<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>The Analysis Point for the CoS</title>
		<description>Discuss The Analysis Point for the CoS</description>
		<link>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:17:06 --600</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.scientology-cult.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/269/10.html" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Yes, BUT...</title>
			<link>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1516</link>
			<description><![CDATA[RJ, Much of your response is completely true. Policies were not applied and had they been applied, the church would would not be in this mess. Complete agreement from me on that. But I don't agree that all we need to do is apply policy is the solution to this. What if, for instance, someone just decides not to apply policy. Then a lot of policies. Sort of like the exact situation we have now. RJ, you made the following statement that actually supports my argument: "In other words, dicking around with the policies isn't going to 'fix' the problem when the problem doesn't exist in the policy itself!" Exactly. The post of COB doesn't exist in policy. The IAS doesn't exist in policy. The Ideal Orgs program doesn't exist in policy. Ad Nauseum. Yet it is a fact that these things nevertheless do exist, and that they are problems.Something a little more than just dicking around with some policies is what is needed here. RJ, your response did not adequately address one of my main points: "Not all the HCOBs, HCOPLs, hard-working and good-intentioned staff stopped DM from coming into power and remaining there, wreaking havoc for over two decades." To just tell everyone to apply policy was not enough, just in our first few years after LRH passed. What about in a hundred years? A thousand? So look, it is perfectly all right to come up with some sort of mechanism that is strong enough to prevent this situation from happening again. Consider: Step 6 of 3D Danger: "Recommend any firm policy that will hereafter detect and/or prevent the condition from recurring." Step 6 of 1D Danger says it even stronger: "Formulate and adopt firm policy that will hereafter detect and prevent the same situation form continuing to occur." (Italics mine) PS: I got my "exclamation point shield" up. Only one of the 16 ya threw at me got through...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Guest</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 06:23:32 --600</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1516</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Okay, mr. high horse</title>
			<link>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1517</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Stephan, you say so much in what you don't say... By selecting certain quotes and responding with only"No opposing comment was issued", it's like you're spanking the whole of the other blog commentators for not taking issue with these comments you seem to find self-evidently objectionable. Yet you offer no actual statement or rational argument to counter any of those arguments you quote.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>John Doe</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 00:43:23 --600</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1517</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Points of view</title>
			<link>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1500</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I wasn't saying I think all those points are negative, I got that Stefan was saying they were negative -- in his opinion. Maybe Stefan will clarify what he is actually trying to say. There is a great article written by Joe Howard called Inside Scientology Compilations http://www.scientology-cult.com/inside-tech.html that gives an insiders view on the compilation of the tech. He says, I think it is a matter of taking responsibility. Relying on a group to sort everything out for us is irresponsible. This thread however is simply people venting and supplying suggestions. Some of those ideas may be good and some may be bad. But Scientology is "knowing how to know" so it is not hard to sort out the good from the bad if one has any responsibility. I got that Stefan was simply trying to stop anyone from even having a say. That seems like censorship. Maybe that's not what he's trying to say. I don't agree with all the posts. I absolutely do agree with some. But I will fight for everyone's right to have a say -- it's right in the Creed of the Church of Scientology. LRH always said that MORE communication, not less, is the solution. And in that regard, this website, open as it is, is a breath of fresh air and must be protected.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Archer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:57:03 --600</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1500</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>@ Stefan Tunedal</title>
			<link>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1481</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Thanks for the perspective, Stefan. I'd stopped reading this thread a few days ago. Guess I missed what had been created here, huh? What you so effectively point out is certainly interesting, isn't it?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>lunamoth</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 09:11:39 --600</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1481</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Rashomon - points of viewing</title>
			<link>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1497</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Rashomon is a great Japanese film from 1950 that explores an event from the numerous viewpoints of the participants and witnesses. I was reminded of it by Archer's comment that Stefan Tunedal had picked only negative comments for his last post. I saw those selected comments as positive and encouraging. Completely the opposite of what Archer perceived, and perhaps even the complete opposite of what Stefan intended. Every individual will see or experience an event, not only from his specific point of view but will then process the event in his own unique way. It is only our desire for agreement that brings about the compromise we all call reality. When seeking Truth, compromise is the last thing I think anyone would like to admit to. Nevertheless, KSW shut the door and walled-in the path and we all agreed to compromise so we could follow that particular road. I think it is apparent to most on these blogs now that LRH did not create/discover (choose your preferred verb) the tech all alone. Many others contributed. So you could say that a group did evolve what we all think of as Scientology tech. So, I agree with Stefan that a group will never evolve Truth, since Truth is individual and personal. However, a group can evolve tools or workable technology of various kinds, be it for building dams or seeking spiritual awareness. Truth is a personal awareness that each individual experiences on his/her own personal journey and cannot be given, imparted, or shared by or with another. However, tools or a workable technology to help that person along his/her path can be shared, can be co-experienced and can be co-evolved. But there also needs to be the freedom to drop the hammer and pick up a saw, or to create a whole new tool when the need arises.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>craig houchin</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 07:55:31 --600</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1497</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>@ Stefan Tunedal</title>
			<link>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1490</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Stefan, You have selected a few negative comments out of this thread, and tried to elevate them in importance for unknown reasons. Are you daring to imply your nitpicked comments are representative of the entire website? If so, that is total bullshit. Those few negative comments that you have selected represent only the viewpoint of those specific people and no one else. You seem to be the one operating on group bank principles. One blog item and a handful of comments does not equate to a "group evolving truth." The very idea is absurd. I'm starting to question who YOU are. You seem to have another agenda, which is to "find fault with the website and criticize it to shut it down." You are acting as a third party, not a participant. You are over-generalizing and reading WAY more into this than the facts merit. You act like this is an "Official Committee to Reorganize Scientology" -- it's nothing of the sort. It's a blog. Have you never seen one before? Are you smoking crack? Furthermore, I don't understand why you are taking a spectator viewpoint here. If you think it is wrong that no one has issued an opposing viewpoint, go tell it to the mirror. Just click on "Reply" and you can issue all the opposing viewpoints you want. It seems strange and irresponsible or maybe just lazy and stupid that you are pointing a bony finger at people, while you yourself sit on the sidelines in judgment. Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it is neither strange, irresponsible, lazy nor stupid. Maybe you are a hired plant. You sure sound like one. Who is supposed to "issue" these opposing comments? You act like it is a fault as if someone somewhere is expected to "issue" opposing comment. A blog simply gives people the opportunity to contribute to the communication. You are not getting involved with the message. Instead you are railing against and you are criticizing the medium. It sounds like you don't like this website and don't want it to exist.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Archer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 05:21:20 --600</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1490</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Groups evolving truth</title>
			<link>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1441</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I wonder if this will get a new disapproval record by publishing some of the comments that this thread contains: ”Scientology IS the issue.” No opposing comment was issued ”The problem goes to the core of the subject itself—the GO/OSA, the RPF, Fair Game, and many other such constructs came from the Founder himself.” No opposing comment was issued ”The church cannot be corrected because LRH cannot be corrected.” No opposing comment was issued ”...but if nothing else is changed, another dictator will sooner or later step into those same shoes.” No opposing comment was issued ”The fundamental problem I see is that a hierarchical organization, which can be controlled from a single post at the top is a magnet for anti-social types who need to dominate others.” No opposing comment was issued ”LRH did not develop all of the tech that is in use today and did not credit those who did the contributions. The open source model mirrors the actual process of discovery and ensures that credit and responsibility are correctly assigned.” No opposing comment was issued ”Where do you draw the line to ensure that the subject and technology remain effective and yet add to or change policies to prevent bad things from happening?” No opposing comment was issued ”There are those that will rail out against this suggestion, saying we only need to get on source and apply what we have. I'm sorry, actual evidence has shown that this is not enough.” No opposing comment was issued ”LRH emphasized repeatedly that he was the sole source of Scientology, and while this protected the subject from destructive changes for the most part, a mindset was ingrained in scientologists to respect and hold inviolate a Single Authority Figure who dictates what the subject is, and the policies to be followed, etc” No opposing comment was issued ”Unless the entire subject is teased apart and the technology separated from the man LRH, ...” No opposing comment was issued ”For instance you have this misconception that Scientology is supposed to have a ”leader”. There isn't a single policy ever written that backs up this contention!” No opposing comment was issued]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Stefan Tunedal</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 07 Mar 2010 03:19:25 --600</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1441</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Antoine says:</title>
			<link>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1440</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This is excellent. Dynamically correct. In the beginning there was LRH and his dynamics. Now it's me, and my dynamics. There is no "Mystery" of that.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Antoine</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 17:55:09 --600</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1440</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>I have the plan</title>
			<link>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1434</link>
			<description><![CDATA[contact me. lets do it!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Garko</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 18:09:59 --600</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1434</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>WOW! THIS IS AWESOME!</title>
			<link>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1436</link>
			<description><![CDATA[25 years in Scientology and i finally found my community in it... OUTSIDE THE CHURCH!!! this is one of the best threads that i have ever read... I am a liberty activist and have read many threads on 911 truth, the Ron Paul meetup groups, sites like prisonplanet.com's forums and such and this is BY FAR the most civil, enlightened, enlightening and inspiring threads that i have read! i found out about all this about three weeks ago. at first i didnt have an emotional reaction... then a few days ago i shed some tears...the thing that got to me was not my own story so much as the realization of how many lives had been adversely affected by something that they got into to make their lives better and other's lives better and which had the power to make their lives better but for one evil man and the degradation he wreaked upon a beautiful spiritual technology. but NOW... i am exhilarated... every day i am feeling more and more of the mass from the Church of Miscarriage's oppression dissipating and I am seeing the incredible potential of this movement for all of mankind and every individual associated with it and and and... and i am so impressed with the people and their stories. we will win because we are doing something righteous and beautiful and powerful! "TO MAN!" Garko]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Garko</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:21:32 --600</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.scientology-cult.com/the-analysis-point-for-the-cos.html#comment-1436</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

