Home > Uncategorized > What do you want to read about on this blog?

What do you want to read about on this blog?

There has been a great deal of response to the two polls I posted (1 & 2).Thank you all for contributing. It’s interesting to see this wide a spectrum of readers.
I feel honored to host a blog with such a diverse and intelligent audience.

If I may; Please tell me what you want to read about on my blog. Add a comment and tell me your request for future blog posts. As usual: Keep it short, no trolling, be polite. Your request just may come true (no promises, though).

Advertisements
Categories: Uncategorized
  1. Gaiagnostic
    2009-10-10 at 19:28

    Hi Geir, thank you for this question. Would love to hear about your progress to make scientology materials indexed and freely available online. Would love to hear about successful actions on how to enlighten current scientologists so that they become willing to actually look at what is happening.

  2. RJ
    2009-10-10 at 19:44

    Hey Geir what you’ve been doing is just fine. I’d say keep it up.

    I guess there is one thing you could add and that is the latest OT dropping out or some anonymous dissent that you’ve heard regarding Miscavigology.

  3. Hubbardianen
    2009-10-10 at 20:55

    It would be interesting to hear peoples wins from Scientology and what has been most important for them.

    • 2009-10-10 at 20:57

      That can easily be done. I’ll put up a post soon for reader’s to share their wins via comments to the post.

  4. Rebel Too
    2009-10-10 at 20:59

    Hi Geir, I’d say just keep us updated on what’s happening with you and OSA and what help you might need. And I’m very interested in how many more Vlls and Vllls are out that have contacted you or that you know are out. I’ve lost track there’s so many now. In the last month I personally know of 3 OTVllls and 2 OTVlls.I think the polls are good too.

  5. Axiom
    2009-10-10 at 21:23

    I´ve had a fantastic resurgence in case gain and wins since I started to inform myself regarding what is happening in Scientology!!!:) First to get rid of all this suppression that has been going on for so many years!!! The last years I´ve applied LRH PTS/SP Tech to try to understand my situation in life and my relation to the Church and repeatedly I´ve come to the conclusion that each time when I´ve disconnected I felt soo much better! Now since bearing this loss of true LRH tech for several years I´ve thru my recent research realized what has been wrong in the Church. This has resultet in two things; a true revitalization of my purpose to go up the Bridge plus a strong desire to help handle the situation and to forward the clearing of this planet!!!:)

  6. Thalkirst
    2009-10-10 at 22:58

    1. Any internal news leaked, especially event reports (like the upcoming IAS event, where supposedly something surpassing the IAS event will be announced).

    2. There are two things I would like to hear more about (not sure you are able to answer them though).
    – Where is LRH? When in the Sea Org, one of the higher-ups told me that he’ll be back in 2007 (end of his 21 year LOA). She showed me LRH ED 339R Tnt where, LRH uses “we” went talking about future work. Well, it’s 2009 now and no sign of him.
    – Any data on OT IX & X, anything you heard from ex-Int staff.

  7. thatsnotmyname
    2009-10-10 at 23:03

    Tough question. But a good one. I guess it comes down to what the purpose of the blog is. If it is simply to give a platform for folk to see what enlightened OTs are doing about the current scene, and indeed what that scene actually IS then it’s already doing a fine job.
    As I see it there are 2 different, albeit related, debates going on. 1. What the Dickens do we do about the CURRENT catastrophic situation with the CofS? Many like me I suspect want to (and are) take an ACTIVE role, not merely a passive one of reading, adding comments etc. So suggestions and successful actions on that would be good. Then 2. After the inevitable decline of DM and the current regime, what then? I for one, am lost on this one. I have read tons but just don’t know how it is going to pan out. (Sorry – bit long)

    • 2009-10-11 at 06:29

      That wasn’t long 😉

  8. Alex
    2009-10-10 at 23:30

    Hi Geir,
    1.I would like to hear about recent Scientology dropouts. (Debbie Cook?)
    2.How current strategies are going and other peoples ideas as far as successful actions for putting ethics in on DM.
    3. Legal advice on what a person could expect from the COS when violating some unknown laws that they feel might be broken by communicating about something that the COS feels is against the law. (This even sounds PTS to me! 🙂 isn’t it bad when you are this worried about communicating and what your church might do about it?)
    Thanks,
    Alex

  9. Jack
    2009-10-11 at 01:14

    How was the release of the new altered books received? Did scientologists really believe the line that Miscavige had found that the typists that originally typed LRH’s words from the tapes had left things out, incorrectly typed things etc. and yet LRH had missed all this whenever he read his own books? Also there were many outpoints on the books release not least the copyright dates. There were many posts about this at the time.

  10. Cinnamon
    2009-10-11 at 05:35

    I’d like to hear people’s opinions about the Basics package.

    I’ve been out for a long time, but when I heard about this package, and how the books have been corrected, it seemed like a good idea. Especially having the tapes available along with the books. Everything sounds great. I would like to hear what others think.

  11. KSW1Fan
    2009-10-11 at 06:09

    I like the blog how it is now. Great would be if we could post some LRH references and also post the violations. Interesting is also what happens inside.
    I´ve just heard from a friend who was at Flag recently that everything is very fast now and that the OT7`s are done in 3 years.

    • Alex
      2009-10-11 at 18:25

      Some finish in that time. That is PR from my perspective. I have been on Solo Nots and you have to give PR opinions like that otherwise it will come up on your sec check that you haven’t been “good”.
      Alex

      • 2009-10-11 at 18:29

        True. There are lots of PR lines like that – time to get through the Pro TRs and the E-meter course…

  12. TRUTH
    2009-10-11 at 07:50

    Basic Books are not corrected, they are altered by Miscavige. If they needed any corrections LRH would have been aware of those errors and wouldn’t have allowed them to be published and placed in the hands of people for about 20 years.

    DM makes up so many lies so he can re-release the materials and make more money each time.

  13. Soderqvist1
    2009-10-11 at 08:32

    1 I want to see you writing short essays and we post short comments as it is today, and every non-sequitur comment routed to the trashcan without sorrow.(TR3).

    2 Latest news regarding OSA versus The Loyalist Think-Tankers, etc!

    3 There is also bypass charge on this blog by posters like Dave and Columbus and others who has probably read other stuff on Internet, which has claimed that the corruption goes deeper than to David Miscavige! I have proposed here that L. Ron Hubbard had a hidden agenda but my link to my evidence was removed because of further links to confidential materials, and thus BPC reply by RJ: what “hidden agenda”? Which I couldn’t answer!

    As a solution I recommend that you talk to your compatriot Andreas Heldal-Lund the Author of Operation Clambake that he creates a new topic there, which you can link to. So only Caroline Letkeman can post her allegations and only one from the Loyalist Think-Tanker can answer if he can? Because now there is already such a topic but no loyalist has answered, meanwhile a lot of quantity which doesn’t add much to the argument is posted. And this proposition by me is for the sake of order and structure on this blog, so the general reader can Judge for himself over there, in the proceeding, how credible the parties are!
    (link removed due to reference to confidential material)

    • 2009-10-11 at 09:13

      You are right regarding defending your viewpoint on the “hidden agenda”. What you could do is take your original post, strip it of any reference to confidential material and post it on a web site. Then link to it from here.

    • RJ
      2009-10-11 at 20:19

      You could also just answer the question “what hidden agenda?” yourself without linking to confidential data.

      A summary will do.

      Personally, I feel someone who can not explain a simple concept in 25 words or less doesn’t know what they are talking about.

      • Chris
        2009-10-12 at 04:58

        I believe he’s a propagator of either the “Ron did it for the money but just happened to have inexplicably discovered the truth about Life,the Universe,and everything theory” or the “Ron did it for the Thelemic Lulz by going into the valence of Aleister Crowley theory”. I say Nuff said.

        Sorry Soderqvist1 in advance if these aren’t your theories,but years of lurking on ESMB preps you for stuff like this.

        • 2009-10-12 at 18:38

          LOL! You’re probably right.

          The theories you suggest are irrelevant though, since they do not answer the pertinent question.

          You´re ZALGO. Prove me wrong.

          • Chris
            2009-10-13 at 05:06

            LOL at the anon who loled with me.
            Internet Hugz?(Outstreches arms) 🙂
            How am I ZALGO?We talking bout the same ZALGO here?
            Cause…..

            • 2009-10-13 at 16:27

              …he is coming.

              🙂

              • Chris
                2009-10-16 at 03:40

                OH NOES!!!
                Save me Internet Gods!!!

  14. 2009-10-11 at 10:08

    Could somebody explain ‘by-pass charge’ to me please? It is not a term that I am familiar with – and even Google doesn’t know…

    Tnx

    • Someone
      2009-10-11 at 13:02

      ‘by-passed charge’ means negative energy that was turned on regarding delicate matters for the person, and that was not handled and stayed inside of the person, hurting.

      • 2009-10-11 at 15:30

        I’m sorry someone, but my questions was directed at somebody :-). Thanks anyways though…

        • Someone in a body :P
          2009-10-12 at 08:52

          someone seems to have more inner life than just somebody 😀 hehe… nice to meet you Dave 🙂

  15. Soderqvist1
    2009-10-11 at 10:22

    In order to build up a convincing case I need references to first hand information, because opposing persons are not handicapped in his referencing. So I will start a new topic at Operation Clambake, Opinions and Debate at Monday. (Put in “Operation Clambake” in the Google search engine. Meanwhile if the Loyalist Think-Tankers has a convincing case and not mere a half-truth, for the sake of credibility, and if you want public truly informed, why don’t you answer her letter, her topic is always first there?

    • 2009-10-11 at 10:32

      As for me answering on various forums; I simply don’t have the time.

  16. Soderqvist1
    2009-10-11 at 10:42

    I didn’t have you in mind, because I think as you have said that your blog takes enough of your time, and the Open Letter by Caroline is addressed specifically to the Scientology-cult.com.

  17. Soderqvist1
    2009-10-11 at 11:09

    Dave, bypass charge means in this context that the person’s way of reasoning in messages has not been duly answered as he sees it. The person feels more or less upset, that is the charge, and thus the person is rightly or wrongly bypassed!

    • 2009-10-11 at 15:27

      Interesting concept, thanks for explaining. Foremost, I do enjoy posting here – there are interesting discussions.

      I can fully understand why my position is difficult to respond to, as it has two layers. My ´easy´ viewpoint is on the question whether or not a reformed Church should have pure LRH tech or whether some of his policies (and concepts!) should be rescinded. And although many posters here will prefer to go back to pure LRH tech, several others have posted a viewpoint similar to mine. I am confident this topic will be explored in more detail here at some point and I look forward to that.

      The more difficult viewpoint concerns LRH intentions and his ‘hidden agenda’. My opinion on this is diametrically opposed to most posters and lurkers here, and I can understand why it is not an easy topic to discuss. I’m also not sure this blog is the right place to do so.

      I am hoping this blog becomes a place where current ‘on the fence’ members can discuss how to turn around the current situation in the CoS and what should happen post-DM. I feel that (as long as I am not outstaying my welcome) partaking from my ‘hater’ mindset can be usefull.

      • Margaret
        2009-10-13 at 00:11

        Dave, I haven’t seen your theory as to why you think LRH had a “hidden agenda”. However, if one hasn’t done a thorough job of studying the subject of Scientology, and in particular doesn’t realize that the core and foundation of the subject is described in LRH books/lectures/articles between 1951 and 1955, then ones conclusions would likely be way off base. Specifically, if one tries to understand all else that LRH wrote and did *after* 1955, without first understanding the depth of what was discovered between 1951-1955, then an inaccurate “agenda” would likely result.

    • 2009-10-13 at 16:15

      Sorry for a long answer.

      Taken from Phillidephia Lectures 20. Only in the original version, though, as it has been removed in Slappy’s version:

      “Therefore we really do have the remedy before the assault weapon is produced. Did you ever read poor old George Orwell’s uh.. 1984? Yes, yes, that’s wonderful. That would be, could be, the palest imagined shadow of what a world would be like under the rule of the secret use of Scientology with no remedy in existence.”

      An intriguing quote, isn’t? It’s almost like Hubbard foresaw the mind control/coercive persuasion in Miscavology.

      How could he predict this? How did he know?

      I am sure there are several answers to this question, but one makes an awful lot of sense:

      He knew because he knowlingly put in the mind control techniques himself. If you look at ‘White dianetics’ with this mindset, it will light up with the poisonous green glow of mind control/’Black dianetics’ in a number of places. More than I think you realize.

      Why he did so? It doesn’t matter. Chris posted the two most popular theories from the ‘hater’-squad above, but perhaps he did so to genuinely help mankind.

      The pertinent point is: he did.

  18. KnowMan
    2009-10-11 at 14:21

    1. Updates about your life, including your recent realizations, trials and tribulations.
    2. Updates on activities related to de-PTSing the Church.
    3. Updates regarding other Scientologists who have perceived the actual scene with Miscavige and the Church.

  19. Maria
    2009-10-11 at 14:29

    I would like to see an expansion on logic. You wrote on ad hominem, but I see instances of many more fallacies all over the the net and not just about Scientology.

    I’m not sure how to word this, but many sites I have researched are very concerned with what they think Scientologists “believe in” eg. Scientologists “believe in” past lives or OT3, etc. The idea seems to be that if I read or use something then I “believe in” it.

  20. Maria
    2009-10-11 at 14:57

    I thought of one more. Many anti sites push hard on the idea that auditing somehow “makes” people think something or other and so they have to be “deprogrammed” so they “see” that they have been victimized, and so must be “shown” its all just a big con job and therefore their personal gain never really happened and they are just deluded. Eg. the only truth is what is proven by research. Any statement to the contrary is discredited as one more example of having been victimized or deluded. There’s a big confusion between what happens in a session and outside of a session.

    • 2009-10-11 at 17:46

      I agree. It is a known technique in an argument to discredit the other because of some idea that they are delusional. It’s a feeble attempt at a check mate, resembling the ad hom logical fallacy as it does not address the content of the person’s communication but rather the person himself.

  21. Chris
    2009-10-11 at 16:25

    Possible Topics for you.
    1.Leaks,news and what the fascists are up to now.
    2.Any musings on the Tech,Future Tech research,Life,the Universe,the number 42 and Everything 😉
    3.News about the Freezone and Independents,and the WINS(World Independent Network of Scientologists).
    4.Long elongated talks about what Quantum Mechanics and Computer Networking have to do with Scientology and the OT levels(It’s already been happening at General Comments)
    5.OSA follies and the like.

    • 2009-10-11 at 17:57

      42 = the sum of eyes on two dice. I think mr Adams had the idea that God was indeed playing dice (answering Einsteins outburst to mr Bohr) – or that he thought the whole universe was a stroke of randomness.

      • Chris
        2009-10-12 at 05:05

        Adams even said himself,he thought it funny that sooooo many people saw so much in the number 42,when all along he honestly made it up randomly in his office over a cup of Coffee.
        I admire Adam’s work for the incredible Spirit Of Play they engage in.That and the fact that it’s an immense work of Science Fiction,so it’s bound to have SOME inkling of truth and significance in it 😉

  22. Anon
    2009-10-11 at 19:28

    Maybe you could write a post, where you explain why you think that the OT material should be confidential or why not.

    • 2009-10-11 at 19:48

      I may write that post when I have settled my opinion on it.

  23. LO
    2009-10-11 at 21:35

    Geir,

    Continue the way you’re doing it, also the moderating. It’s a good training for me to learn to express myself clearly in not too long posts, so instead of just writing I think the whole matter trough (still training on it). Something that is needed urgently (I think), would be the same as friendsoflrh.org did. Taking a datum from DM and compare it to what Lrh says (mostly the contrary). A website that just takes any statement of DM and then on the opposite the Truth. This would dpts lots of people and handle their false data. This include his funny stats and expansions wins (like having handled social security in Venezuela, or the peaceful Revolution in Ukraine). I know at least of one freedom medal winner, where the presented wins weren’t totally true as told to me by a witness that took part on the project. Also a safe place where people could tell their stories, where the moderators would help to heal, showing the right references and foremost would be listening.
    Continiue your good works, it helps a lot to have fun in life and ahve a rekindeld purpose.

    • 2009-10-11 at 21:44

      Fun is always fun 😉

      Besides my comments and warnings to help people adhere to the simple rules of this blog, I don’t do much moderation. Less than 0,4% of the comments have actually been deleted due to blatant breaking of the rules, and that after repeated warnings.

  24. Abel
    2009-10-12 at 14:32

    Leaks with real stats. Reports ond blows.

  25. Abel
    2009-10-12 at 14:33

    *on

  26. Inky
    2009-10-12 at 19:06

    I like your blogs on your personal experience, your travels and your meetings. I would like to see more.

    I like the polls, as that adds an element that makes me the viewer a contributor, more than just these comments.

    I would like a web site to send someone who can ease into learning about the current situation. Someone I was talking to on the weekend reported he had read one page from scientology-cult.com (or maybe Marty’s) where DM was given an unpleasant moniker and that turned him off of the web site. (DM’s actions should be enough without the name calling.) Your site is one I can send such a person to.

  27. StarsAwait
    2009-10-14 at 23:05

    I’d like a section called “Stats”, and managers and orgs can post on all manner of stats they’ve observed in the church right now, good or bad. Also links from other sites regarding stats could be posted.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: