HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: raz@sleeper.apana.org.au (Roland Turner)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Can anyone help me?
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 23:13:01 GMT
Organization: Desolation Road Railfan BBS

cg1v+@andrew.cmu.edu (Charles J. Goldstein) writes:



>How do I get the "church of scientology" to stop sending me literature?

>I wrote to this bboard before but I just started getting mail again.

Have you tried writing to them and asking them to delete you from their 
mailing list?

Bye for now.

        - Raz.

         

raz@sleeper.apana.org.au   (Roland Turner)   (OH) 61 2 319 5700
From: cg1v+@andrew.cmu.edu (Charles J. Goldstein)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Can anyone help me?
Date: 31 Dec 92 06:18:35 GMT
Organization: Junior, Social & Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA



How do I get the "church of scientology" to stop sending me literature?

I wrote to this bboard before but I just started getting mail again.

- Charlie
From: sol@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (chris s de voir)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: For the record...
Date: 23 Dec 92 21:03:11 GMT

pae@teal.csn.org (Phil Earnhardt) writes:

>The FAQ has no personal statements.

I wrote:

>>This emphasizes who is in control in the communication cycle and is also part
>>of TR4.  TR4 and other numbered Training Routines are the drills for learning
>>communication Scientology style.

Phil wrote:

>.... And people skilled with the
>media will typically avoid "flaming": making personal statements about
>themselves and others.

I forgot to add that once question is answered it is supposed to be ack-
nowledged.  And that each time the questioned is repeated, it is asked
as if it were the very first time.  This avoids among other things
communicating frustration to the pre-clear and causing mutual upset
by contagion.

Scientologists are taught to use these techniques outside of the auditing
room in their personal lives.  But it is a hierarchal form of communication.
Essentially the Scientologist asks the questions and get answers while
ignoring questions and answers by the Wog.  When the Wog says something
personal about himself (and this is what I meant by personal, I didn't
mean "I hate your tie/religion/illogic") when the Wog says "I'm hungry",
or the pre-clear says, "My head hurts." this is recognized and acknowledged
by the Scientologist.  You just haven't been under control yet.  That's
why Scientologists can't communicate with you."
>It's probably not a tremendously fertile environment for recruiting new
>Scientologists...

>--phil
From: sol@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (chris s de voir)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Anthroposophy
Summary: Acknowledgement of reference.
Keywords: anthroposophy
Date: 2 Jan 93 19:12:38 GMT


From sun001!gpalo@uunet.UU.NET Wed Dec 30 12:22:40 1992

"...you might want to look into the work of Rudolf Steiner (anthroposophy).
Check out the Anthroposophic Press, Hudson NY."

Gerry Palo
(73237.2006@compuserve.com)

Thanks for the reference.  I responded in this forum because the e-mail
route to you is apprarently undeliverable through my system.
From: chipg@access.digex.com (Chip Gallo)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Scientology: It's just "a joke".
Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology
Date: 24 Dec 1992 02:30:36 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Distribution: usa
Expires: 15 Feb 93
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com
Summary: answers
Keywords: PT BARNUM A FOOL AND HIS MONEY

In article <schafmei.725090316@sfu.ca> schafmei@fraser.sfu.ca (Chris Schafmeister) writes:
>chipg@access.digex.com (Chip Gallo) writes:
>
>>So Annette, why are you posting to this newsgroup?
>
>><Chip>
>
>For that matter, why are you?
>

I'm glad you asked me that, Chris. I am following the Code of a
Scientologist, point #1:

To keep Scientologists, the public and the press accurately informed
concerning Scientology, the world of mental health and society.

This Code can be found in its entirety in THE CREATION OF HUMAN
ABILITY by L. Ron Hubbard.

Let me note that I make no profit from a person who buys a book or
gets auditing (counseling). I volunteer my time to read and reply
to articles where the writer seems interested in learning or
gaining some ability. 

You and Annette, among others, don't seem to me to care about
studying Scientology. I have told you why I post here. It truly
makes little difference to me whether you and others who fear
Scientology and the imagined dangers of the subject answer the
question. I personally do consider Annette's comments to be a form
of baiting or harassment but a public forum is hardly the place
to attempt to get her (or you for that matter) to give an honest
reply. 

On another online service I saw a similar progression. Very soon
after a few people quoted the TIME article and attacked Hubbard,
Church management and sincere Scientologists at length, the
Scientologists stopped posting to the forum. Because they were
only there to help by answering questions and referring people
to LRH material, when the noise and disruption became loud enough,
they left. Just as no one forces you to read this newsgroup, no
one forces us to participate.

As a side note, the perported FAQ is loaded with false, 
negative and biased material. It would be interesting if the
copyright and trademark holders of terms such as "Scientology,"
"Dianetics" etc. took legal action. There are clear, concise
answers available from the Church with documentation; a continued
distribution of demonstrably false and damaging material could be
construed as intentionally malicious. Just my 'umble opinion.

>Questions, questions, questions.
>
>.Chris.
>
>P.S. Thanks for the E-mail Chip, it was good for a laugh.
>

As I recall, after I hit "R" rather than "F" on my reader,
you tersely replied that you didn't want to carry on a private
discussion. Glad you finally laughed; that will be $500 (ha ha).

<Chip>
From: sol@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (chris s de voir)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Background
Date: 23 Dec 92 20:43:15 GMT

lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay) writes:


>Your post implies (perhaps by accident) that Hayakawa therefore has
>agreement with Hubbard's ideas. A cruise through my files for Hayakawa
>references came up with:

>|S.I. Hayakawa put it well in his review of Dianetics:  "The
>|appalling thing revealed by dianetics about our culture is that it
>|takes a 452-page book full of balderdash to get some people to sit
>|down and seriously listen to each other!"'
>|	S.I. Hayakawa, "From Science-fiction to Fiction-science", 
>|	A Review of General Semantics, 1951 Vol. 8 (4) 280-293. p. 293.
>|--Jeff Jacobsen.

>-- 
>Don		D.C.Lindsay	Carnegie Mellon Computer Science

I did not mean to imply any aggreement or association between Hubbard
and Hayakawa.  I had no knowledge of this position of Hayakawa's but
I appreciate you bringing it to my attention.  Hubbard dedicated one of
his books to "my friend Will Durant".  But I have never read any
response from Durant that would indicate this friendship was mutual.
It reminds me of Ken Kesey in "Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test" where he
paints a sign in the front of his hangout that says, "Hells Angels
Welcome" and the Hells Angels come.  Then he puts another sign out
that says "The Beetles are Welcome" and they never come.
From: chipg@access.digex.com (Chip Gallo)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Scientology:  It's just "a joke".
Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology
Date: 23 Dec 1992 03:07:25 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Distribution: usa
Expires: 15 Jan 93
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com
Keywords: PT BARNUM A FOOL AND HIS MONEY

So Annette, why are you posting to this newsgroup?

<Chip>
From: sol@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (chris s de voir)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: For the record...
Date: 23 Dec 92 22:08:34 GMT

sol@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (chris s de voir) writes:

>by the Scientologist.  You just haven't been under control yet.  That's
>why Scientologists can't communicate with you."
>>It's probably not a tremendously fertile environment for recruiting new
>>Scientologists...

>>--phil

Due to an emergency system shutdown the last lines didn't get properly
edited.  To continue:

The Scientologist is sent out into the Wog world, that is outside of the
physical confines of the CoS, to use these and other techniques to bully
unsuspecting genrally good-natured polite people into the CoS.  Success
at this is supposed to demonstrate to student correct application of tech-
nique.  Failure is followed by additional training.  It should also be
said here that Success of Application of technique is implied to be
accompanied by absolution for the Scientologist for whatever grief he
may bring to the Wog or pre-clear by implimenting these methods.

I don't think the Scientologists will ever really tell you much because
of the policy of "verbal tech" and "out-gradient".  These policys are
accompanied by spiritual and implicit physical threat.  By physical
threat I mean the policy of "Fairgame" on Suppressives.  Fairgame has
all the implied threat of Mafia retribution action.  Additionally,
R2-45 (45 is caliber) is a procedure with a very "high gradient" but
I'm sure its effectiveness is quite high.

Also, sorry to say, you guys have been mostly talking about material
low on "the bridge".  It is mostly introductory bait, low gradient
stuff to get people into the CoS.  What really happens in the courseroom
in the auditing rooms and how much it costs, this is where Scientology
is happening.  I have a great respect for the excellent analysis of
this introductory material.  The Hubbard.sources faq exceeded my
meager attempt, though I got different sources, mostly because I
was looking at Scientology not Dianetics.  I am afraid though that
Dianetics Modern Science of Mental Health is somewhat of
a read herring and is not what is really going on.
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Kelly Martin)
Subject: Re: Verbal Tech
Reply-To: scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Organization: Gender Anarchists United
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 02:18:34 GMT

isds11990012@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:

>It just occured to me that several of you don't understand what
>Verbal Tech is.  I suspected this after reading that PV thread from
>Gisle, but after reading Chris' last post I'm afraid its worse than I
>thought.

>You should really find out what verbal tech means before you go
>around talking about it, because it really makes you look dumb.

well, since you obviously do know, why don't be a nice person and tell
us?  or does that violate some rule of scientology?

>ps.  One other thing, I'm not trying to be mean or be a smart-ass.
>I'm just trying to make the discussion go a little easier.  Try doing
>your part.

you could aid the discussion immeasurably more by actually providing
definition for the terms you believe we are misuing, instead of just
saying 'you're using them wrong'.  sorta like the different between
saying 'you're wrong' and 'you're wrong because...'.  the latter has a
LOT more weight in argument.
--
No responsible person attempts to absolve himself of the bad effects of his
actions by blaming the actions of others.  Irresponsible people, of course, do
it all the time.
	-- Chip Salzenberg (chip@tct.com), news.groups
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Kelly Martin)
Subject: Re: Hi guys
Reply-To: scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Organization: Gender Anarchists United
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 02:30:00 GMT

davidb@engin.umich.edu (David Bonnell) writes:

>Also I'm open to honest questions and inquiries.  My temper runs very
>short for smart-asses and people who know nothing about Scientology
>who try to slam it for kicks.  I have a policy of immediate reverse
>slamming.

does this policy include sending random email messages to people of
the form "what crimes have you committed that you are hiding?"  i
think i got one of those gems from you, unsolicted, earlier this year.
kinda funny because i hadn't been active here for over a month when i
got your note.  me and my friends got a good laugh out of it.

>Psychologists are the largest drug pushers on the planet.  

funny.  my psychologist is rather OPPOSED to the use of
psychopharmaceuticals...  he would rather see if i can manage without
them.  maybe you people should get your minds out of the 50s and into
present time.
--
No responsible person attempts to absolve himself of the bad effects of his
actions by blaming the actions of others.  Irresponsible people, of course, do
it all the time.
	-- Chip Salzenberg (chip@tct.com), news.groups
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: sol@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (chris s de voir)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: For the record...
Date: 25 Dec 92 08:40:13 GMT

schafmei@fraser.sfu.ca (Chris Schafmeister) writes:

>You speak quite knowlegably, where did you learn all this stuff?

I knew this question was bound to come up.  I am an ex-scientologist.
I was trained to Level IV.  I was part way through my internship when
I decided I had to leave the CoS.  Maybe now I'm going to be a problem
for the Scientologists in this group but I don't have any hidden crimes
and I am willing to continue the dialogue.
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: schafmei@fraser.sfu.ca (Chris Schafmeister)
Subject: Re: Can anyone help me?
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 07:41:35 GMT

cg1v+@andrew.cmu.edu (Charles J. Goldstein) writes:



>How do I get the "church of scientology" to stop sending me literature?

>I wrote to this bboard before but I just started getting mail again.

>- Charlie



1) Move with no forwarding address.
2) Die and be reborn as an animal or an appliance.

Seriosly, I have no idea. 
The church of scientology can be worse than cooties.

To get revenge on an old landlord,
two years ago I called up scientology, posing(sp?) has him,
and asked for some information to be sent to his address.

Poor bastard!  They will never let him go!  AHAHAHAHA!

There, I feel better now that I confessed that particular hidden crime.

.Chris.

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: pae@teal.csn.org (Phil Earnhardt)
Subject: Re: For the record...
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 02:51:30 GMT

In article <6604@pdxgate.UUCP> sol@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (chris s de voir) writes:
>If I may be of assistance.  Simply repeating the question over and over may
>help.  It is something Scientologists understand as TR4.  Repeat the question
>until you get it answered.

That's the general strategy. Interesting questions that don't get answered in
this group will migrate to the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) posting.  FAQs
get posted periodically and are cross-posted to news.answers.

It's a bit embarassing to have a FAQ with many unanswered questions. But if
this technique actually encourages the Scientologists to *answer* questions
posed on this newsgroup, great! Also, as noted in earlier discussions,
questions that have never been answered here convey their own message to
readers of the FAQ.

>But there is a problem.  If the Scientologists considers himself to be in
>control of the the interaction you are having with him, he may ignore
>everything you ask or comment on as mere "bullbaiting" and will only
>recognize statements you make about yourself.

The FAQ has no personal statements. Technically, the FAQ is owned by the 
group as a whole.

>This emphasizes who is in control in the communication cycle and is also part
>of TR4.  TR4 and other numbered Training Routines are the drills for learning
>communication Scientology style.

Well, from what you say, I'd guess that the entire style of communications of
Usenet News groups is totally frustrating to Scientologists. They have to live
by the words they say here: inconsistencies are apparent. And questions that
remain unanswered are quite visible to all readers. And people skilled with the
media will typically avoid "flaming": making personal statements about
themselves and others.

It's probably not a tremendously fertile environment for recruiting new
Scientologists...

--phil
From: mkkuhner@phylo.genetics.washington.edu (Mary K. Kuhner)
Subject: Re: Scientology: It's just "a joke".
Keywords: PT BARNUM A FOOL AND HIS MONEY
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 06:22:17 GMT

chipg@access.digex.com (Chip Gallo) writes:

>As a side note, the perported FAQ is loaded with false, 
>negative and biased material. It would be interesting if the
>copyright and trademark holders of terms such as "Scientology,"
>"Dianetics" etc. took legal action. There are clear, concise
>answers available from the Church with documentation; a continued
>distribution of demonstrably false and damaging material could be
>construed as intentionally malicious. Just my 'umble opinion.

Please, don't threaten people.  It cuts off lines of communication and
makes Usenet less useful as a communication medium for everyone.  It
also makes you look very bad.

Nothing TIME said about Scientology scares me half as much as
the things I have been hearing *from Scientologists* on this newsgroup.
And number one among those is the tendency to threaten people who
criticize Scientology.

Mary Kuhner mkkuhner@genetics.washington.edu
From: sol@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (chris s de voir)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Scientology: It's just "a joke".
Date: 2 Jan 93 19:55:44 GMT

schaf@socrates.ucsf.edu (Chris Schafmeister) writes:

>How much of your training involved learning how
>to draw other people into the church?

None.  Sort of.  Occassionally it was required on a checksheet.  I told my
supervisor that I didn't have the training and he said just use what you
know from being trained as an auditor, but of course, make it low-gradient.
He had me read a bulletin on "no coffee shop auditing".  This means that
the auditing session occurs under the supervision of a case supervisor and
this most often requires a hefty donation to the church.

Sometimes I would be assigned to be a coach for someone lower in training.
I skipped many of the introductory classes.  It's many of these introductory
classes that have a person going out into the world and observing things
about people and interacting with them according to Scn principles.  There
is a course devoted to just bringing people into the CoS.  I could coach
TRs and communication cycle and tone scale.  So I would accompany the
student outside for these lessons.

I brought a couple of people into the CoS but I don't think they stayed.  I
didn't really have my heart into it.  I figured: If someone is seeking
enlightenment, they are going to find the CoS or the Vatican or sit
under a full moon.  And this person is going to get the gain out of it.
But there is this thing called "overwhelm" and although it is stated by
LRH as a thing you should not do, it is done alot in Scn.  You can
overwhelm another person's determinism and direct their body in the CoS
quite easy.  But this person isn't going to get the gain.  They don't
really want to be there.  And as soon as you leave them alone for a
few minutes they're going to start coming out of the fog and thinking
for themselves again.  And then they're gone.  Thank God.  "Overwhelm"
like many other principles is officially denied and commonly practiced.

By the way "God" in Scn is "the R-6 god".  That is the God of the monotheistic
religions of the world is considered an implant.  An implant is a
false picture attached to a thetan by the evil overlords.  So listen
up anybody who got the idea that Scn was tolerant of other religions,
your God is a mere implant.  Some people think they can retain their
own religion and still practice Scn, but on the higher levels it gets
audited out.  LRH recounted on a tape that he advised his daughter to
"be tolerant of the natives" his tone derogatorily refered to christianity.
See when John Holifield is objecting to
Chris Schafmeister's argument about how to restrict power of religious
groups by saying "Moslems, Jews listen up" well I say listen to this.
Scn does not have a friendly agenda for other religions. 
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Scientology: It's just "a joke".
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 18:33:56 GMT

schafmei@fraser.sfu.ca (Chris Schafmeister) writes:
>chipg@access.digex.com (Chip Gallo) writes:
>>...you and others who fear
>>Scientology and the imagined dangers of the subject

Some posters have said that studying Scientology is bad for the
ability to think critically. If true, then that is a danger, yes.

Mostly, the fears have been about the *Church*, not the subject.
You know, like, the lawsuit threat that you just brandished.

>What I learned was that it's amazingly easy to believe
>in almost anything.

I've heard claims that in order to understand something that you
are told, you must (for a moment) believe in it. If your higher
mental functions are in good shape, you will quickly decide
if you *should* believe it. 

If this theory is correct, then gullibility is a natural human
condition. It might even be the natural condition of all intelligent
creatures! In which case, some day, intelligent computers will
believe in the religion that they were "born" into...
-- 
Don		D.C.Lindsay	Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
From: dleland@dante.nmsu.edu (LELAND)
Subject: Re: Rebellion against Santa?
Organization: New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 23:04:40 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.022711.124572@zeus.calpoly.edu> jmunch@hertz.elee.calpoly.edu (John Munch) writes:

<stuff deleted>

>We have to use any means necessary to win this glorious battle for truth,
>and Santa. Thank you fellow Santaists.
>
>                     -Yours in Santa,
>                         John David Munch


Hear hear! Or more precisely, ho ho! And remember, there never was a movie called
SANTA CLAUS CONQUERS THE MARTIANS! For Christmas, if I get a wish, it ceases to
exist.


Ho ho ho...


Queen of Swords
dleland@nmsu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.religion.santaism
From: kamilewi@lars.acc-admin.stolaf.edu (Alex Kamilewicz)
Subject: Re: Why I hate Santa.
Organization: St. Olaf College; Northfield, MN
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 01:07:19 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.170325.20449@nmsu.edu> dleland@dante.nmsu.edu (LELAND) writes:
>Dear me Walter, you certainly are a perhaps overly serious one aren't you. Jeez,
>"Why I hate Santa?" Yech..... Well anyway, I've consulted a few elves on
>this one, and I have been told it's a COMMON MISCONCEPTION that all presents
>that end up under the tree on CHristmas morning are Santa's presents. Certain
>affluent parents may forge his signature (ask them what they got in their

This is especially helpful when getting Santa to co-sign for a car loan.

Alex
Newsgroups: alt.religion.santaism
From: solan@smaug.uio.no (Svein Olav G. Nyberg)
Subject: Easter Bunny
Keywords: Easter, Easter Bunny, Bunny
Reply-To: solan@smaug.uio.no (Svein Olav G. Nyberg)
Organization: University of Oslo, Norway
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:02:56 GMT


The Easter Bunny is the Opposite - the Enemy, who seeks
to seduce mankind and bring their attention away from
Santa.

Just thought Id let you know ...


Solan
Newsgroups: alt.religion.santaism