welcome-image-wide
blog-header

By Lana Mitchell

Today I want to talk about something that has been niggling at me for some time. 

Though I love the fact that in today's world, we can easily link up and connect people across the world through the internet -- I really think blogs, in general, are quite aberrated. And the problem, in my view, is all about communication.

 First there is the cycle of communication – ie.  where there is an origin that is received, duplicated and acknowledged. A blog article makes a statement, or gives a view or an opinion on something, and many people read it, but in doing so the majority never make an acknowledgement that they have received the communication.

I know that many of you are out there reading this at this moment  – as we have statistics that show between 1000 and 1400 visitors come each day.  BUT, you visit, read and leave –with no acknowledgement that you received or duplicated the communication. Regardless of whether you like or dislike the article, it is like having an open house and people sneak in through the window, have a snoop around and then leave the same way they came. Other than evidence of footprints on the carpet, you have no idea if they liked the house, or if they will be back.

Many of you are phantom readers – ghosts who we know are there, but are seemingly unwilling to communicate an acknowledgement of the article and what it said.

Maybe we need to set up a LIKE button (or dislike) so you can simply click that if you agree or disagree?

Maybe we need to put in emoticons, so that you can simply add a smiley face (or not) and not have to comment otherwise?

Not really sure how we can encourage acknowledgement -- but there must be some solution to this that is workable and allows a cycle of communication to occur.

Thank you to those who do acknowledge an article – much appreciated.

Then we take a look at two way communication – and there seems to be little opportunity for you, the reader, to then originate a communication back to the blog.  You can write an acknowledgement – and then make an origination – but routinely it is lost in a long list of commentary.

And though I have made it clear that this is a COMMUNITY blog, I am not overwhelmed by the volume of articles submitted. Now I admit, I am a hard task master in that regard – as I require that articles are precise and have a message and are fitting to the purpose of the blog and iScientology – and some (yes Jim, I am talking about you) get more than a little testy when I reject articles or edit them. But – my point is here, I am not being swamped with communication from the independent community, with articles and communication.

So, maybe there is a consideration that either communication is not necessary, not needed, not wanted, or that the quality has to be just so, or something?

Or maybe a large majority of Scientologists out there have been driven out of communication due to Corp Scn suppression and fear of retribution?

Or maybe the topics of the blog articles are not something that people feel impelled to contribute to – not something that really want to talk about – no interest items – or things that are unreal?

I realize that in today’s world crappy communication is the norm – but here, on this blog particularly, I have been looking at how can we actually incorporate Scientology basics of communication – and not just send out communication to the world, but also get communication back from the same. It seems to me - now I have restudied Dianetics 55! and the 9th ACC (Communication, the Solution to Entrapment) that if we could get real Scientology communication principles applied, that it would help one and all. After all -- aren't those very principles what Scientology auditing is based on, and what makes case gain possible? Surely -- in building a 3rd dynamic, those principles would be vital.

Do you guys have views on this?

Is it just me that this puzzles on this point?

There must be a better way we can achieve real communication. 

 Any suggestions?

Comments   

 
Tony DePhillips
0 # Tony DePhillips 2013-04-19 10:35
Nice post Lana.

I usually will post depending on whether or not the post interests me. If the post doesn't interst me then I won't just comment to say "not interested". I will just skip it.

Sometimes I won't comment just becasue I don't have time.

I like the idea of using good communication to expand the group.

Another thing is that I'm not sure how many people come to this blog?

Another thought is that there are a lot of dis-enchanted people who have left the cult. They may see this blog as a "Scientology light" blog and may be more into going somewhere where they can "itsa" all their emotions and so forth, which might not all be acceptable on this blog.

These are some of my random thoughts...
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-04-19 15:06
Thanks Tony.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Ralph Hilton
-1 # Ralph Hilton 2013-04-19 15:25
I found this blog as I occasionally wander into the Darkside on ESMB to see what the enthetans are up to and a link was posted to it as an offshoot from Martyworld.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Worsel
+5 # Worsel 2013-04-19 10:58
Hi Lana, thanks for your communication.
I see a choice of different viewpoints on that.
1. If you'd consider HCO PL "Conference Hats", then I would only say (or write) something when I feel that it contributes something worthwhile to the discussion. In view of the fact that articles and comments will be viewed from many people at later points when they come to read them, it makes sense to not drown other readers with meaningless chit chat. In that view it could be an expression of respect.
2. The level of competence represented in the articles is quite high. Therefore there may be some people feel that they cannot communicate back on the same level and so an impression of a one-way flow can come up.
3. I see it this way: To click into this blog and to read the articles and the comments IS a way of participation and contribution. The fact that similar numbers of people each day acknowledge your existence and information by reading is a wonderful thing.
4. Some people take their time before they take part in commenting (much less in writing an article). On one article I had written two years ago someone told me that it was this article after that he decided to become independent. At that time I had thought I had failed to reach people with this article, because there was very little response and some of the response gave me the feeling I had not been understood. So, sometimes one has to give it a little time.
5. It takes time to read and time to write and there are a number of blogs that carry matters of interest. So often I do not write comments even if I could or would like to. Often I just read.
Maybe for some it compares more to a newspaper where one reads what is going on and other matters of interest.

You (you all) are very definitely creating an effect which is appreciated! (or your readers would be off). Please continue.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
+1 # Lana M 2013-04-19 15:10
Hi Worsel,
Your point on Conference Hats is a good one. In fact, each of the points you make make sense.
Do you think that there should be a mechanism that makes it easier for a reader to give a reaction of some sort without having to go through the process of answering in a comment? Whether that is emoticons, or the famous thumbs up and thumbs down, or like buttons, or whatever? Or is that just an unnecessary distraction to the process?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Worsel
+1 # Worsel 2013-04-19 16:17
My opinion is this:
If you wanted an emotional response and wanted to build up some kind of group-thinking, group-identity cherishing claque, that would be the thing to do: some simple form to clap hands or shout "Booh". If it would be my blog I would not introduce that.
If you wanted analytical responses, foster differentiating communications, individual expressions of thoughts or questions, like in comments. I would rather prefer that. It adds substance and colour to the substance of the articles.
I think this blog is doing wonderful and you should not change anything successful.

Ideas:
For new articles, you could judge by the comments made and then approach writers who seem to qualify for an article on a subject. (Build up a CF on potential writers.)
Or you could encourage bilingual readers to suggest articles from other languages (and then have them translate them.)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-04-19 20:21
Thanks Worsel. I agree with your opinion, and your idea is a good on and one that has actually been in place since we started.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
SKM
+1 # SKM 2013-04-20 06:22
Actually, Worsel, one of your articles over on the German Independents Blog really helped me to go through my lower conditions regarding my involvement in the Church.
If it wasn't for that article, I would still feel uncomfortable about having left the Church behind.
Making the lower conditions in a consistent manner, as suggested by you, rehabbed my knowingness about my own appreciation of Scientology and my disagreements with what the Church has become.
As a result no one from within could stop me in leaving - actually my certainty was so high that not many even have tried.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lisa Bladh
+1 # Lisa Bladh 2013-04-19 11:34
Hi everyone, this is the first comment I do on a blog in the independent field. My name is Lisa Bladh and I’ve been doing my doubt regarding the Church in public on my website scientology-freedom.com.

Personally I don’t see this as such a big problem as you might do Lana. I can understand your frustration, but not really as a problem. That this blog has over 1000 visitors each day is a tremendous success in my eyes. So congratulations to that!

That this community and maybe even this blog needs to evolve and grow and everything else is true and I do think that there are some technical solutions that might help do that in different ways. The question is what we want with the online community.

That a large percentage will stay quiet maybe always or maybe for a while is something I think we will have to live with. For various reasons people do not want to reveal their identity or they have other reasons why they don’t want to post online and I think that is ok to be honest.

I also think one has to understand how the dynamic of a blog works, it’s kind of in the middle of a newspaper and personal communication. But one could also create other types of online communities where people will have the opportunity to maybe create a profile and start to interact in other ways with people. One could for example create a sort of Facebook like community. (Not on Facebook but hosted by iScientology.org)

But under all of these technical solutions lie the question what it is that you want to accomplish? For a blog with it’s limitations and possibilities I think this one is a success. That you need and want more articles is one thing – that can be handled. Other than that I think you have a winner here!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
+1 # Lana M 2013-04-19 15:23
Welcome Lisa. Lovely to have your voice here and I appreciate your answers.

To clarify -- I guess my goal has been to work out how to apply and use Scientology communication principles to really enhance a persons experience on a specific topic. It is not so much that I consider this blog not successful -- nor that I am trying to get every person to be part of every conversation -- as I reckon that would be pretty strange in itself.
I am fishing for what people think is important in the application of communication -- and to see if there are changes we should make relating to either the physical structure/plug ins of this blog that make participation easier, or, as you point out, when we create our new group online community, what would work well and what people would prefer?

In an online community you have the capacity these days to be able to directly email other members, to be able to chat online, to have ongoing conversations between a handful of individuals, etc. Steve and I have been exploring those possibilities quite thoroughly in recent times -- not so we can recreate a Facebook, but so we can look at options as far as building a group in today's world of fast comm.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Tony DePhillips
+2 # Tony DePhillips 2013-04-19 11:52
If you compare this to Marty's blog which is probably the most successful, i Marty doesn't edit/censor all that much which I think is a great thing. He does draw the line and I think (not sure) that maybe the line has been drawn in too close here.

I saw Ralph Hilton get reprimanded a bit the other day. I think generally he makes some very good points and I think if people get rebuked too many times they may stop posting.

Sometimes I don't like hearing what someone is saying, but I think they should have the right to say it as long as it is in the parameters of the guidelines. The guidelines shouldn't be all that tight imho.

Without getting too significant, I do feel the more censorship there is the more it restimulates the cult. In the cult if you were "critical" then you had overts and withholds and the whole "machine" was started in on you.

The reason I came here in the first place was to have a balanced flow. Balanced between the negative itsa towards the cult and a positive itsa about wins people are having with the tech. If this blog gets to be too much of a one way flow of "everything is all good" then I think it will drive people away. Or you will have a small following as it will be somewhat specialized. Maybe that is what is needed and wanted?

I like what I have seen so far.

I also really liked that you put in the itsa line to your readers. Very good idea!!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
calvin b. duffield
+3 # calvin b. duffield 2013-04-19 12:17
Hi Lana, apologies for my irregular blog time lately. Just a whole bunch of commitments and cycles that have to be confronted and taken to EP's. This is unlikely to change for the next couple of months,and I just have to focus on that!

I duplicate your "anguish?" over the comm
"situation," as you described in some detail. Since you invited comments, here are a few.

Looking at the 3 main Independent blogs
as they currently stand, I think I agree
with an earlier poster, that each has now
tended to cater for a "leaning" toward specific interests, ie the"Transcending,"
the "News," and the "ARC/tech" groups.

Though of course, many would visit all three AND other sites as a matter of routine broad interest, there will tend to be the preferred "favorites."

This broadening of available choices, will mean a lessening of attendance to once monopolized blogs, and that is just
the way it works.As a journalist yourself
I'm sure you are too well aware of the nature of the game in being able to keep up "circulation figures" that is -- keep finding / creating fresh interest.

Regarding the comm cycle, one of the most obvious impediments, would seem to be the
built in handicap of Time lapse or comm lag, tween each cycle. Since you're in the time Zone of OZ/NZ, I'm in the Africa
/UK/Europe Zone and then we have the West in US/Canada Zone, we average out a 7-8
hour or 14-16 hourlag time over 24 hours.
just to get read / acke'd due to work/ sleep, free time availability. So slicing up our little ol' planet int 1/3's does
make holding interest a little tricky, to say the least. 30 seconds is the absolute limit for holding most people's interest, (as is well known in advertising!)

Live comm, by phone or skype, is, of course, the closest thing to achieving
an ideal communication platform. but is difficult to interact with as a group, but is possible as conference calls, etc.

My final comment is aimed at broadening
the strength of our particular high ARC
grouping. The KEY phrase coined by Steve Hall-"Scientology without ARC, just isn't Scientology!" is a catchphrase that put's
IN ORDER, each time it is uttered, IMHO!

The OBVIOUS Affinity, to be found in abundance on this blog, is another Key
element which may be missing (along with
the absence of ARC) on other blogs. Therefore I feel as long as you keep the Tone in the higher bands, with some time
for light hearted-ness and humor, success is assured.

One element I've personally noted, and had quite a bit to say about, is the
moniker ---"REAL" Scientology. I feel very strongly, that the use of that term,
is perfectly aligned with the wording "Independent" Scientology, and serves to
invite questioning/evaluation , when doing a comparison with the original, source material vs. the CO$ $quirrel version and other altered versions.

Just my 2c. Hope to pop in again soon!

ML to ALL,
Calvin.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Nickname
-1 # Nickname 2013-04-19 12:29
No, it's not just you who puzzles over how to have an orderly ten-way conversation.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
+1 # Lana M 2013-04-19 20:22
Ha! Thanks nickname! You made me laugh on that one!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Don_M
+3 # Don_M 2013-04-19 14:17
I'd say don't sweat it. If you have some way of determining the number of visitors then that is an acknowledgement of sorts. Also just because it may violate the laws of a 2 way comm cycle does not mean that it is not communication or that it is not valuable. Also not all of us have the amount or depth of experience of the regular posters so we don't alway have as much of to draw on to communicate - Don
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Jim Logan
+2 # Jim Logan 2013-04-19 18:18
I'm with Don M. Don't sweat it as having an origination here in the way of an article, and the chance to ack it with a comment, or originate something else in a comment is a pretty good flow back and forth. Lots of people participate and others take what they take from the interchanges.

I think the thumbs up/down thingy is open to abuse. It exists here, but is discrete it seems so it doesn't give a false impression, IMO.

What I've witnessed on various blogs is a general Tone Level of the articles and comments. By the nature of interchange with ARC, some ARC is finer and some not so much. Keeping the general Tone higher while being as open as possible within the purpose of the blog, is something that you'll deal with on a instance by instance basis.

I agree with moderation of those types of communications that are prone to devolve into the famous "flaming" of these internet sites.

I like a place where the tone maintains above 2.0, while still allowing some edge and reality for those who have some moments of "arrrrrgggghhhh" and such.

As long as the general trend is in keeping with the aims, you'll continue to succeed.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
+1 # Lana M 2013-04-19 20:26
Thanks everyone. A lot of really valid viewpoints -- and I have changed my own considerations as a result.

I am very happy with how the blog is progressing, considering that we are only 3 months old. I don't tire of it - and I enjoy having all of you come by and comment when you wish to.

I don't have the expectancy that all ack and/or comment on every article, and frankly, that would be kinda strange if that did occur.

But I feel I better understand the view of those that are reading, and I appreciate you communicating to me about that.

Thanks again.

Will post a new article by Jim Logan now -- on a wholly different topic. :)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Ingrid Smith
0 # Ingrid Smith 2013-04-20 00:49
Lana,you have a great uptone blog. Just hold your position.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
KFrancis
0 # KFrancis 2013-04-22 08:58
I think this just about covers it Lana.

It's a great blog and will grow simply by staying with it. I certainly appreciate it.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Chris Mann
0 # Chris Mann 2013-04-20 02:23
I sometimes dislike the verification system where you have to type in the chracters in the box. I would swear to God I put in the the right letters, but it rejects it. I saw one the other day where you drag somthing. It has three items and you drag the correct one to the matching picture. A pineapple, a fish and a key- you drag he key to the lock, etc. I'll have to find out what it is called because I don't know.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-04-20 16:22
Hi Chris -- I would have to agree with you on the verification system as that happens to me as well, routinely. The good thing about it is that it forces that every person commenting is a real person, and not a computer program, so we don't end up with tons of comments about optimizing the website, or how to get a new woman.
The drag and drop system sounds cool -- so send me the details when you get a chance and we will check it out.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Chris Mann
0 # Chris Mann 2013-04-21 13:09
I think there may be a couple options. I'm not a web designer though, so I don't know if they will work. Here's one that looks like what I used:

Are You Human PlayThru areyouahuman.com/demo/

I tried one where you pick one item out of three and match it to another item. It was a bit simpler than the above, but I cant find it now.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
steve spargo
0 # steve spargo 2013-04-21 18:53
Is there a problem with computer generated answers? I have had a blog for nearly a year now and not one single machine generated answer has turned up to be moderated. Could it be a great solution to a pretty tiny problem?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Chris Mann
0 # Chris Mann 2013-04-23 14:59
Maybe it helps protect against DoS attacks?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Espiritu
0 # Espiritu 2013-04-20 03:47
Lana,
One more comment:
I think that almost all authors suffer from "answer hunger" to some extent and it is sort of comes with the territory. It is probably less of a problem for bloggers, actually because of the nature of the media. But it is still writing. Musicians have less of a problem because the audience can applaud immediately.
The only problem I have personally is that the page requires cookies and scripts in order to view or post. In my quest to surf very securely, I disallow cookies and scripts as a default when I use Firefox. It is kind of a pain to have to enable them one by one each time I come to this site and then disable them when I leave, but that's what I have to do.
It would also be nice if the part of the screen where the writing is shown was wider.
But as far as the content is concerned I would just keep doing what you are doing, particularly articles emphasizing what the correct tech is in certain areas where the COS is squirreling. And especially articles which emphasise on what is the CORRECT way with references after mentioning in passing the incorrect applications. I think that this action is very helpful to Scientologists who have been abused with out tech as practiced in the COS (or outside the COS, for that matter).
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-04-20 16:25
Thanks Espiritu,
Your feedback is really helpful. We will get some more articles up on the point of correct tech where the COS is squirreling. We may also publish some earlier articles in case some have not read them -- such as those on 3 swing floating needles, etc.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
SKM
+1 # SKM 2013-04-20 06:11
Lana, patience is one of those qualities not very popular in the Scientology World(s).

However, I think a good dose of patience can really help to accomplish something worthwhile.

It's right that in a two way communication there is the component of an acknowledgement. But on the blog?
Understanding the comm-formula also brings the understanding that not anyone will use it to full extent.
Be patient by knowing that your blog makes a difference.
So many people write for this blog and so many come to read and comment on the posts. And the numbers are growing.
You know you make a difference - acknowledgement of single particles seems not so important in this context.

Love,
SKM
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-04-20 16:26
Wise words SKM. Thank you.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
David Cooke
0 # David Cooke 2013-04-20 07:53
Hi Lana,
You've spotted a general problem with blogs and other interactive websites. I think part of the reason is that people (at least in the current society) tend to be passive consumers of inflowing communication. They treat websites like television programs and like to be the observers unobserved in the secure darkness of their livingrooms. There's a site www.archive.org where I download lots of free books and music, and it's surprising how few of the thousands who use that site ever leave comments or ratings.

Also - many readers might be hesitating to comment unless they're sure they have something valuable to add. Or we don't want to be obnoxious by writing too often. Now you've made it plain that you'd like more acks and originations, you might get more.

A ratings button (ie 1 to 5, or 1 to 10 stars) for the whole post as well as the thumbs up/down for individual comments might also be popular with readers.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-04-20 16:30
Thanks David.
It is a funny world we live in. We have Twitter that survives on 140 characters or less -- and we have Facebook which is majorly about the sharing of photos and trivial information. We even now have Pinterest which simply gets people to post pix they like. All of these are communications -- to some degree or another -- but often they are not actually directed AT someone, and there is generally no expectation of an answer. It is a fascinating topic for an analysis of society, the 4th dynamic and the reactive mind/bank.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Susan
+1 # Susan 2013-04-21 11:31
I know for myself one of the reasons I usually don't comment is I feel I don't necessarily have anything valuable to add and leaving just an acknowledgement doesn't really accomplish anything. However, my viewpoint has recently changed in that your blog and others are providing such a wonderful service to Scientologists- those still in the church, newly out,etc, that it's important that I flow power to you in any way that I can. Contributing to the conversation even with a simple acknowledgement can help.

I like the fact that you show the statistics of number of visitors. I hadn't realized that there were so many new posts going up so that has encouraged me to look at this site on a regular basis. Also, I see it as an indicator of how many people are "looking". For those still inside the church and in doubt, the larger the numbers they can see in the Independent field, the safer they may feel in leaving.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-04-21 15:54
Thanks Susan. Appreciate you giving your views, and great to have you here regularly.
Lana
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Ronnie Bell
+3 # Ronnie Bell 2013-04-20 13:44
Lana, I'd just like to reiterate some of the points that others have already made above, in saying that this blog is young, yet healthy and growing. No need to rush the baby to adulthood. It's doing just fine, and making a difference in people's lives.

I'm sure you recall our conversation about the OT levels from just a day or two ago. Your advice on the thread was a huge help to me, and I'll bet you dollars to donuts that lots of others in the same place on the Bridge read that exchange, and were similarly helped.

Although I'm a person who is pretty unrestrained in my communication, there are many times where I don't comment, because someone else has already said something that perfectly communicates my own thoughts.

As to contributing articles, I think a person has to be struck with a certain inspiration to compose a detailed communication complete enough to offer for mass consumption. Who knows when that inspiration will strike, or when a person will find themselves in the perfect moment to put it all down in a format that they feel is acceptable to their peers?

I've personally hesitated on submitting anything, because I want to contribute something I feel is of real value, and not just a rehash of the thoughts I've seen so ably expressed before.

I've also noticed that most of the better articles have been contributed by ex-S.O. members, and experienced tech people. Those without such experience (which is most of us) may not feel as capable of rendering a piece worthy of publication. Perhaps part of the maturation process involves the broad public becoming more comfortable with offering their perspective from a public's point of view.

Anyway, I wouldn't fret, and I wouldn't change a thing. I think you and Steve are doing a bang up job with the blog. I think it'll grow into one of the most heavily visited Indie spots on the internet, because of its focus on what's right with the applied philosophy of Scientology.

I, for one, find it to be an oasis of sorts. I really mean that.

Thank you,
Ronnie
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-04-20 16:31
Thank YOU Ronnie for a succinct and very helpful comment. Much appreciated.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Tom M
0 # Tom M 2013-04-20 14:07
Lana, sounds like another survey is in order. "What do you want from this blog is a good start." What is expected of this blog anyhow? What do you expect Lana? What does anyone need or want from it?
ML Tom
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
theo sismanides
+1 # theo sismanides 2013-04-21 11:11
Lana, I understand that after reading Dianetics 55! you may get into some questioning of how good is our communication here. Well, I want to acknowledge that anxiety of your's by saying that iScientology.org is one of the most uptone to me blogs.

I read Jim Logan's latest article on explaining quantum mechanics and the vibrations of particles and I found it rather fitting to my frame of mind: analytical, scientific no opinions but facts and data.

So I frequent this blog even though not so often as I should to check out also what is happening of the True Group. See, it's what interests people.

Patience and keeping one's position in (hyper, lol) Space is the key ingredient. It takes hard work and I want to acknowledge you and all the participants here for this.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Sparks
0 # Sparks 2013-04-21 14:32
The topics of this blog are excellent. It's also one of the only blogs about Scientology that evokes the spirit and purpose of the methodology, sans various agendas (self-serving or otherwise).

I know what you mean about the aspects of blogs that appears to be aberrative, because --true-- they don't follow the precise and complete ideal of a perfect communication -- The communication Formula is one of the less touted but absolutely brilliant aspects of L. Ron Hubbard's work.

When Twitter came along, it stretched the "internet communication" phenomena even further -- that is, existing as pieces of the Communication Formula. Someone says something, looks to see if its been understand, the Recipient acknowledges it has been heard (in quick summary).

In fact, "e-meter drills" exist in Scientology that demonstrate how "charged up" a person can get when a communication is not acknowledged, or when it is interrupted.

Back to Twitter ... a lot of people didn't take to it right away because it was not communication as usual. It basically is a platform from where people chirp about anything and everything in their days, with no acknowledgement at all required. It's optional and perfectly within the moral code of the network whether you ack someone, or repeat (Retweet) and further something they said (also a form of acknowledgment, indirect).

It's basically pieces of communication, sometimes out of sequence, not linear, and it's known as a shout-out platform, acknowledgment be damned.

With blogs it's a little less piece-meal than Twitter. The number of visitors for sure is way more than people responding or commenting or participating. Most people comment not for the purpose of acknowledging a communication (as Scientology brilliantly illustrates as vital) but if they have something to contribute.

For every comment, there are hundreds absorbing and listening. Which is OK in some ways, or there would be thousands of OKs and Got that :-)

OTOH (on the other hand) acknowledgment is a beautiful thing!!

The net is just not a linear sequence communication cycle.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
+1 # Lana M 2013-04-21 15:51
Sparks you duplicated my origin completely. Theoretically, if one could achieve the magic of 2WC on this site -- in some form or way -- then I think the iScientology.org site would present something that you cannot get anywhere else -- as-isness.
The magic of real 2WC actually produces case gain for people -- and if we could provide that for our readers it would be a service in more ways than one.
Just a dream -- but I think we can work towards in, in some capacity - despite the non-linear comm that occurs.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Ronnie Bell
0 # Ronnie Bell 2013-04-22 01:07
You know Lana, the chat function on Facebook comes closest to achieving a real cycle of communication in cyberspace.

If Steve could figure out how to add such a function, it might satisfy the as-isness in the comm cycle you're looking for.

There are lots of cool communication technologies out there today, including Skype and GoToMeeting. I haven't yet seen anyone in the Indie field use those technologies in conjunction with a blog or website, and I think there's an enormous amount of potential there.

For instance, someone could give a live lecture to a virtual audience, and take calls to answer questions. That audience would probably be world wide, so with proper promotion, an event such as that could be dynamite.

Just a few thoughts there for your consideration. Might as well splurge on creativity, eh? :-)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Ronnie Bell
+1 # Ronnie Bell 2013-04-22 01:11
Quoting Sparks:
The topics of this blog are excellent. It's also one of the only blogs about Scientology that evokes the spirit and purpose of the methodology, sans various agendas (self-serving or otherwise).


Thank you for saying that, Sparks. I think that's one of the chief attractions of the iScientology blog.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Sparks
+2 # Sparks 2013-04-21 14:35
That said, to acknowledge your excellent question ... a specifically more interactive section might increase acks and participation. What do readers need? A place they can ask questions about Scientology? A poll to find out what is most interesting about spiritual development? A "Ask an Auditor" or "Ask a Tech Supervisor" section?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-04-21 15:42
Sparks -- thank you very much. We had been tossing that idea around -- and that you bring it up also, really supports the idea.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
steve spargo
0 # steve spargo 2013-04-21 18:28
I vote for don't change anything right now. I also believe this is an issue for your contributors more than your readers. I will make some adjustments.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
SKM
0 # SKM 2013-04-24 17:14
Lana, I have one technical suggestion for the blog functionality.
When you sent a message (blog comment) it only says "Your comment was saved....".
It would be great when a preview of the comment would be possible like on the other blogs. You sent the comment and it's there, saved in a cookie I guess and above is the statement "Your comment is awaiting moderation."

It's not so important, but it is "nice to have".
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-04-24 18:10
Good point SKM. Will ask Steve to do this and it should not be any problem at all.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
SKM
0 # SKM 2013-04-25 05:03
Thank you Lana.

It would be also great to have links to NEXT >> and
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
SKM
0 # SKM 2013-04-25 14:11
Hm, the whole message didn't go through.
I try again.

It would be also great to have links to Previous and Next Plog-Posts.
Say I am on this Blogp-Post and at the end of the page there would be a Next and Previous Link.
Now we need to move to the top of the page, klick again "Blog" and then look for another blog-post.
Would be great to have the possibility to move to the next/previous post straight away.

Also I wonder if there are RSS Feeds for the latest comments and for the latest blog posts? Couldn't find them.

Kind regards,
SKM
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Persistence
+1 # Persistence 2013-04-25 21:11
I really like your blog. i learn a lot from it. i have to be under the radar for now so I can't say a lot but believe me your site is very much appreciated. i love the wins of people from the tech and everything else you and others have posted about. please continue it is important.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-04-25 21:27
Persistence, you are most welcome here -- any time. Lovely to have you aboard -- under the radar or otherwise.
Cheers- Lana
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
1984
0 # 1984 2013-04-28 00:26
Hi Lana,
Regarding why people don't post, I often see that it is already said, or I don't feel that I can contribute much of any significance (lacking some expert background).
Often, I do a fast check to see whats up.
(these symbols to duplicate do suck.)
The ability to PM would be useful also. (Sometimes, like now, I would be interested to communicate to you, but not to the everybody.)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
Lana M
0 # Lana M 2013-04-28 00:53
Hi 1984 -- thanks for your honesty on it. You are welcome to write me anytime on .
Steve and I will do something about these symbols -- as they do seem to jack many people's TA :)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
richard lloyd-robert
0 # richard lloyd-robert 2013-05-09 13:05
I think that's the nature of the internet. You put a comm out there and you may or may not get an answer. Its pretty enturbulating not to get the comm back. I write emails all day to people and very few actually ack me. So here's my comm back. Thanks for asking. :)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

1664074
Today
Yesterday
This Week
371
1164
1535

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