Thread:Talk:Two Happiness Rundowns/How LRHL. Ron Hubbard Developed Rundowns - Revision history

AntPhillips at 09:32, July 29, 2016

2016-07-29T09:32:56Z

AntPhillips at 09:13, January 14, 2016

2016-01-14T09:13:30Z

Dl88008: New thread: How LRH Developed Rundowns

2016-01-07T15:10:32Z

New thread: How LRH Developed Rundowns

New page

:''excerpted from email correspondence on the topic of the HRD.''

In my day, [[L Ron Hubbard|LRH]] would develop a new rundown using the auditors to hand locally to begin the experimental auditing.He would work with the c/s who was in charge of the auditors but LRH would usually see the folders too.

And he would have daily conferences with the c/s about the folders and what was happening with the preclears.

When he was satisfied that he had a good product, he would have the c/s write up the hcobs -- often from the c/s's notes of conferences he'd had with LRH as the rundown developed. The c/s would also submit a list of the most common errors he'd seen the auditors committing on this new RD and that would be the basis of the RD's correction list.

I was not on that line when they developed the HRD but I would bet that the same procedure applied. Because [[David Mayo]], who would
have been the c/s on this pilot, "wrote the issues," his initials followed LRH's on the ascription at the bottom.

Compiling the RD's issues would have been a cooperative effort involving LRH and David Mayo.

To say that David Mayo wrote the HRD issues is a misstatement.

Yes, he sat at a typewriter and typed up the HCOBs' texts from his notes of discussing the sessions with LRH. He would have sent these
draft issues to LRH for approval. If LRH didn't want to approve anything he didn't. If he wanted something changed, he changed it
or had it changed. If David Mayo had had an idea of his own and wanted it added to the RD or to an HCOB above and beyond what
LRH had uttered in their meetings, David would have run it by LRH before sending it in for approval to issue.

I'd say that the same procedure applied to the NOTs materials.

[[Ken Urquhart]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 On 8 January 2016 Kenneth G. Urquhart wrote the following comment on Max Hauri's entry. [[User:AntPhillips|Antony A Phillips]] ([[User talk:AntPhillips|talk]]) 03:13, January 14, 2016 (CST) :
-In my day, LRH would develop a new rundown using the auditors to hand
+This has been transferred to the main page see under the heading:<br />
-locally to begin the experimental auditing.He would work with the c/s who
+'''From Ken Urquhart; Earlier Preparation of Rundowns,1969/75.'''
-was in charge of the auditors but LRH would usually see the folders too.
-And he would have daily conferences with the c/s about the folders and
-what was happening with the preclears.
-−
-Now, I was directly on his communication lines from 1969 through to
-, when he piloted and introduced several new rundowns. Although
-the pc folders in the pilots didn't come through me there were written
-communications between LRH and the C/S which I saw. I knew when
-they were both in consultation or briefing in LRH's office as my office
-was a couple of yards from his. I became very familiar with the
-process and system LRH used.
-−
-When he was satisfied that he had a good product, he would have the
-c/s write up the hcobs -- often from the c/s's notes of conferences he'd
-had with LRH as the rundown developed. Once the two of them had
-agreed on the form and processes and policies for the new rundown,
-LRH would ask the c/s to submit a list of the most common errors he'd
-seen the auditors committing on this new RD and that would be the basis
-of the RD's correction list. The whole process usually occupied little more
-than a couple of weeks. An exception, understandably, was the L's.
-−
-I was not on LRH's comm line when they developed the HRD and nowhere
-near the door to his office, but I would bet
-that the same procedure applied. Because David Mayo, who would
-have been the c/s on this pilot, "wrote the issues," his initials followed
-LRH's on the ascription at the bottom. Compiling the RD's issues
-would have been a cooperative effort involving LRH and David Mayo.
-To say that David Mayo wrote the HRD issues is a misstatement. Yes,
-he sat at a typewriter and typed up the HCOBs' texts from his notes
-of discussing the sessions with LRH. He would have sent these
-draft issues to LRH for approval. If LRH didn't want to approve
-anything he didn't. If he wanted something changed, he changed it
-or had it changed. If David Mayo had had an idea of his own and
-wanted it added to the RD or to an HCOB above and beyond what
-LRH had uttered in their meetings, David would have run it by LRH
-before sending it in for approval to issue.
-−
-I'd say that the same procedure applied to the NOTs materials
-−
-Kenneth G. Urquhart

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-:''excerpted from email correspondence on the topic of the HRD.''
+On 8 January 2016 Kenneth G. Urquhart wrote the following comment on Max Hauri's entry. [[User:AntPhillips|Antony A Phillips]] ([[User talk:AntPhillips|talk]]) 03:13, January 14, 2016 (CST) :
-In my day, [[L Ron Hubbard|LRH]] would develop a new rundown using the auditors to hand locally to begin the experimental auditing.He would work with the c/s who was in charge of the auditors but LRH would usually see the folders too.
+In my day, LRH would develop a new rundown using the auditors to hand
-And he would have daily conferences with the c/s about the folders and what was happening with the preclears.
+Now, I was directly on his communication lines from 1969 through to
-When he was satisfied that he had a good product, he would have the c/s write up the hcobs -- often from the c/s's notes of conferences he'd had with LRH as the rundown developed. The c/s would also submit a list of the most common errors he'd seen the auditors committing on this new RD and that would be the basis of the RD's correction list.
+When he was satisfied that he had a good product, he would have the
-I was not on that line when they developed the HRD but I would bet that the same procedure applied. Because [[David Mayo]], who would
+I was not on LRH's comm line when they developed the HRD and nowhere
-have been the c/s on this pilot, "wrote the issues," his initials followed LRH's on the ascription at the bottom.
+near the door to his office, but I would bet
-Compiling the RD's issues would have been a cooperative effort involving LRH and David Mayo.
+I'd say that the same procedure applied to the NOTs materials
-To say that David Mayo wrote the HRD issues is a misstatement.
+Kenneth G. Urquhart
-−
-Yes, he sat at a typewriter and typed up the HCOBs' texts from his notes of discussing the sessions with LRH. He would have sent these
-draft issues to LRH for approval. If LRH didn't want to approve anything he didn't. If he wanted something changed, he changed it
-or had it changed. If David Mayo had had an idea of his own and wanted it added to the RD or to an HCOB above and beyond what
-LRH had uttered in their meetings, David would have run it by LRH before sending it in for approval to issue.
-−
-I'd say that the same procedure applied to the NOTs materials.
-−
-[[Ken Urquhart]]