HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr)
Subject: Re: Freedom of speech, choice and association
Organization: gisle@ifi.uio.no
	<By4q5v.9Ho.2@cs.cmu.edu> <1992Nov23.082542.3088@lds-az.loral.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 11:35:34 GMT
Originator: gisle@gyda.ifi.uio.no

In article <1992Nov23.082542.3088@lds-az.loral.com> jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera) writes:

> In the early days of Scn, people were going on staff, getting a lot of
> auditing and then quitting.  The contract (usually 2.5 year) is set up
> to discourage a person from quitting after getting what they want.
> However, (1) if a person leaves after contract expiration, then is no
> debt and (2) the debt is only to be paid if the person wants further
> auditing or training.  No one has been required to pay this debt against
> their own determinism.

The last paragraph is not true for Norway.  The newspapers here has
re-printed the letters that has been sent to "freeloaders" (that is
what the CoS call staff that quit before their contract expires, and
without paying for all the "free" auditing they have received while
staff).  The letters are very threatening in tone, and clearly indicates
that the Church requires the ex-staff member to pay in full.
--
Meta-disclaimer: A society that needs disclaimers has too many lawyers.
 
- gisle hannemyr  (Norsk Regnesentral)
  OSI:   C=no;PRMD=uninett;O=nr;S=Hannemyr;G=Gisle (X.400 SA format)
         gisle.hannemyr@nr.no                      (RFC-822  format)
  Inet:  gisle@ifi.uio.no
  UUCP:  ...!mcsun!ifi!gisle
------------------------------------------------
From: jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Scientology FAQ.
Date: 22 Nov 92 00:23:43 GMT
Organization: Loral Defense Systems Arizona

In article <1eiag1INN2b1@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca> nistuk@unixg.ubc.ca (Richard Nistuk) writes:
>In article <1992Nov19.043030.17277@lds-az.loral.com> jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera) writes:
>
>	But seriously Jonathon.  I want the proof *BEFORE* I
>give the CoS my student loan.  An as I have outlined in previous

How about some free introductory auditing?

>posts, not speaking for Phill of course, I am NOT qualified
>to do the type of research you are speaking of.  In a previous
>post I talk about how a REAL research effort might be run.  I
>hope people can add to what I have said!
>

Jonathon
Barbera
From: pae@teal.csn.org (Phil Earnhardt)
Subject: Re: Just how *does* Scientology view other religions?
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 05:21:31 GMT

In article <1992Nov21.235301.20990@lds-az.loral.com> jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera) writes:
>Your rules keep getting stricter.  I get the feeling that you really don't
>want to look up the information.

...and Jonathon has described "keep getting stricter" as asking for the ISBN
number. 

Actually, it's exactly the opposite! I can't think of any way to *aid* someone
in listing the information than by providing the book's ISBN number. It's how
I can find a clear, unambibuous reference to a book--it's how I can endure
that Jonathon and I are talking about exactly the same book. It's how I can
find out if my local B.Daltons or my local library has a copy in stock. In
short, it's how I can ensure that the reference that Jonathon provides is the
reference that I look up.

Claiming this is a stricter request is ironic, unless you're committed to
un-clear communications.

It's clear Jonathon will dispute that this is indeed a stricter request. He's
welcome to do that. However, what appears to be happening is that Jonathon is
again failing to provide the answer to the question: what makes Scientology
different from other religions. Jonathon claims that it's an "applied"
religious technology; I feel that this is a null statement: most religions
are indeed about "applying" their belief systems on the world.

Jonathon could provide no statement whatsoever on how the CoS views itself as
distinct from other religions. And when I say I'm willing to go to a
bookstore/library and read (up to 10 pages) myself, he's unwilling to provide
me with references available in bookstores. The best he's able to do is
claim that asking for an ISBN number means that I "keep getting stricter" in
my demands. 

In this discussion, you're reminding me of an alternate mnemonic for CoS.

Jonathon: provide me with the page numbers! Now!

--phil
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: raz@socs.uts.edu.au (The Inimitable Raz)
Subject: Re: The PV equation
Organization: Computing Sciences, Uni of Technology, Sydney.
Date: 19 Nov 92 02:47:01 GMT

ph36@unixg.ubc.ca (Richard Nistuk) writes:

>	If I am "flogging a dead horse" please forgive me.  But I have 
>"glommed" onto an equation cited in summary of part 1 of "Dianetics:
>A Handbook of Dianetics(R) Procedure"; Bridge Publications:1991;
>written by the late great L Ron Hubbard.  

Not at all. I also am MOST interested to see the questions you have
posed answered in full.


--
Bye for now.
         - Raz           

raz@socs.uts.edu.au   (Roland Turner)   (OH) 61 2 319 5700
From: jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Scientology FAQ.
Date: 16 Nov 92 09:03:13 GMT
Organization: Loral Defense Systems Arizona

In article <1992Nov16.004942.9592@stortek.com> pae@blackcat.stortek.com (Phil Earnhardt) writes:
>In article <1992Nov15.104321.5845@lds-az.loral.com> jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera) writes:
>
>>Harmed by Scn?  What kind of harm have these people you know received?
>>Be specific.
>
>Oh. So you *do* understand that you should be able to get access to *specific
>information* in order for you to make an assessment of the validity of a claim
>of harm by Scientology. Does the inverse apply, too?

The inverse does apply.  For the helpfulness of various services and courses,
there are several references which detail what the end product is.

I previously posted something with some of this information.  Are you
requesting a re-post?

>Perhaps he's making an attempt at humor. This is another good thing "to know"
>that people do from time to time.

However, I think humor concerning Scn or its founder objectionable.  Isn't
there a rec.humor or something for general humor?  I dunno, but I feel such
humor is in bad taste on a newsgroup about Scn.
      
Jonathon
Barbera
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: It's True For You (LONG)
From: lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 19:42:08 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon


jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera) writes:
>Quick question, Don: do you have as much attention on alt.satanism and
>alt.out-of-body as you do on Scientology?  

No. Perhaps you could summarize for us?


-- 
Don		D.C.Lindsay	Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
From: jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: _PV_ According to Jon
Date: 19 Nov 92 05:56:20 GMT
Organization: Loral Defense Systems Arizona

I didn't say that the equation wasn't workable.  I said that I read the
equation to as something to show relevancies between concepts.  As there
is a big debate on units and numbers, I proposed this.  However, that
is not to say units and numbers could not be used...

Jonathon
Barbera
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: pae@blackcat.stortek.com (Phil Earnhardt)
Subject: Re: Scientology FAQ.
Organization: StorageTek, Louisville, CO
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:52:53 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.085631.2487@lds-az.loral.com> jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera) writes:
>>One more time: from a religion that claims some mastery of what it
>>means "to know," it astonishes me that this fundamental principle of
>>humanity [that people are skeptical, particularly when they feel
>>that something is being sold to them] is beyond your understanding.
>
>This was something I previously tried to stress: don't view me as
>representational of Scientologists or Scientology.  (So don't be astonished.)

I'll file this one away in the Just Plain Silly folder. By your actions in
this newsgroup, you certainly are an [unofficial] representative of
Scientology.

If you are averse to being viewed as a representative of Scientology, then
you should stop posting to this Newsgroup. Or, putting it in culinary terms:

	If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen!

>Second, this concept wasn't beyond my understanding.  However, I prefer
>the "innocent until proven guilty" approach to things.

Oh, nonsense. Jonathon: here's what you said:

>>      So I call the local "Org", and they say that they have x number
>>of case histories, what's to say that they're not lying??  To quote my
>
>Lying?  Sounds like you're already taking a bad view of Scientologists.  How
>                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>something ever be proven to you if you refuse to accept it?

You are *not* having an open mind about this. The poster was taking a
skeptical view; this is a natural thing for people to do. He's not necessarily
taking a "bad view" of Scientologists. In a similar fashion, I'm not
necessarily taking a "bad view" of my local Ford dealership if I don't take
his word as gospel (I think that's the word I want).

You may think you're going with the "innocent until proven guilty" approach,
but it sure doesn't look that way out here.

--phil
From: gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr)
Subject: Re: Just how *does* Scientology view other religions?
Organization: gisle@ifi.uio.no
	<By5Hz6.6wy@csn.org> <1992Nov23.084624.3732@lds-az.loral.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 12:28:35 GMT
Originator: gisle@gyda.ifi.uio.no

In article <1992Nov23.084624.3732@lds-az.loral.com> jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera) writes:

> I do not have access to an ISBN number.  I did have access to title and
> publisher.  I do not have access to page numbers.  When I do gain access
> to these things I will be able to help you.  But that is still in the
> future.

If I remember correctly, at least one of the books in question was
L. Ron Hubbard's "The Way to Happiness".  In that case:

Author:    L. Ron Hubbard
Title:     The Way to Happiness
Publisher: Bridge Publications, Inc., Los Angeles
ISBN:      0-88404-412-2
Year:      1989 (1st edition 1984)
Pages:     69-71 (Chapter titled: "Respect the religious beliefs of others")


My summary of this chapter:

Hubbard praises the merits "religion" and "faith" in general (i.e. he
does not limit his praise to scientology and appears to be a tolerant
sort of chap).  His tolerance, have its limits, and the main message
of the chapter has little do to with religion, but is a thinly veiled
attack on the current "fads" of "mechanism", "materialism", mainstream
science and scepticism.  He argues that scientific "zealots" creates
intolerance and contention by attacking the religions and beliefs of
others, before concluding that "Men without a faith are a pretty sorry
lot."

As always, the best bits are found in the footnotes. For the benefit
of all, I'll reproduce Mr. Hubbards defintions of materialism:

     "materialism: any one of a family of metaphysical theories
      which view the universe as consisting of hard objects such
      as stones, very big or very small."
--
Meta-disclaimer: A society that needs disclaimers has too many lawyers.
 
- gisle hannemyr  (Norsk Regnesentral)
  OSI:   C=no;PRMD=uninett;O=nr;S=Hannemyr;G=Gisle (X.400 SA format)
         gisle.hannemyr@nr.no                      (RFC-822  format)
  Inet:  gisle@ifi.uio.no
  UUCP:  ...!mcsun!ifi!gisle
------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr)
Subject: Re: PV equation
Organization: gisle@ifi.uio.no
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 08:40:45 GMT
Originator: gisle@gyda.ifi.uio.no

In article <g6c0TB2w165w@throb.mcws.fidonet.org> hardman@throb.mcws.fidonet.org (Bill Hardman) writes:

> gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr) writes:
>> In article <ykD5TB1w165w@throb.mcws.fidonet.org> hardman@throb.mcws.fidonet.o
>>> gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr) writes:
>>>> on the result.  So again, EXACTLY WHY DOES THIS PARTICULAR RANGE OF
>>>> VALUES MAKE MORE SENSE THAN ANY OTHER RANGE ONE MAY HAPPEN TO THINK
>>> OF?
>>> I'll help you answer this yourself.  What are you trying to
>>> discover?
>> Thanks, Bill, I appreciate your help!
>> I am trying to discover how to apply this equation.
> You've mis-understood the question.  What are you trying to discover
> with the equation?
>> Now, that I have answered your question, can you please answer mine?
> You haven't answered the question.  Read it slowly this time.

Sure, Bill (( muttering Bill's revised question slowly to himself,
thinking: "Perhaps Bill wants me to say that I want to discover my PV
(potential value), but NO -- that's too stupid -- an equation is
really just a very compact way of expressing a theory about the
relationship between measurable quantities, enabling us to veryfy the
theory experimentally.  Heck -- that one is sure hard."  Flash of
insight appear above head )).

You see Bill, I'm not really trying to discover anything _with_ the
the equation, because at the moment I'm quite convinced that this
equation doesn't make sense algebraically or physically -- and was in
fact concocted by a charlatan who wanted his mindless ramblings (yeah,
I'm talking about "Dianetics -- the Modern Science of Mental Health")
to appear "scientific" to an audience who also didn't know the first
thing about algebra and physics.

So I can't see the point in trying to discover anything _with_ the
equation until someone, with better training and more understanding
of these matters (that's you) has managed to explain to me how to
make sense of this equation in the first place.
--
Meta-disclaimer: A society that needs disclaimers has too many lawyers.
 
- gisle hannemyr  (Norsk Regnesentral)
  OSI:   C=no;PRMD=uninett;O=nr;S=Hannemyr;G=Gisle (X.400 SA format)
         gisle.hannemyr@nr.no                      (RFC-822  format)
  Inet:  gisle@ifi.uio.no
  UUCP:  ...!mcsun!ifi!gisle
------------------------------------------------
From: jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Scientology FAQ.
Date: 16 Nov 92 08:48:01 GMT
Organization: Loral Defense Systems Arizona

In article <1992Nov15.234422.8510@stortek.com> pae@blackcat.stortek.com (Phil Earnhardt) writes:
>In article <1992Nov14.045858.14979@lds-az.loral.com> jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera) writes:
>>>>3. Is Scientology valid?
>>>>
>>>>Tens of thousands of case histories, all sworn to, are in the possession
>>>>of the organizations of Scientology.
>>>
>>>This goes into that ever-increasing folder of Claims Asserted but not Proven.
>>>Show us the data!
>>
>>You're questioning the fact that there are tens of thousands of Scn case
>>histories?  Call up your local Church of Scientology and ask them how many
>>people in the past ten years they've audited.  Multiply that number by
>>450 (total number of orgs and missions).  This will give you the number of
>>case histories for just the past ten years.
>
>You still don't get it.
>
>Do you see a fundamental distinction between the CoS giving me a number over
>the telephone and an organization *completely independent* of Scientology gathering
>and producing *written* reports on the effectiveness of SCN?
>
>What you're suggesting is similar to calling a particular computer company and
>asking if they have the best computers. And believing what they say.

If the word of Scn cannot be accepted, then someone else will need to take
the responsibility of getting some people trained up as auditors and
case supervisors and auditing people according whatever research methods
were needed.

Why dispute Scn's results and still ask for evidence from *them*?

Jonathon
Barbera
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: rogue@ccs.northeastern.edu (Free Radical)
Subject: Re: Scientology FAQ.
Organization: College of CS, Northeastern U
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 06:25:21 GMT

In article <1992Nov21.234729.20750@lds-az.loral.com>
jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera) writes: 
>In article <BxzAxo.2nE@csn.org> pae@teal.csn.org (Phil Earnhardt) writes:
[...]
>>To continue the Ford analogy: I ask my Ford dealer why I should buy a Ford.
>>He produces lots of testimonials about people who *love* Fords. Some of them
>>are even published in a book.  But I don't trust him. I'm a skeptical person.
>>
>>I tell him that what he's given me is not enough. The dealer's response: if
>>*I* can't trust what he says, then it's my problem. After all, *he* already
>>knows that Fords are the best cars out there; it's clearly a problem with me
>>that I can't see that for myself. He suggests that I set up my own research
>>project to investigate Fords....
>>
>>Is that what the Ford dealership would do, Jonathon? Why or why not?
>>
>>Question: is it possible for the Ford dealership to provide independent
>>research about Fords that they themselves didn't control? (Semi-non-sequitor:
>>could I even find such research at a B. Dalton's?)

Jon - you seemed to have forgotten to include your answers to these
questions.  I'm reposting them to give you a fair chance to answer
now.  I know I didn't aske them, but I'm very interested in hearing
the answers.  Thanks.

	RA

rogue@damon.ccs.northeastern.edu (The Rogue Agent)
--------------------------------------------------
The NSA is now funding research not only in cryptography, but in all areas
of advanced mathematics. If you'd like a circular describing these new
research opportunities, just pick up your phone, call your mother, and
ask for one.


Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: rey@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Troy Lovata)
Subject: FAQ
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 21:29:19 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523

I just started reading this group, could someone mail me the FAQ that you
all seem to be talking about. Thanks
		 

 rey@lamar.colostate.edu                                      
 Is it bad I recieved a free, signed copy of _Battlefield Earth_ after
 Hubbard's death?
From: jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Freedom of speech, choice and association
Date: 24 Nov 92 01:10:51 GMT
Organization: Loral Defense Systems Arizona

In article <GISLE.92Nov23123534@gyda.ifi.uio.no> gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr) writes:
>In article <1992Nov23.082542.3088@lds-az.loral.com> jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera) writes:
>
>> In the early days of Scn, people were going on staff, getting a lot of
>> auditing and then quitting.  The contract (usually 2.5 year) is set up
>> to discourage a person from quitting after getting what they want.
>> However, (1) if a person leaves after contract expiration, then is no
>> debt and (2) the debt is only to be paid if the person wants further
>> auditing or training.  No one has been required to pay this debt against
>> their own determinism.
>
>The last paragraph is not true for Norway.  The newspapers here has
>re-printed the letters that has been sent to "freeloaders" (that is
>what the CoS call staff that quit before their contract expires, and
>without paying for all the "free" auditing they have received while
>staff).  The letters are very threatening in tone, and clearly indicates
>that the Church requires the ex-staff member to pay in full.

If this is true, it is certainly news to me.  I do not believe this is
a common practice and it may have been started in one area by the
initiative of one person.

Jonathon
Barbera
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: mkkuhner@phylo.genetics.washington.edu (Mary K. Kuhner)
Subject: Re: Scientology FAQ.
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 16:58:44 GMT

jerry@lds-az.loral.com (J Barbera) writes:

>So, yes, a person or group could get tech training and go out into the
>field and audit people.  The name for these people is "field auditor" or
>"field group" and there are a lot of them already.

But according to ISE, such people are forbidden to do a long list of
things, including varying the procedures (certainly a necessity in a
good scientific study of Scientology tech), and if they publish
findings which are critical or unsupportive of Scientology they will
become Enemies and be subject to penalties.

(I can't provide direct quotes, as I've returned the book to the
library, but the general idea was quite clear.)

I don't think I could do science under those circumstances.

Mary Kuhner mkkuhner@genetics.washington.edu
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: decot@cup.hp.com (Dave Decot)
Subject: Re: Scientology Joke.  
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 03:45:20 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.8 PL6]

[Note for those puzzled by undefined buzzwords, Qual is short for
 Qualifications Division, where faulty auditors, students, and staff
 members are sent to find out what's wrong with them and correct the
 problem.  -- Dave Decot]

A fanatical Scientologist would have had you go out and try to find
a copy of "Modern Management Technology [sic] Defined", otherwise known
as the "Admin dictionary".  But I decided to pass on some VERBAL DATA
(that is, "information expressed in words, rather than references to
holy LRH scripture").

Dave Decot
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr)
Subject: Re: PV equation
Organization: gisle@ifi.uio.no
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 14:49:40 GMT
Originator: gisle@gyda.ifi.uio.no

In article <2w0DuB4w165w@throb.mcws.fidonet.org> hardman@throb.mcws.fidonet.org (Bill Hardman) writes:

> gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr) writes:

>> But, I understand your reply to mean that you have a good
>> understanding of the PV equation, and would be willing to help others
>> learning about it if it could be made worth your time.  I think
>> that that could be arranged in some sporting fashion.  In short, I
>> have a bet to offer you:

 [bet specifics deleted to save bandwidth, essensially, I offer him
  US$ 8888.- if he can show that the equation are computable according
  to the rules of standard algebra.  He has to pay me $US 1.- if he
  fails.]

>> Do we have a bet?

> Due to time constraints, I won't be able to put that together during
> this week.  It would be easier for you (as well as cheaper) to go
> into an org, and take the Dianetics Course.

Stop waffling.  You said you could to it if I made it worth your time.
I have made you an offer that should make it worth your time.
I'm pretty tired playing the Monty Phyton Cheese Shop skit with you.

If time is an issue, I'm willing to grant you any reasonable time to
put together your proof.  How much time do you need?

Put up or shut up!
--
Meta-disclaimer: A society that needs disclaimers has too many lawyers.
 
- gisle hannemyr  (Norsk Regnesentral)
  OSI:   C=no;PRMD=uninett;O=nr;S=Hannemyr;G=Gisle (X.400 SA format)
         gisle.hannemyr@nr.no                      (RFC-822  format)
  Inet:  gisle@ifi.uio.no
  UUCP:  ...!mcsun!ifi!gisle
------------------------------------------------