up the bridge and cleared. That would make such a difference to the society we live in. The more people we can pull out of the bank agreement that surrounds us, the better society will be for us all.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Tom M
+4 # Tom M 2013-03-12 10:01
Ya, why re-invent the wheel. so let's take a look at what went wrong. i was in management at Int so I saw what I saw and learned what I learned up there. Mainly what went qwrong is what is wrong with the USA today - too much government and by people who have vested interests instead of the interest of people at heart. You had RTC, CMOI, Exec Strata and FB as well as the local CMO cont units and CLO's all trying to manage the orgs through their various networks and killing the orgs with management. Why? Because the people who set this up were interested in power and that big honey pot called Sea Org Reserves. Like many a smart person has said in the past - just follow the money and it will lead you to the biggest crimes you ever have seen. I owned a public company 10 years ago and as soon as our stocks got up to $3.45 (the org had 75 million shares) everyone and their uncle were on my doorstep, including WISE and OSAI, trying to figure out how to steal that money from me. Lawyers were like ICBMs - they had theirs and I had ours and when we launched them at each other all that was left was wasteland. \
The postings at the top of the org board were criminal. None of the senior execs had ever worked in an org before and knew little about what it took to get people in the door and turned into Scientologists. This includes DM, Yager, Mithoff, Leserve and a host of others. Their stable datums were to make money and get big bonuses. and they did make plenty of money for their pockets. i saw it.
If the top of the org board were to be posted with FEBC Class VIII's with org experience, then you would see real Scientology happening. This is the pattern of the late 60's and early 70's which preceded the boom in Scn: SHSBC grads went to orgs and opened them ip and boomed them. Study tech and the PRD came in followed by Data Series Tech and Management Tech. The orgs boomed.
There's your formula right there. We need to train FEBCs and Class VI and/or VIII C/Ses and send them out to open orgs. These same people then move up to local management and then central management. And we keep it small.
How's that sound?
ML Tom
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Jim Logan
+1 # Jim Logan 2013-03-12 16:15
Tom,
That sounds like it worked before, so it will again. A successful project.

I got into Scn in 75, just after the FEBC/VIII program in Toronto. It went from a small place to some 35,000 new names to CF in the early 70s. When I got trained as a Sup, I, along with two other good Sups, and a functioning Tech Services call-in, put an Academy there with 250 students actively on course.

I couldn't agree more on the burgeoning "top" and the cry for money, when all that actually worked was people honestly approaching others with the message and results of the technology of Dianetics and Scientology, and then producing them. Individuals, contacting and in ARC with individuals, and sincere acts to help others with the materials.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Theo Sismanides
0 # Theo Sismanides 2013-03-12 18:12
Hey Jimbo, you can be heard across the planet... over here, to Greece... I love your spirit, man... you don't forget that easy cause you know the path, boy... You are Sup, Man.... I had a couple of beers, but who cares. I get what you are talking about. 250 students actively on course... hahaha, that's quite a number.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Paul
+1 # Paul 2013-03-12 17:42
Hi Tom, I am oec trained and I am a business owner with many years experience both as a staff member and business owner, consultant, etc. The post I just read is one of the most sensible I have read since I am out of the C.of S. The wheel doesn't need to be re-invented. Admin Tech works perfectly. It needs just to be applied. I second totally your viewpoint
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Tom M
+1 # Tom M 2013-03-12 22:15
Thanks Paul, it really is a matter of "What did you really do" when it comes to what went wrong with the Church. No need in saying "management bad" or "organization bad". They are only bad when grossely misapplied and misused. We were all zealots of management tech in the 70's and we boomed some pretty high end orgs without much effort and without all of the HE&R that Int produced.
ML Tom
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Paul
+2 # Paul 2013-03-13 18:58
Tom, whoever ran into trouble with Admin tech has misunderstood words on the relevant pl's. Everytime i used the tech purely in the business world i made a lot of money. It is not Admin tech that is wrong. It is what lies beneath: out tech and out ethics. Truth is not everybody can be a good administrator: when i was on the OEC I saw many glib students, several of them from higher orgs. They zipped through the checksheets but they couldn't even sell a book and... they ended up being my seniors. Whoever thinks Admin tech doesn't work is almost uniformly a worker rather than an exec or entrepreneur. Ah, one more thing: he is also almost uniformly broke.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Theo Sismanides
+1 # Theo Sismanides 2013-03-14 18:06
Thank you Paul, for witnessing that.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Worsel
+1 # Worsel 2013-03-13 01:33
"Study tech and the PRD came in followed by Data Series Tech and Management Tech" This does make sense. In an attempt to help some people to bring some order into their lives by having apply them conditions and their formulas I realized that not knowing the lessons of the data series can utterly defeat any application of condition formulas. This missing knowledge also seems to be a factor in the creation of judgement, And that makes a difference between being a "follower" and being a creator of your life. As I see it, the Data-Series is the foundation on which Ethics-Tech can work.
A "Why" like "You were mean to me" or some variation of that like "you didn't give me the right orders" will but add confusion.
And Study Tech and PRD before that make a lot of sense as well.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
SKM
0 # SKM 2013-03-12 11:31
Make it simple.
You don't need a Leader if you can bow to LRH as the goal maker.

The OrgBd is fine - I use it myself for a 2 people "Organization".
But more important is to understand the purposes, the different hats and its different purposes.

I don't like the idea to have anyone on the planet on a artifical OrgBd.

Have a Guild or some Foundation(s) with different purposes (Checksheets & Materials, Training & Cramming) and make it easy to participate.
Use Online-Tools to stay connected and in comm. Make sure all of it is secure.

Than the creators of the Foundations offer their service to the field so they can get it and if they wish to also participate in the programms of the foundation for particular projects or products.

Don't try to make a overall OrgBd for all activities.
Instead, put the people together who already are doing the things we are talking about here and let them visualize a Scene.
Begin with what you've got and don't get a broken heart because you realize that the ressources are little.

Make a AdminScale first - visualise what you wanna have after you know what the current scene is.
The OrgBd is secondary to the AdminScale. If you have purpose and agreement the other factors will fall in place, almost naturally - the OrgBd can follow.
The structure follows the mind.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Theo Sismanides
0 # Theo Sismanides 2013-03-12 18:15
SKM, you give me an idea... that Group, the True Group I talked about, will have to be so... close! So tight, so... in ARC! I can't put it in words... that Group will have to be, act and have as One.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Nickname
0 # Nickname 2013-03-12 23:07
The purpose of the group should be to bring people together to pursue their purposes of auditing and training. I don't see anything wrong with following the traditional Mission model as LRH set it up, just keep it independent.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Dani Lemberger
+1 # Dani Lemberger 2013-03-13 03:58
There has been some attention on Dror Center in comments above, so I guess I need to comment on the comments.
We set up our AO in September 2012, shortly after leaving the Church. Tami and I had been on Solo NOTs at Flag for 15 years. We witnessed at Flag the destruction of Standard Tech, invalidation of states attained by OT's and use of auditing to suppress and extort the public. Our observation was supported by others who were many years on Flag lines as public and also by the most senior tech terminals who wrote reports and spoke to us in confidentiality.
We were running one of the top missions on the Planet, so we could not just leave the Church and walk away. Taking responsibility means the preservation of the Tech forever and making it available - standard, accurate and within reach for all.
The next obvious step was to acquire ALL the materials and deliver the FULL Bridge, both sides. In this we were assisted generously by many great individuals, including Marty Rathbun, Claudio Lugli, Jim Logan, Dan Koon, Gary Webber, for materials and advice.
To get the AO going we asked Claudio and Renata Lugli to guide us. They came to Haifa at personal sacrifice and got us going and products started rolling. They are still valuable terminals for us, C/Sing and supporting. We have recovered many individuals who are back on the Bridge, doing their OT levels and auditors who are back in the chair, including two Flag Class IX's. Yes!
The next step is constant improvement and striving for perfection. In this we are assisted by Silvia Llorens, Flag Class IX Cramming Officer. Ron says in KSW Series 12, HCOPL 31 July 1965, "The prime purpose of Qualifications Division is: TO ENSURE THE RESULTS OF SCIENTOLOGY, CORRECT THEM WHEN NEEDFUL AND ATTEST TO THEM WHEN ATTAINED."
In HCOPL 7 Dec 1971, CORRECTION DIVISION PURPOSES, …, Ron says: "Cramming Officer, Purpose: To help LRH ... and see that the correct data is known, cleared of MU's and drills to confident certainty, thus ensuring the technical honesty of the organization."
A Scientology activity, much like any large business, must maintain a Qual function, or Q.C. in the business world, to ensure ever-improving technical perfection. Ron talks of the “technical honesty of the org.” This is key, the public expects 100% Standard Tech and we must be honest with the public and deliver as much.
The Qual Div at Flag has been destroyed by the thuggery of DM and his goons. Qual personnel must be courageous and respected, so they can do their jobs. Cowed individuals, harassed and constantly by-passed, cannot serve a Qual function.
We at Dror are thankful to our fellow Scientologists for their hard work, cooperation and support, making it possible for us to attain the purpose as stated above – preserve the Tech, make it available to all, easily and perfect. Perfection and availability is a never-ending process. Our honesty is in knowing we CAN be corrected and we can get even better.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Chris Mann
0 # Chris Mann 2013-03-19 00:36
I never answered this.

I think "Nickname" above said it pretty close:

The purpose of the group should be to bring people together to pursue their purposes of auditing and training.

I would hope preservation of materials and correct application could occur- perhaps by consensus of a group of highly trained individuals. Correct application is something that can be lost over time.

For a start, perhaps an annual meeting or something could be set up where we could do more than get together to get together. Maybe some planning etc. I guess I'm skipping ahead.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-03-19 00:54
Thanks Chris,
It seems we are all on the same page. I agree on the purpose and on preservation of materials and correct application.

And creating a cohesive supportive group, including social events, is definitely on the calendar. Will keep you and all else posted as things progress.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

2344103
Today
Yesterday
This Week
519
999
4513

Subscribe!


Powered by Google FeedBurner

Easy ShareThis

This is your blog

ticket

This blog was created as a safe space where independent Scientologists can meet, talk and post.

If you fit any of the following criteria, we welcome contributions from you for this blog. Have you experienced results from Scientology

  • Auditing
  • Training
  • Knowledge

Send articles, stories or successes to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Communication

“As the only crime in the universe seems to be to communicate, and as the only saving grace of an awareness of awareness unit is to communicate, we can readily understand that an entanglement of communication is certain to result. What we should understand – and much more happily – is that it can now be resolved.”

L. Ron Hubbard
Dianetics 55!, Chapter Nine
Two-Way Communication

Help Support Us

Making Auditors

courseroom-logo

Standard Tech is alive, and ready to take you to greatness.

Learn More

Training in iScn

dan-koon

A note on training from the man who was there with LRH.

Learn More

Operating Thetan

super-barriers

Training's role in removing the counter-effort from living.

Learn More

FREE Checksheets

meter-dial

LRH Checksheets that made 1000s of successful auditors.

Download Yours