Newsgroup Postings : Re: R2-12 [was--Re: Pros and Cons

Re: R2-12 [was--Re: Pros and Cons
From: Alan Walter <wisdom@cyberstation.net>
Subject: Re: R2-12 [was--Re: Pros and Cons
Date: 1999/05/28
Message-ID: <374ED815.95333A9@cyberstation.net>#1/1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <7ie852$4o6$1@autumn.news.rcn.net>
 <374AD7AD.4E1C7EED@cyberstation.net>
 <7iglaq$c97$1@autumn.news.rcn.net> <7ihijk$91r$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <7ijkij$946$1@autumn.news.rcn.net> <7im31m$9sq$1@autumn.news.rcn.net>
 <374EB441.D56DD673@cyberstation.net> <7img21$iep$1@autumn.news.rcn.net>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: typ42b.nn.bcandid.com 927914036 207.2.210.150
 (Fri, 28 May 1999 13:53:56 EDT)
Organization: Cyberstation, Inc.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: wisdom@cyberstation.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 13:53:56 EDT
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology




Rogers wrote:

> I'd just like to add, or emphasize, that the BC was considered an essential
> part of the "route to OT" in the early days.  I don't think there was any
> real concept of a "pc route" to clear or OT because Ron was quite aware that
> processing without training (education) was pretty much an overt.  He said
> so explicitly.  I don't know why he compromised on this later.

Money, old age, running out of time, domination. grabbing all the comm. lines
and power.

> >C/Sing probably was the worse thing to happen to tech. As you no longer
 went
> >into session knowing you did not know.
> >
> >Running knowns gives you very little case gain. Your life will not change
 for
> >the better running knowns. Unknowns are usually encased in force, charge and
> >mass.
>
> Excuse me Alan, I can't quite duplicate the above, particularly the first
> part.

Gee, you picked up on my "make nothing of" outrageous statement. :-)

I probably shouldn't answer this immediately as I need a few to go ballistic.
:-)))

> For one thing, didn't Ron C/S for the BC students a lot of the time?

True. LRH C/s from these orders of importance's.

1. C/S the auditor skills and application.

2. C/S the process being run.

3. Work with the auditor on C/Sing the pc's case.

4. As far as he was concerned the auditor was fully responsible for the pc's
case.

LRH would massacre you if you ever said "Ron said," or "Ron has C/Sed this to
run on you." I know I once said it, he went ballistic, yelling and screaming at
me for shifting responsibility of the session from me to him. Ooops! another
complete re-train of the BC!

> And, even in a normal HGC, didn't the DofP serve as the C/S in practice?

Yes, but the DofP was used mainly to check what was the auditor really doing.
What areas of charge needed handling and was the pc getting what he wanted
handled - handled. An honesty check in essence.

As an auditor you were expected to write up exactly what you did, good or bad.
As an example I was running Peter Williams on R3-21 a GPM Multi-flowed series of
40 flows (I think) processes on the goal To be the Leader. I ran into a series
of "glum areas" that bogged the pc down. So I handled the "glum areas" with serv
fac handling and continued. Ron was very pleased with that. Peter at that time
was the Continental Director of Australasia, which was far ahead of the rest of
the world as regards Scio. (When Peter left Australia to do the BC I had just
finished the PE course.)

> I'm really not sure how C/Sing, the principle of, would affect the
> known/unknown component in auditing.  Or are you just saying the c/ses
> became more wimpy as time went on?

The orders of importance's shifted. That occurred on the Class VIII course. The
responsibility of the pc was shifted more or less back to the C/S. I know that
is not true in all situations. But once the Grades came into existence the Tech
became contained in a very narrow box. So much so the pc had to fit the box
rather than the box be expanded to fit the pc.

Prior to the grades the only pc that was not welcome was the heavy electro-shock
cases. And only because they tended to equate therapy with betrayal of trust.

The truly great C/Ses target making great auditors 1st!

Great auditors produce great products!

Alan