Talk:OT VIII

message: The text in the body of this page regarding people paying hundreds of thousands for OT VIII is linked to the "Confidence Trick" page. While I understand and agree with the sentiment, I don't think this is in accord with NPOV. Sorry if I did this wrong, never edited before.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.201.80.170 (talk) 21:29, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to the "Confidence Trick" page

message: The article says that the only known Flag Ship Service Organization is the Sea Org. This is incorrect. The Flag Ship Service Organization (FSSO) is a Scientology Organization located aboard the Freewinds Motorvessel. 
See: http://www.scientology.org/p_jpg/world/worldeng/21/fsso.htm
As an organization it is staffed my members of the Sea Org, as all Scientology Advanced Organizations are, but the terms "Flag Ship Service Organization" and "Sea Org" are not synonymous as the article implies.
It is also important to note the difference between FSO and FSSO. FSO is the Flag Ship Organization, also known as the Flag Land Base, or simply Flag, and is located in Clearwater, FL.
So, FSO = Flag = Building in Clearwater, while FSSO = Freewinds = Ship where OT8 and other courses are delivered. Both are staffed by SO members, but neither term is synonymous with the Sea Org (A Sea Org member posted at ASHO, for example, is not affiliated with either the FSO or the FSSO).
The article as it is currently written does a poor job of explaining what the FSSO really is.
Matt2053 01:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FSSO 

message: Besides having no sources, the article just basically seems to be saying that there is something called OT VIII. Steve Dufour 17:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notable

message: The version on Wikileaks is yet another text claiming to be OT VIII. The CoS has claimed the PDF on Wikileaks is a copyright violation - it contains the common versions of OTI-VII - but I've seen nothing on whether they expressly claim the version of OTVIII as a violation. Given their earlier erroneous claiming of the Fishman version, I'd say hold off for more information. I've added to the article accordingly. - David Gerard (talk) 11:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the way you added it looks good so far.  Cirt (talk) 12:15, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The quote is by any definition offensive and irrelevant to what OT VIII is supposed to be about, spiritual gain.  I have tried to make it more neutral by also mentioning that Hubbard is alleged to have also said that Jesus did not exist, with a ref to show that this is a current debate.  He couldn't believe both things.  And also positive statements made about Christianity in the early years to give the third option.  I put a reference to The Secret Gospel of Mark only in the references which may or may not be relevant but is the actual controversy on this subject.  So if a disgruntled member wants to allege a highly offensive (to Christians) viewpoint, well he is not alone.  I hope this is fair and welcome other edits to make it even more neutral point of view.Drg55 (talk) 12:15, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Your edit, as it stood, is original research through the synthasization of two or more reliable sources.  If there isn't a source that makes the point that 1. Hubbard was talking about the secret gospel of Mark, 2. and he believed it was fake, then you can't make the edit you are trying to do under wikipedia regulations.  This isn't about points of view, it is about the type of sources we are allowed to use to edit wikipedia.Coffeepusher (talk) 14:22, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikileaks version 

message: Unlike other OT levels, no "leaked" copy of OT VIII materials has ever been released. All that exists on the Internet are outlines allegedly based on memory from former members - none of these "versions" have ever been validated by the Church, unlike the other OT levels (most notoriously OT III) which have clearly been validated by the Church as being true. In other words, the versions of OT VIII floating around out there are for all intents and purposes BS. Also see WP:V and WP:RS. Laval (talk) 20:14, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article is misleading

message: The write-up we had did not seem to match the cited source. Rewritten – please check. --JN466 12:26, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Fishman version

message: In her recent documentary that aired earlier this year(can be watched: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x13ahb6) Nancy Many put to rest the rumours of "The Masonic Program" at the old Guardians Office by strenuously confirming it was administered to her. Considering this program was designed by hubbard to teach that "L Ron Hubbard is the messiah", and we now know it to have occurred(at least according to Many), I think this is obvious evidence the Fishman Affidavit OT8 is clearly the original text(and this GO program was somesort of OT8 preparing test) or, equally as controversial, is based off recollections of, or indeed a leaked document from, the bizzare Guardian's Office program that we now know did exist at one stage. OT8 was not originally administered on the Freewinds, and it's even possible it could have been a version of "OT8"(or simply known by nickname as that due to the extreme and final nature of the "revelation" contained) administered specifically by the GO. This program was restricted to Commordore's Messengers(like Miscavige for instance) and Guardians Office Agents who were high ranking. No scientologist outside of these two groups was allowed access to this program, and they wouldn't even know of the existence of a "GO specific course", which is one reason it may have been OT8, or known as OT8 by those who were given it, due to the limited access to members in the extreme inner circles of the church. I think this deserves a strong mention in the article as it obviously relates to this particular issue. Colliric (talk) 10:30, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nancy Many 

message: See the text at the very bottom of the page. BalinKingOfMoria (talk) 05:43, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Wizardman was referring to this edit which was reverted three hours later. (Just leaving this note here in case someone else thinks the issue is still open.) Grorp (talk) 01:25, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential copyright violation