Martin Luther

Commenting on Scientology, Inside and Outside the Church

Auditing Over the Internet

Apparently, I’ve stepped in it, as I often do. In my comments regarding auditing over the Internet, I’ve hit upon an unsuspected “sacred cow” of the Independent Field. Though there are those who disagree with this practice, those who advocate for it are exceptionally vocal. So let me state for the record: If you want to audit over the Internet, be my guest. And if you believe you’ve been helped by being audited over the Internet, far be it from me to invalidate your gains. There. I don’t think I could be more clear than that.

That said, for the rest of you, including those who may be contemplating participation in such an arrangement, let me explain to you why I believe it is a bad idea.

First, auditing over the Internet is auditing on a via. I can’t imagine anyone could argue about that, but I’m sure some will. I remember back when I did the HAS course in 1976, we drilled TR-1. One of the purposes of that drill was to be able to deliver a command to the PC without using vias. No waving of hands or gesturing as you talk, no raising of eyebrows unconsciously, etc. No vias. You sit there across from the PC, who’s in the same room as you, three feet or so away, and ask, “Do birds fly?” and “Do fish swim?”. That was an integral piece of auditing tech, basic to all future delivery of processing to PCs. Maybe I’m wrong and LRH relaxed that requirement, but I don’t think so.

Second, auditing over the Internet involves the use of the Internet as the via. Now, let me tell you a couple of things about the Internet. I know these things because I’ve been assembling, programming and dealing with computers since 1974. Auditing over the Internet involves at least you as the preclear/pre-OT having a web camera connected to the Internet so the auditor can see you. A web camera is like a motion picture camera, except a lot cheaper and lower quality. A typical motion picture camera or web camera delivers what looks like continuous images of whatever it’s pointed at. At least that’s what you’d think. But you’d be wrong. These devices instead deliver single frame photos at a rate of speed roughly 30 frames a second or so. When you put them together as you do with a motion picture, they look like moving images, but in fact they are individual images, stitched together and shown in order. Sounds okay, doesn’t it? Except it’s not. In the case of a web camera, you’re sending those images over the Internet, one at a time. Now, the Internet was not designed to deal with this kind of traffic from the outset. It was originally designed to deal with text and such, which it does very well. The problem with transmitting video over the Internet is that each individual image is transmitted separately and may take a different route and pass through a variety of computers and networks before it gets to the auditor on the other end. Each of the images transferred is numbered, and when it gets to the auditor’s computer, the auditor’s computer attempts to reassemble them in order, to make the full motion picture possible. Unfortunately, since each image can take a different route, some images may be delayed in arriving. And hard as the auditor’s computer tries, it simply may not be able to fit all the images in in order before it begins to display the whole motion picture. Some images may never arrive. Others may arrive, but too late. They’re dropped from the movie. The result is jerky video. If you’ve ever seen a Skype phone call, or ever seen a jerky Youtube or other video on the Internet, you’ve witnessed what I’m talking about. I just explained to you why that happens.

Third, general purpose computers, like your laptop, your desktop, your iPad or your iPhone are meant to do a variety of things at once. There are all kinds of processes going on in the background as you read email, compose a letter, or work with a spreadsheet. While your computer is dealing with your keystrokes as you type, they’re also checking for new emails, or scanning for viruses, or indexing documents on your hard drive, or checking to see if the printer is ready to print something, etc. These are all “general purpose” computers, and they have a multitude of processes occurring simultaneously. If you’ve ever had to wait (even a fraction of a second) for your computer to respond when you interact with is, you’ve actually witnessed what I’m talking about. Moreover, a virus or similar program somehow installed on your computer without your knowledge can slow things down even more. These kinds of slow-downs can strongly affect performance or create jerky response, just like I mentioned above in my second point. Welcome to jerky Skype calls or jerky Youtube videos again.

So these last two items can, separately or together, affect not only how well your (the preclear’s) computer responds in picking up and transmitting images of you, but also the auditor’s computer in showing video and needle reactions. Is that what you want? Do you want to have the auditor, because of the Internet and his and your computers, miss a read or a facial expression indicating pain or emotional charge?

Of course, Internet auditors will probably swear they’ve never seen this happen, or that such events are minor for one reason or another. Yeah, okay. But I’m telling you what the liabilities are.

Now, if you’re still not convinced, let me put it this way. Let’s assume that LRH is still alive. And let’s assume I’m putting together a CSW to him to allow me to audit over the Internet. Being an honest sort of bloke, I tell him all the advantages of auditing over the Internet, but I also include the above data as well. What do you think his response will be? If you say that he’ll do anything but disapprove it, you’re lying to yourself. And if you say that not only will he disapprove it, he’ll also send me to cramming for even asking the question, your understanding of the way LRH thinks is pretty good. And if you think he’ll cancel all my certificates and make me redo all my auditor training, congratulations! You know LRH exceptionally well!

Again, I’m simply informing you of the facts. Any reasonably knowledgeable computer geek can testify to the last two of my points and the TRs bulletins will testify to my first point. As to LRH’s responses, those are hypothetical. But I’ll bet I’m right about those, too.

If you choose to audit or receive auditing over the Internet, the decision is yours. You have the facts. Proceed at your own risk.


Single Post Navigation

7 thoughts on “Auditing Over the Internet

  1. I agree completely that you should not expose yourself to auditing over the Internet. I am sure that you will find a competent auditor to deliver auditing to you locally when you are ready to get auditing again.

    Meanwhile, those of us who have analyzed the issues you discuss and have worked out solutions for them are busy every day delivering auditing to pcs who need and want the gains that we can deliver.

    You are actually providing a service to us as we do not have time to service anyone who is skeptical or uncertain and needs persuasion or approval from self appointed authorities or LRH himself.

    Our pcs come from those who think for themselves and are often referred to us by existing pcs. If you can discourage those who are only looking idly, we will have more time to service those who are literally demanding the level of service which we provide.

    Telepathic auditing is not a sacred cow except to those who have had gains from it. Yes, they are quite vocal, but miracles tend to cause that reaction.

    There are many ex Scientologists and non Scientologists who think that Scientology cannot produce miracles except to the deluded faithful. If you have experienced gains from auditing, you will know how ridiculous that sounds.

    Auditing over the internet may not light your fire and OT auditing may not be your cup of tea either, but some of us are happy to use our training to deliver both and to see new OTs being made every few weeks.

  2. Ron Bible on said:

    Paul you said that auditing over the inernet is using a via, what do you think using a body to deliver a communication is using? Is that not a via. It is a via your familar with so you do not accept the data that your using a via. Along the track there have been terrible wars between OT’s and meat body societies. You sir are most definetly part of a meat body group. OT is not for you. So continue to rant away against what you cannot become. Keep attempting to stop others from reaching the state of OT, fortunatly you do not have enough ability to stop internet auditing. That is the way of the future of auditing and if you were OT you would have cognited on that.
    You keep making the assumption that you know what LRH would do. What an arrogant little man you are. How is that even possible for you to imagine what LRH would do when your imaginations best funcition is to STOP beings going OT. So what is it that you want to have? I think it is a universe that is on your reality level, how sad. Mine is a number of Universes that are filled with OT’s.
    Yes am beating you up, someone needs to before you harm others. You have one bit of data out of trillions and are basing your imortality on that. For you that is sad, for you to push your stupid ideas onto others is as criminal as DM is being. I fear you will have to share in his fate. If you continue in this madness your little thetan will be taken away.

    Peace Love & Harmony (try it it is good)

    Ron Bible CLVI OTVII+

    • Ron, as a fellow Scientologist, I love you, but there are some serious outpoints here. Of course you can go OT without Internet auditing. Scientologists, using standard technology, have been doing that for many years, including LRH himself. Or are you invalidating all those OTs? And despite saying you’re a BC auditor, and despite the fact I pointed this out in my reply to you on my blog, you insist on make evaluative and invalidative comments (and they’re getting more vile). So consider this your cramming order. Word Clear Method 2 “The Auditor’s Code” and Clay Demo point 2 “I promise not to invalidate the preclear’s case or gains in or out of session.” While you’re at it, you might consider doing something about the rampant typos, misspellings, improper punctuation, poor grammar, etc. that make your posts difficult to read. It’s really out Comm.

      • Theta Clear on said:

        Forgive me for being rude here Nancy, but I would also include an order for the cramming officer to “Run some Black Dianetics” on the subject. I am sure he will, THEN, get the point.

    • Theta Clear on said:

      “Class IV, OT VII+” ????????????


    • Theta Clear on said:

      That was meant for Ron Bible.

  3. Ron Bible on said:

    My spelling is very poor, I have thanked the gods many times for spell check. I will repeat I am not your auditor nor would I want to be. You are in no position to give me a cramming order, you take much too much onto your shoulders. There is much I would like to say, the fact is you would not be able to duplicate it; so I will say no more. My statement stands more then ever I am convinced you work for DM and his church, purpose to put entheta into the free scientology groups to disrupt the production that is occuring. Some wise man once said “suffer not a witch to live”!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: