Ah the ratings, the laughter, the joy it would bring to wogs. 

I must say I do feel for the poor SSO at Plymouth having to do duck decorating rather than helping her fellow staff members get trained & processed, but, hey, Duck Decor does fall under her hat, I'm sure there's gotta be a policy on it…

Remedy of Maybes

@Aquamarine: Thank you for duplicating and acknowledging my post regarding the High D case vs. those just in a labyrinth of maybes.  It appears that there are 3 groups of Scientologist at this moment:

1) The High D cases, together with the salvation-obsessed and the FPRD cases, which constitute the relatively small cadre of die-hard DM devotees,

2) Those stuck in maybes, which constitutes the vast majority of those still on lines, on staff or on the fence, and

3) Those who have worked through this on their own and are either under the radar or declared Indies.

I have great respect and empathy for groups 2 and 3, and consider that it is group 3’s responsibility to help those in group 2 wherever and whenever practical because it’s actually a very easy thing to do when a high-ARC, gradient approach is employed. In fact, I have had great success not even indicating any data outside the person’s reality, as such is reactively resisted as “entheta” or “enemy lines”. The line of least resistance is like a Zen session – where only strings are pulled, questions are asked on only those issues where the person is already cognizant of contrary facts that hang them up in a maybe.

As you pull strings and make it safe for them to give honest answers FROM THEIR REALITY, you afford them the opportunity to have a genuine LOOK for themselves without jeopardizing any stable data they are as yet unwilling to relinquish. By just pulling strings, indicating WHICH outpoint THEY are observing, and employing some high-ARC, playful “bate and badger” only when appropriate, recognizing rightness and NEVER op-terming, you begin to see by their indicators the pain and anguish of betrayal, followed by a  “something is rotten in Denmark” cognition being verbalized.  Thereafter, a reference to The Creed of the Church of Scientology is adequate to send them on their way to make their own further decisions about the situation (see http://www.faqs.org/faqs/scientology/users/codes_and_creeds/):

We of the Church believe:

That all men of whatever race, color or creed were created with equal rights;

That all men have inalienable rights to their own religious practices and their performance;

That all men have inalienable rights to their own lives;

That all men have inalienable rights to their sanity;

That all men have inalienable rights to their own defense;

That all men have inalienable rights to conceive, choose, assist  or support their own organizations, churches and governments;

That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others;

That all men have inalienable rights to the creation of their own kind;

That the souls of men have the rights of men;

That the study of the mind and the healing of mentally caused ills should not be alienated from religion or condoned in non-religious fields;

And that no agency less than God has the power to suspend or set aside these rights, overtly or covertly.

And we of the Church believe:

That man is basically good;

That he is seeking to survive;

That his survival depends upon himself and upon his fellows and his attainment of brotherhood with the universe.

And we of the Church believe that the laws of God forbid man:

To destroy his own kind;

To destroy the sanity of another;

To destroy or enslave another's soul;

To destroy or reduce the survival of one's companions or one's group.

And we of the Church believe that the spirit can be saved and that the spirit alone may save or heal the body.

I'm no prude but I just re-read this this duck promo from the viewpoint of a non-Scientologist  knowing nothing whatsoever about the RCS or L Ron Hubbard, and what immediately communicated to me was. "What a bunch of oafs". 

In fact, the RCS's fundraising activities are their own reality show.  Honestly, think about it: no one never in the RCS would believe that this stuff actually goes on in a church.  We should send this duck thing to every church and synagogue we know.

Mike, what I just posted in response to Graduated's "Maybe" post should actually be at the end of the comments so that it is sequitur to the previous comm.

Graduated, OMG, yes, the "maybe"s!!  All those "maybe"s holding up Beingness.This is ringing bells all over the place for me. This is a very helpful post.

 LRH, on the Route To Infitity tapes somewhere,  gets into how you can just make people do anything you want by giving them lots and lots of  Maybe's.  You keep this up and they just become nothing because they can't emanate from anyplace.  It is extremely abberative, he says, and if you keep this up long enough, at some point they just cave in completely and say, "YES – ANYTHING!!  I'LL DO ANYTHING!"  I forget which RTI tape it is but he makes a huge point out of it, that it doesn't matter,  i.e., is not particulary abberative, WHAT a thetan decides, but if he CAN'T decide ongoingly it has serious case reprecussions.  Oh, now I recall: its either the Decision tape or the Decision, Cause & Effect tape on the RTI.  

So now we have these guys really caved in, going along with anything, degraded, quacking like ducks, and its all "so theta". This is real evil, right before our eyes.

 I really GET the handling now of introducing truth on a gradient, pointing out the lies on a gradient.  Its the ONLY thing which will get these people off of their "maybe"s, and then they will have their own cognitions.

I'm a "solution oritented" type, so thanks again Mike, Marty, and to all who post. You all really help me!

You nailed it, Statpush.  I have such charge on those phrases now.