This is the old (read-only) version of the site running Mediwiki 1.25

Difference between revisions of "Thread:Talk:Two Happiness Rundowns/How LRHL. Ron Hubbard Developed Rundowns"

From Scientolipedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(New thread: How LRH Developed Rundowns)
 
m
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
 +
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.  
  
−
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
 +
1975, 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. 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
 +
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 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
 +
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.
  
−
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]]
+

Revision as of 09:13, January 14, 2016

On 8 January 2016 Kenneth G. Urquhart wrote the following comment on Max Hauri's entry. Antony A Phillips (talk) 03:13, January 14, 2016 (CSTChurch of Spiritual Technology (Senior to, and part of the corporate structure of the churches of Scientology)) :

In my day, LRHL. Ron Hubbard would develop a new rundown using the auditors to hand locally to begin the experimental auditingThe application of Scientology processes and procedures to someone by a trained auditor. (Dianetics & Scientology Technical Dictionary (C) 1975).He would work with the c/s who was in charge1. harmful energy or force accumulated and stored within the reactive mind, resulting from the conflicts and unpleasant experiences that a person has had. Auditing discharges this charge so that it is no longer there to affect the individual. (Scn AD)..more of the auditors but LRHL. Ron Hubbard 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 communication1. the consideration and action of impelling an impulse or particle from source point across a distance to receipt point with the intention of bringing into being at the receipt point a duplication and understanding of that which emanated from the source point. (HCOB 5 Apr 73)...more lines from 1969 through to 1975, 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 LRHL. Ron Hubbard and the C/S2. the C/S is the case supervisor. He has to be an accomplished and properly certified auditor and a person trained additionally to supervise cases...MORE which I saw. I knew when they were both in consultation or briefing in LRHL. Ron Hubbard's office as my office was a couple of yards from his. I became very familiar with the process and system LRHL. Ron Hubbard 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 LRHL. Ron Hubbard as the rundown developed. Once the two of them had agreed on the form and processes and policies for the new rundown, LRHL. Ron Hubbard 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 LRHL. Ron Hubbard's commSlang, short for - communication lineThe military type of organization form whereby there is a definite ascending and descending chain of command. Orders pass from top management down the line of command and compliances and data pass on up without by-passing the chain of command. (Modern Management Defined (c) L. Ron Hubbard, 1976) 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 LRHL. Ron Hubbard's on the ascription at the bottom. Compiling the RD's issues would have been a cooperative effort involving LRHL. Ron Hubbard 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 LRHL. Ron Hubbard. He would have sent these draft issues to LRHL. Ron Hubbard for approval. If LRHL. Ron Hubbard 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 HCOBHubbard Communications Office Bulletin (technical bulletin) Also colloquially referred to as "red on white" HCOB's are always red ink on white paper. above and beyond what LRHL. Ron Hubbard had uttered in their meetings, David would have runUndergo processing. (Science of Survival, p.75) it by LRHL. Ron Hubbard before sending it in for approval to issue.

I'd say that the same procedure applied to the NOTsNew Era Dianetics for OT's. Done in two main sections after OT III. Audited NOTS (OT V) and Solo NOTS (OT VI & VII with OT VI being the course that trains the pre-OT how to solo audit NOTS) Note: OT IV is the OT Drug Rundown. materials

Kenneth G. Urquhart

Retrieved from "https://upgrade.scientolipedia.org/index.php?title=Thread:Talk:Two_Happiness_Rundowns/How_LRHL._Ron_Hubbard_Developed_Rundowns&oldid=18153"