DeadFile.ivysubs

Clearing Archive Roboposter roboposter at lightlink.com
Tue Nov 15 18:06:03 EST 2016


This file is in a corner of "Homer's Archives" called ivysubs, containing
some past posts to IVys private email list, ivy-subscribers, which is open
to people who subscribe to the paper magazine IVy (International Viewpoints).
This file might occasionally (randomly) be posted to newsgroup
alt,clearing.technology.
Hope you find it interesting and/or of value.
****************************************************************************
***************
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 12:01:31 +0200
To: ivy-subscribers at lightlink.com
From: Antony Phillips <ivy at post8.tele.dk>
Subject: IVySU: Deadfile
:
:
:
Sender: owner-ivy-subscribers at lightlink.com
:

**   ivy-subscribers relaying   **

A subscriber to ivy-subscribers asked me about Deadfile.  Here is a brief
summary
More details, see Policy Letter 7th June 1965, Green Vol I page 415.
Title " Entheta Letters and the Dead File, Handling of"

The problem it was intended to solve is described (roughly) in Ron's words:
"Every movement amongst Man runs into the phenomena that when you try to
help some people - or help them - they react like mad dogs.Trying to help
them is like trying to give a mad dog medicine. You might be bitten."

When seeing an attempt to help people, to improve conditions, some attack,
in various ways.  And it was the sales personnel and executives who mostly
got the rough end of this.  One of the things Ron devised for handling this
was a policy that Registrars, etc (people who faced the public) should be
"rested" (given a post not facing the public) occasionally.

But the above policy handles by taking all attacking type letters
(communications), labelling them (a rubber stamp was to be made for the
purpose) 
"ENTHETA
TO Central Files
TO Address then
TO ETHICS DEAD FILES"

When it went to Central Files, the persons file was taken out, replaced by
a dummy which said that person had been dead filed (to stop the person
getting in the system again), and sent to address who took out the address
plate (as it was then, before computers) out, and sent the file on to Ethics.

At the same time all other (likely) Scientology organisations were
informed, so the person did not get into the organisation and its mailing
lists again.

The admin of this takes a three or four pages of fairly small type.

Having got dead filed, it was difficult to get it revoked, as any letter a
deadfiled person wrote to the org, would, by policy get dead filed without
being read, however polite.

Here is a tip for those who can not get off the mailing list of a
Scientology Org.

Write a brief entheta letter to the org. If they follow policy you need not
write more than "I think Scientology is a dirty, unspeakable, racket"
(making sure the name and address the org is sending to is clearly stated).
You should then be dead filed, and not receive any more mailings or
personal communications

I got shown a recent example where some one was told they had been dead
filed. That action was off policy. When you dead file a person he or she is
not communicated to any more. Full stop.
The example I got shown (maybe the sender will post it, work out what tone
level the writer is writing at) was in my opinion an entheta letter, and
the receiver might be well advised to dead file the writer!

Personally I am more and more against the practice of disconnecting from
people (that is, announcing to the person you have disconnected, it smacks
a little of service fac).  But I am certainly in favour of being a little
thoughtful about who you communicate with and how much. Your
communications are valuable, theta, creative things. Seed. Try and sow them
on fertile ground.

Hi,

Ant

**
Originations, comments, to the list, send to ivy-subscribers at lightlink.com
Home Page: http://home8.inet.tele.dk/ivy/ - with extensive links to FZ!
**

***************
The letter sent from an AOSH was as follows:
>From: "AOSHxxxxx" <xxxxx at mail.xx>
>Reply-To: <xxxx at mail.xx>
>To: 
>Subject: SS  [was the senders name]
>Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 00:47:13 +0200
>
>Date: Wed Oct 10 20:03:21 2001
>         charset="iso-8859-1"
>XXX
>
>
>Boy! I'd Like to know that you have just been DEAD FILE is a STANDARD
>Scientology Church, bloody Squirel!
>
>Honestly!
>(I hope you come to sense someday! MEDITATER!)
>SS
>ADDO OFF AOSHxx
**************************
His earlier letter read in part:
**************
> >>State of CLEAR ?? Well... I see! Look I don't think this is funny, are 
>you
> >>going to A Squirel group and are you getting auditing over there ?
> >>If so, who is auditing you ? where is this ? Do you really think that 
>you
> >>attested to the STATE OF CLEAR officially and standardly ? Let me tell 
>you
> >>something if you attested in free zones, This is so gross and not OK!!! 
>I
> >>think you better knock that Off now and go to a standard church before 
>it
> >>is
> >>too late. I don't want to have to DEAD FILE you.
> >>You are just destroying yourself by going there! If you want to get some
> >>Scientology practice then go to a standard church, but no where else. If
> >>this is not your Idea, then don't go anywhere else. Squirels are just
> >>making
> >>this civilization nuts! Not better then psychs... Please understand
> >>that
> >>this is no good for you, I don't know how they do it over there but it 
>is
> >>just not LRH's technology and you will not get anywhere. You maybe are
> >>spending your money (If the result is anything) to destroy yourself and
> >>NOTHING else. LRH made the bridge in a very persiced way and if you just
> >>switch around a few things, it can even kill you! So, I demand that you 
>go
> >>into a STANDARD Scientology church and handle yourself in ethics, to go
> >>back
> >>onto the standard bridge. This is the only advice I can give you!
> >>

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Nov 15 18:06:03 EST 2016 
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/ivysubs/DeadFile.ivysubs
Send mail to archive at lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but 
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.



More information about the Clear-L mailing list