From: squirrel@echelon.alias.net (The Tech Lion)
Subject: FZ BIBLE - LEVEL 3 COURSEPACK [5/7]
Date: 14 Nov 1999 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <9fbce6b1505e0a022fc62672761f1a67@anonymous.poster>
Sender: Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
Organization: FreeZone Bible Association
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
Comments: Please report problems with this automated remailing service to <squirrel-admin@echelon.alias.net>. The message sender's identity is unknown, unlogged, and not replyable.
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

ACADEMY LEVEL III COURSEPACK: Part 5 of 7

***************************************

Continuing our quest to spread the Tech on the internet,
we bring you the Academy Level 3 coursepack from the late
1980s, in 7 parts.

The full table of contents is in Part 1 only.

To see the proper formatting, use a fixed-pitch font such as
Courier to view this file.

Looking forward to a Tech-filled Millenium,

-The Tech Lion 

********************

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE 

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoners are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heretics.  By their standards, all Christians, 
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judaism form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old 
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.  

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

************************

PART 5

16. HCOB   29 Apr. 1980R      Prepared Lists, Their Value and
                                Purpose

17. HCOB   14 Mar. 1971R      F/N Everything

18. HCOB    3 July 1971R      Auditing by Lists

19. HCOB    4 Dec. 1978       How to Read Through an F/N

20. HCOB   15 Oct. 1973RC     Nulling and F/Ning Prepared Lists
                              C/S Series 87RC

21. HCOB    6 Dec. 1973       The Primary Failure
                              C/S Series 90

22. HCOB   22 Apr. 1980R      Assessment Drills


******************************************************************

16. HCOB   29 Apr. 1980R      Prepared Lists, Their Value and
                              Purpose


      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

     HCO BULLETIN OF 29 APRIL 198OR
          REVISED 26 JULY 1986

Remimeo


       PREPARED LISTS, THEIR VALUE
              AND PURPOSE


No matter how complicated or confusing the environment is 
getting, if you have a stable datum of exact action it can see 
you through.

The prepared list provides the auditor with a stable action when 
a session or case is confusing and can bring things under 
control.

The idea of such lists and their development are original to 
Dianetics and Scientology. They are made possible because these 
subjects embrace the full extent of thought, the spirit and 
actual and potential aberration. Thousands of hours of research 
and development have gone into these lists. Thousands of case 
histories have been reviewed and condensed to make the lists 
possible. They are, in themselves, a considerable tour de force.

They have often meant the difference between a failed case and a 
spectacular result. Just as they are important, a knowledge of 
them and skill in their use is vital to auditing success.

                HISTORY

Probably the oldest "prepared list" is the White Form (now called 
the ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET-HCOB 24 June 78R). This provided a 
series of questions which would give one the background of the 
preclear. It dates from 1950. By it one can get the probable 
this-life areas of the preclear's heaviest charge. Done on a 
meter, it provides a case entrance.

Self Analysis was written in 1951. It contains processing lists a 
preclear could run on himself.

Group Auditing materials of the middle '50s contained lists of 
commands which were run on groups.

The "Joburg" of 1961 is probably the next historical point. It 
was a list of the possible withholds a preclear might have. It 
was called the "Joburg" because it was developed in Johannesburg, 
South Africa.

The "L1" was probably next. The original gave a list of session 
rudiments which might have gone out and enabled the auditor to 
get the session rudiments back in. It is still in use as "L1C" or 
"List One C."

The "Green Form" was developed in the early '60s so that Qual 
Review at Saint Hill would have a tool to analyze a case.

Correction lists for various auditing actions began to appear. 
These corrected an action in progress that had gone awry.

In 1973, the famous "C/S 53" (meaning "Case Supervisor Series 
53") was devised and continued to be improved and reissued.

Today there are dozens of prepared lists. There is even a 
prepared list to repair prepared lists in general.

         THEORY OF PREPARED LISTS

A prepared list is an assembly of the majority of things which 
can be wrong in a case, an auditing action or a session.

Such lists are quite remarkable, actually. Only a thorough 
knowledge of aberration makes such a list possible. When you look 
over the extent of prepared lists, you will see that they contain 
a grasp of the subject of aberration never before available.

                  USE

While an auditor is expected to have studied and mastered all 
this theory, it is a bit much to expect that in the confusion of 
a case or session gone wrong he will be able to spot instantly, 
without help, exactly WHAT has gone wrong. Prepared lists, where 
they exist, and his E-Meter will sort this out for him. All the 
auditor has to have is a general insight that something is going 
wrong, know in general what is being handled in the case, know 
what list to use and then, with good TRs and metering, do an 
assessment of the prepared list. Usually the trouble will come 
right, since the exact point will have been located. It is 
sometimes enough to merely indicate the point found to discharge 
it somewhat. One can F/N what is found or one can go into very 
wide, extensive handling. The point is, the use of the prepared 
list has spotted the trouble. What is demanded of the auditor or 
C/S is WHICH prepared list to use, but this is determined by what 
has been going on.

        TYPES OF PREPARED LISTS

There are four general types of prepared lists. These are

A. An ANALYSIS list. This is a type of prepared list which 
analyzes a case broadly or analyzes a session. The purpose of it 
is to find out what to address in the case in order to program 
it. The White Form, the Green Form and the C/S 53 can all be used 
for this purpose. There are other such lists and there is even a 
prepared list to debug production.

B. A direct AUDITING list. Prepared lists exist which deliver 
direct auditing commands or questions which, run on the pc, 
produce an auditing result. The lists of Self Analysis and the 
various Confessional lists form this type of prepared list.

C. A CORRECTION list. This type of list corrects an ongoing 
action. Examples are the Word Clearing Correction List, the Int 
Rundown Correction List, the Dianetic Correction List. There is a 
bit of a gray area in this type of list as one can also use some 
of them for analysis as in the case of a Course Supervisor 
Correction List or a Student Correction List. The C/S 53 can also 
serve as a correction list. The real difference is what the list 
is being used for -- to analyze to find out what to program or
start or to correct something already in progress.

D. DRILL lists. These are used in training as dummy lists to get 
an auditor used to handling the meter and prepared lists. Such 
lists are contained in The Book of E-Meter Drills.

           METHOD OF HANDLING

There are three methods of handling prepared lists, depending on 
the type of list.

There is simply the method of asking the questions in sequence 
and getting the answer from the preclear. This would apply to a 
White Form or to auditing prepared lists as in Self Analysis or 
in Group Auditing. Very few lists are handled in this way.

The second way is called "Method 3" wherein the list is assessed 
on a meter, and when a read is noted, the meter-reading question 
is taken up with the preclear and F/Ned. Method 3 is covered in 
HCOB 3 July 71, AUDITING BY LISTS.

The third way is called "Method 5." This type of assessment 
assesses the whole prepared list rapidly, without getting the 
preclear to talk, and the reads are then noted. The largest read 
or reads are then taken up and F/Ned. Method 5 is covered in HCOB 
3 July 71, AUDITING BY LISTS.

When using a correction list on an OT III or above, the auditor 
must know and apply the tech given in HCOB 4 July 79, HANDLING 
CORRECTION LISTS ON OTs. This HCOB concerns the handling of 
reading questions and applies regardless of the method of 
assessment used.

            TRs AND METERING

Whether or not a prepared list reads depends upon the auditor's 
TRs and metering. At one time or another Case Supervisors have 
had a great deal of trouble with this. Accuracy as to what really 
read was greatly in question. This came to view on Flag in the 
early '70s when prepared lists that had been assessed by Class IV 
trainees were then reassessed, same list, same pc, shortly after 
the first list assessment, by Class XIIs. Totally different 
results were found -- lists on which few or no reads were obtained 
by the Class IV trainees were found to be very live by the Class 
XIIs. The difference of quality of TRs and metering were what 
made the difference with the prepared list response. HCOB 22 Apr. 
1980R contains the drills which remedy this. It is the TRs and 
metering of the auditor that makes a prepared list reliable, not 
the list itself.

              C/S SERIES 53

The champion list of all time is the C/S 53. On one page any 
general thing that can be aberrated in a thetan has been 
assembled. There are two forms of it -- Short Form for preclears
who know the terms and Long Form for preclears who are 
unindoctrinated (they are the same lists but the Short Form is a 
single word and the Long Form is a full question).

A Director of Processing giving a D of P interview can use one of 
these and obtain enough material to enormously help a Case 
Supervisor. It is not the only D of P interview action but it is 
very helpful when used.

An auditor can debug a program or a session with it.

It can analyze a case for programming and it can also be used to 
correct a program or to correct a session.

Originally it was developed to handle high and low tone arm 
cases, and although it still says this, it also says it can 
"correct case outnesses." And today, this is its greatest use.

PRIORITY of handling outnesses is a vital part of C/S 53. The 
first three groups of items -- A (Interiorization outnesses), B 
(List errors) and C (rudiments) -- give the necessary order of 
handling. If Int is reading, nothing else can be handled until it 
is. List errors take the next priority. Then rudiments. If one 
were to try to repair a case out of sequence, a mess could occur. 
So this prepared list also gives the sequence in which outnesses 
must be handled.

It is always done Method 5, whether it is being assessed once 
through or taken to an F/Ning assessment. It is never done Method 
3. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 78R, C/S SERIES 53, USE OF)

The main fault in using a C/S 53 is overuse -- an auditor reaching 
for it when he gets in trouble instead of improving the auditor's 
own TRs, metering or knowledge of programming in the first place.

But the C/S 53 is one of the most valuable tools an auditor or a 
Case Supervisor has.

           GENERAL CASE HANDLING

The prepared lists of all types place in the hands of the Case 
Supervisor and the auditor a procedure by which a case can be 
analyzed and programmed.

Some auditing can be done direct from prepared lists.

Actions can be corrected from prepared lists.

        WORD CLEARING PREPARED LISTS

It can happen that a prepared list gets stalled on misunderstood 
words.

For many prepared lists there are also full Word Clearing lists 
which can be done on the pc.

At one time it was thought that before one did a list one should 
ALWAYS word clear it. However, this has the liability that a pc 
who is in one kind of trouble can't sit still until a full Word 
Clearing action is done.

The amount of trouble which came from prepared lists came more 
from assessing and metering errors than it did from misunderstood 
words.

When one is using a prepared list on a pc who has never had it 
word cleared, it is usually enough to check that the read isn't 
coming from a Mis-U.

Early in a pc's auditing, about the time he gets a C/S-1, the 
more critical prepared lists should be word cleared and the fact 
noted in his folder. But when one is doing this Word Clearing, 
tone arm action or significant reads should also be noted. One is 
liable to think he is word clearing whereas he is actually 
assessing.

True, there are a lot of tech words on a prepared list that the 
pc isn't likely to know. Unfortunately, the discoveries of 
Scientology exceed common language and require terms of their 
own. But a pc catches on to this quite rapidly. They are new 
ideas to him (even though he has been living with them all the 
eons of his existence). When the word is cleared, the idea is 
also thrown into action. So it is important to note meter reads 
and tone arm action when clearing the words of prepared lists.

No hard and fast rules can be drawn on this point of word 
clearing prepared lists. If you have already word cleared the key 
words of a key prepared list before you need it, thank your 
stars. Otherwise, carry on and hope.

                 SUMMARY

A Case Supervisor and an auditor owe it to themselves to have a 
good command of this subject of prepared lists. There are many 
issues on the subject. There are dozens of prepared lists.

Knowing what prepared lists exist is a vital step for a Case 
Supervisor and auditor. Knowing what each is used for is equally 
important. Knowing which lists have Word Clearing lists already 
prepared is of assistance.

One has to know enough general tech in order to select what 
prepared list to use.

The ability to assess, as it applies to TRs and metering, is 
extremely important in using prepared lists.

When it comes to analyzing, auditing and correcting cases and 
actions, the prepared lists are a jewel box that glitters with 
potential success.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations

LRH:RTRC:dr.rw.ja



******************************************************************

17. HCOB   14 Mar. 1971R      F/N Everything


      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

      HCO BULLETIN OF 14 MARCH 1971R
           REVISED 25 JULY 1973

Remimeo
All Levels


             F/N EVERYTHING


Whenever an auditor gets a read on an item from ruds or a 
prepared list (L1B, L3A, L4B, etc., etc.), IT MUST BE CARRIED TO 
AN F/N.

To fall to do so is to leave the pc with bypassed charge.

When a pc has had several reads on various lists which were none 
of them carried to F/N, it can occur that he will become upset or 
depressed without any other apparent reason. As one has DONE the 
lists without F/Ning each item, one now has the mystery of what 
is wrong?

The error is reading items from ruds or prepared lists cleaned to 
no read but not carried to F/N.

This action (amongst many such refinements) is what makes Flag 
auditing so smooth and indeed makes it Flag auditing.

When an auditor first tries this, he may well think it is 
impossible.

Yet it is simplicity itself. If you know bank structure, you know 
it is necessary to find an earlier item if something does not 
release. What has been found as a read on a prepared list would 
F/N if it were the basic lock. So if it doesn't F/N, then there 
is an earlier (or an earlier or an earlier) lock which is 
preventing it from F/Ning.

So the RULE:

NEVER WALK OFF FROM A READING ITEM ON A RUDIMENT OR A PREPARED 
REPAIR LIST BEFORE YOU CARRY IT DOWN (EARLIER-SIMILAR) TO AN F/N.

Example: ARC break reads. Pc says what it is, auditor does ARCU 
CDEI. If no F/N, auditor asks for an earlier-similar ARC break, 
gets it, ARCU CDEI, etc., until he gets an F/N.

Example: PTP reads. Carry it E/S (earlier-similar) until a PTP 
F/Ns.

Example: L4B: Has an item been denied you? Reads. Answered. No 
F/N. Is there an earlier-similar denied item? Answered. F/N. Go 
on to next reading item on the list.

Example: GF assessed once through for reads. The next C/S must 
take every item on it that read, by two-way comm or other 
process, to an F/N.

So there is a much more general rule:

EVERY ITEM THAT READS MUST F/N.

In Dianetics you get the F/N when you run E/S secondaries or 
engrams to an erasure, F/N Cog VGIs.

In rudiments, every out-rud you get a read on is run E/S to F/N.

On a prepared list, you take each read to an F/N or E/S to F/N.

On an LX list, you run each flow chain to an F/N.

On GF you get, by whatever process, an F/N.

On listing by the laws of listing and nulling, your eventual item 
listed must F/N.

So another rule:

EVERY MAJOR AND MINOR ACTION MUST BE CARRIED TO AN F/N.

There are NO exceptions.

Any exception leaves bypassed charge on the pc.

Also, every F/N is indicated at the conclusion of the action when 
cog is obtained.

You take too soon an F/N (first twitch), you cut the cognition 
and leave bypassed charge (a withheld cognition).

               ----------

I could take any folder and simply write out the ruds and 
prepared list reading items and then audit the pc and carry each 
one to F/N and correct every list so disclosed and wind up with a 
very shining, cool, calm pc.

So "Have reading items been left charged?" would be a key 
question on a case.

              ----------

Using lists or ruds on high or low TAs that are not meant for 
high or low TAs will get you reading items that won't F/N.

So, another rule:

NEVER TRY TO FLY RUDS OR DO L1B ON A HIGH OR LOW TA.

One can talk the TA down (see HCOB on talking the TA down).

Or one can assess L4B.

About the only prepared lists one can assess are the new Hi-Lo TA 
HCOB 13 Mar. 71 and possibly a GF+40 once through for biggest 
read. The biggest read will have a blowdown on it and can 
possibly be brought to F/N. If this occurs, then one also handles 
all other items that read.

              ----------

The most frequent errors in all this are:

  Not taking a read earlier-similar but just checking it and 
  leaving it as "clean."

  Not using Suppress and False on items.

  And of course leaving a pc thinking things are still charged
  by failing to indicate the F/N.

  Indicating an F/N before cog.

  Not going back through the folder to handle ruds and items
  that read but were called "clean" or were simply abandoned.

A pc audited under tension of poor TRs has a hard time and does 
not F/N sometimes, inviting overrun.

The rules then to happy pcs are:

  GOOD TRs.

  F/N EVERYTHING FOUND ON RUDS AND LISTS.

  AUDIT WITH TA IN NORMAL RANGE OR REPAIR IT SO IT IS IN NORMAL
  RANGE.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:mes.nt.rd.gm



******************************************************************

18. HCOB    3 July 1971R      Auditing by Lists


      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

       HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JULY 1971R
         REVISED 22 FEBRUARY 1979

Remimeo
Franchise
All Auditors
Level III Checksheets
Tech/Qual
C/Ses

            SCIENTOLOGY III

           AUDITING BY LISTS

    (Note: We now F/N everything. We do NOT
     tell the pc what the meter is doing.
     This changes "Auditing by Lists" in
     both respects. We do not say to the
     pc "That's clean" or "That reads.")


  Refs:
  HCOB 14 Mar. 71R    F/N EVERYTHING
  HCOB  4 Dec. 77     CHECKLIST FOR SETTING UP
                      SESSIONS AND AN E-METER
  HCOB 24 Jan. 77     TECH CORRECTION ROUNDUP
  HCOB  7 Feb. 79R    E-METER DRILL 5RA -
    Rev. 15.2.79      CAN SQUEEZE
  HCOB  8 Dec. 78 II  GREEN FORM AND EXPANDED
                      GREEN FORM 40RD, USE OF


Use any authorized, published LIST (Green Form for general 
review, L1C for ARC breaks, L4BRA for list errors.)

                METHOD 3

Set the sensitivity for one-third-of-a-dial drop on a correct can 
squeeze per E-Meter Drill 5RA (Ref: HCOB 7 Feb. 79R, E-METER 
DRILL 5RA - CAN SQUEEZE).

Have your meter in a position (line of sight) so you can see the 
list and the needle or you can see the needle and the pc. The 
meter position is important.

Hold the mimeoed list close beside the meter. Have your worksheet 
more to the right. Keep record on your worksheet. Mark the pc's 
name and date on it. Mark what list it is on the worksheet with 
time. It remains in the folder stapled to the worksheet.

Read the question on the list, note if it reads. Do NOT read it 
while looking at the pc, do NOT read it to yourself and then say 
it while looking at the pc. These are the L10 actions and are 
called Method 6, not Method 3. It is more important to see the 
pc's cans than his face as can fiddle can fake or upset reads.

TR 1 must be good so the pc clearly hears it.

You are looking for an INSTANT READ that occurs at the end of the 
exact last syllable of the question.

If it does not read, mark the list X. If the list is being done 
through an F/N and the F/N just continues, mark the question F/N.

If the question reads, do not say, "That reads." Mark the read at 
once (tick, SF, F, LF, LFBD, R/S), transfer the number of the 
question to the worksheet and look expectantly at the pc. You can 
repeat the question by just saying it again if pc doesn't begin 
to talk. He has probably already begun to answer as the question 
was live in his bank, as noted by the meter.

Take down the pc's remarks in shortened form on the worksheet. 
Note any TA changes on the worksheet.

If the pc's answer results in an F/N (cog, VGIs sometimes follow, 
GIs always accompany a real F/N), mark it rapidly on the 
worksheet and say, "Thank you. I would like to indicate your 
needle is floating."

Do NOT wait endlessly for the pc to say more. If you do he will 
go into doubt and find more; also, do NOT chop what he is saying. 
Both are TR errors that are very bad.

If there is no F/N, at the first pause that looks like the pc 
thinks he has said it, ask for an earlier-similar ______, 
whatever the question concerned. Do NOT change the question. Do 
NOT fail to repeat what the question is. "Was there an earlier-
similar restimulation of rejected affinity?" This is the "E/S" 
part of it. You do not leave such a question merely "clean."

It does not matter now if you look at the pc when you say it or 
not. But you can look at the pc when you say it.

The pc will answer. If he comes to a "looks like he thinks he 
said it" and no F/N, you ask the same question as above.

You ask this question -- "Was there an earlier-similar ______"
 -- until you finally get an F/N and GIs. You indicate the F/N.

That is the last of that particular question.

You mark "F/N" on the list and call the next question on the 
list. You call this and other questions without looking at the 
pc.

Those that do not read, you X as out.

The next question that reads, you mark it on the list, transfer 
the question number to the worksheet.

Take the pc's answer.

Follow the above E/S procedure as needed until you get an F/N and 
GIs for the question. Ack. Indicate and return to the mimeoed 
list.

You keep this up until you have done the whole list in this 
fashion.

If you got no read on the list question but the pc volunteers 
some answer to an unreading question, do NOT take it up. Just ack 
and carry on with your mimeoed list.

BELIEVE YOUR METER. Do not take up things that don't read. Don't 
get "hunches." Don't let the pc run his own case by answering 
nonreading items and then the auditor taking them up. Also don't 
let a pc "fiddle the cans" to get a false read or to obscure a 
real one. (Very rare but these two actions have happened.)

                 BIG WIN

If halfway down a prepared list (the last part not yet done) the 
pc on some question gets a wide F/N, big cog, VGIs, the auditor 
is justified in calling the list complete and going to the next 
C/S action or ending the session, except in the case where an 
F/Ning list is C/Sed for, e.g., C/S 53RL. The auditor does not 
violate C/S Series 20, PERSISTENT F/N. If he is intending to F/N 
the list and the pc is on a big win, the auditor would end off, 
let the pc have his win, and then in another, later session, 
continue with the list.

There are two reasons for this -- one, the F/N will usually just 
persist and can't be read through, and further action will tend 
to invalidate the win.

The auditor can also carry on to the end of the prepared list if 
he thinks there may be something else on it, if it does not 
violate C/S Series 20, PERSISTENT F/N.

            GF AND METHOD 3

When a GF is taken up Method 3 (item by item, one at a time), one 
ends it at the first F/N (Ref: HCOB 8 Dec. 78 II, GREEN FORM AND 
EXPANDED GREEN FORM 40RD, USE OF). If the auditor were to 
continue, it can occur that the TA will go suddenly high. The pc 
feels he is being repaired, that the clearing up of the first 
item on the GF handled it and protests. It is the protest that 
sends the TA up.

Thus, a GF is best done by Method 5 (once through for reads, then 
the reads handled).

L1C, L3RF, L7 and other such lists are best done Method 3.

The above steps and actions are exactly how you do Auditing by 
Lists today. Any earlier data contrary to this is canceled. Only 
two points change -- we F/N everything that reads by E/S or a 
process to handle (L3RF requires processes, not E/S to get an 
F/N) or else check for false read if the pc shows manifestations 
of this, and we never tell the pc that it read or didn't read, 
thus putting his attention on the meter.

We still indicate F/Ns to the pc as a form of completion.

L1C and Method 3 are NOT used on high or very low TAs to get them 
down or up.

The purpose of these lists is to clean up bypassed charge.

                ----------

An auditor also indicates when he has finished with the list.

An auditor should dummy drill this action both on a doll and 
bullbait.

                ----------

The action is very successful when precisely done.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt.rd.jk.gm



******************************************************************

19. HCOB    4 Dec. 1978       How to Read Through an F/N


      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

     HCO BULLETIN OF 4 DECEMBER 1978

C/Ses
Class III Auditors
  and above
Supervisors
Cramming Officers


      HOW TO READ THROUGH AN F/N

  Ref:
  HCOB 15 Oct. 73RB   C/S Series 87RB
                      NULLING AND F/Ning PREPARED LISTS


WHEN TAKING A LIST TO F/Ning ASSESSMENT, AN AUDITOR MUST KNOW HOW 
TO READ THROUGH AN F/N.

This is a skill that, up to this point, has been used routinely 
only by highly trained auditors or a few very sharp Class IIIs or 
IVs or above. But with the difficulty auditors have had in F/Ning 
prepared lists, it becomes obvious that, from Class III on up, 
all auditors should be trained to read the meter through an F/N.

It is the answer to almost any difficulty an auditor has had in 
taking a list to F/Ning assessment.

An F/N speeds up or slows down or does different things while 
still remaining an F/N and one can read through it.

It is done like this: The swinging weight of the needle (F/Ning 
from an earlier item) has momentum and it will tend to obscure 
the read on another item. It will almost obscure it, but not 
quite. You'll see the F/N "check" or slow up briefly and then 
continue and this means you have a hot item. Any item that would 
cause an F/N to 11 check" will be hot. The auditor who can read 
through an F/N will spot this and handle the item then and there. 
Then he continues on down the list, missing nothing, handling 
what is there to be handled and, with this skilled metering, 
takes it to a genuinely F/Ning list on assessment. And it doesn't 
take days or even several sessions, necessarily, to do it.

If an auditor can't read through an F/N, he'll miss this. He's 
going down the list, the F/N "checks" or slows and he doesn't see 
it so he goes right on by it. Then, within the next couple of 
items, the F/N kills. He's going to have a hard time F/Ning that 
list because he's now got a suppressed read.

Example:
Auditor in assessing starts with an F/N which continues as he 
goes on down the list calling the items. On, say, item five the 
F/N "checks" or slows briefly. Auditor can't read through an F/N 
so he misses this and goes on by. On about the sixth or seventh 
item the F/N packs up, and the auditor is in a quandary because 
the F/N has turned off but he didn't get a read on items six or 
seven either. Or he may misduplicate the killed F/N as a read on 
items six or seven and attempt to take up one or the other of 
them. Either way he's in for trouble because he's missed the 
actual item and he may even try to handle a wrong item. He's 
going to find it difficult to take that list to an F/Ning 
assessment.

The correct action when an F/N packs up this way is to go back up 
the list and reassess the last several items to find the missed 
read. But one should be able to read through an F/N.

Probably the main reason for pc upset or protest against 
"overrepair" and being handled again and again with repair lists 
lies in this factor alone -- the auditor can't read through an 
F/N. Thus, he misses the charged items and takes up items that 
are uncharged. And the repair goes on interminably, as the 
charged lines are not found and handled.

This is also probably the reason that auditors have been known to 
back off from having to F/N a list. They "know" from experience 
that it is a laborious business.

The truth is it's not necessary for an auditor to labor over 
taking a list to F/Ning assessment. It simply requires good TRs 
and skilled metering, including the ability to read through F/Ns.

An auditor can be trained to see a read through an F/N. The drill 
would be to sit him down in front of a meter with an F/Ning 
student on the cans and assess the prepared lists in The Book of 
E-Meter Drills, spotting each time he gets a "check" or a "slow" 
or any change in an otherwise continuing F/N. He'll find that he 
can read through an F/N and become very adept at this, and from 
then on he won't miss.

You'll have an auditor who is confident of his ability to F/N a 
list accurately and thoroughly in one-half the time (and trauma) 
it would take otherwise.

And far fewer "overrepaired" pcs. ("Overrepaired" pcs are usually 
pcs with actual reads missed and false reads taken up. So 
"overrepair" is really "misrepaired" or "not repaired.")

This is metering at its best and most accurate. We now expect the 
best and most accurate metering from the auditor who is in the 
business of F/Ning prepared lists.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH.jk.gm



******************************************************************

20. HCOB   15 Oct. 1973RC     Nulling and F/Ning Prepared Lists
                              C/S Series 87RC


      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

    HCO BULLETIN OF 15 OCTOBER 1973RC
         RE-REVISED 26 JULY 1986

Remimeo

             C/S Series 87RC

    NULLING AND F/Ning PREPARED LISTS


A prepared list is one which is issued in an HCOB and is used to 
correct cases. There are many of these. Notable amongst them is 
C/S 53 and its corrections.

It is sometimes required of the auditor to F/N such a list. This 
means on calling it that the whole list item by item is to F/N.

                 QUICKIE

It is wrong think that one has to quickie a prepared list and 
"get it to F/N in a hurry." A prepared list should always be done 
so as to get optimum results on a pc.

If a prepared list reveals that more needs to be handled, then it 
should be handled. For example, if "Engram in restimulation?" 
reads, the handling would be to assess an L3RG and handle the 
reads. (Warning: You would not run Dianetics on a Clear or OT. 
For Clears you would assess the L3RG and then simply indicate the 
read. For persons at OT III or above, you would handle the L3RG 
as per HCOB 4 July 79, HANDLING CORRECTION LISTS ON OTs.)

If something hot leaps into view on a prepared list, handle it.

If a more major action were found to be needed, it should be 
programmed for later handling, per list instructions.

              C/S SERIES 53

A C/S Series 53 is always done Method 5. When one is doing a C/S 
53 to F/Ning list, it is assessed Method 5 and then reassessed 
Method 5 until the whole list F/Ns. It is never done Method 3.

     "NONREADING AND NON-F/Ning" LISTS

Now and then you get the extreme oddity of a list selected to 
exactly remedy the case not reading but not F/Ning.

Of course, this might happen if the list did not apply to the 
case (such as an OT prepared list being used on a Grade IV, 
heaven forbid). In the case of lists to correct listing, and in 
particular the C/S 53 Series, it is nearly impossible for this 
situation to occur.

A C/S will very often see that the auditor has assessed the list 
on the pc, has gotten no reads and the list did not F/N.

A "reasonable" C/S (heaven forbid) lets this go by.

Yet he has before him first-class evidence that the auditor:

1. Has out-TRs in general,

2. Has no impingement whatever with TR 1,

3. Is placing his meter in the wrong position in the auditing 
session so that he cannot see it, the pc and his worksheet,

4. That the auditor's eyesight is bad.

One or more of these conditions certainly exist.

To do nothing about it is to ask for catastrophe after 
catastrophe with pcs and to have one's confidence in one's own 
C/Sing deteriorate badly.

An amazing number of auditors cannot make a prepared list read 
for one of the above reasons.

Putting in Suppress, Invalidation or Misunderstood Words on the 
list will either get a read or the list will F/N. If a list does 
not F/N, then the subject of the list is still charged or the 
auditor is doing something wrong with the list.

The moral of this is that prepared lists that do not read, F/N. 
When prepared lists that do not read do not F/N or when the 
auditor cannot get a prepared list to F/N, serious auditing 
errors are present which will defeat a C/S.

In the interest of obtaining results and being merciful on pcs, 
the wise C/S never lets this situation go by without finding what 
it is all about.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations

LRH:RTRC:rw.ja



******************************************************************

21. HCOB    6 Dec. 1973       The Primary Failure
                              C/S Series 90


      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

     HCO BULLETIN OF 6 DECEMBER 1973

Remimeo

            C/S Series 90

         THE PRIMARY FAILURE

  Refs:
  HCOB 28 Feb. 71    C/S Series 24
                     METERING READING ITEMS
  HCOB 15 Oct. 73    C/S Series 87
                     NULLING AND F/Ning
                     PREPARED LISTS


A C/S who cannot get a result on his pcs will find the most 
usual, biggest improvement by getting the offending auditors' 
ASSESSING handled.

We used to say that "the auditor's TRs were out" as the most 
fundamental reason for no results.

This is not specific enough.

THE MOST COMMON REASON FOR FAILED SESSIONS IS THE INABILITY OF 
THE AUDITOR TO GET READS ON LISTS.

Time after time I have checked this back as the real reason.

It became evident when one could take almost any "null" (no read) 
list in a pc's folder, give it and the pc to an auditor who COULD 
assess and get nice reads on it with consequent gain.

Example: Pc has a high TA. C/S orders a C/S 53RF. List is null. 
Pc goes on having a high TA. C/S gets inventive, case crashes. 
Another C/S and another auditor takes the same pc and the same 
list, gets good reads, handles. Case flies again.

What was wrong was

a. The auditor's TR 1 was terrible.

b. The auditor couldn't meter.

                  REMEDY

One takes the above two reference HCOBs and gets their points 
fully checked on the flunking auditor.

The C/S gets the auditor's TR 1 corrected. In doing the latter, 
one may find a Why for the out-TR 1 like a notion one must be 
soft-spoken to stay in ARC or the auditor is imitating some other 
auditor whose TR 1 is faulty.

              QUAL CRAMMING

It can happen that these actions are reported done in Qual and 
the auditor still flubs.

In this case the C/S has to straighten out Qual Cramming by doing 
the above reference HCOBs on the Cramming Officer and getting the 
Cramming Officer's TR 1 ideas unscrewed and straight.

              REQUIREMENTS

It takes correct metering and IMPINGEMENT to make a list read.

If the auditor does not have these, then drug lists, Dianetic 
lists, correction lists, will all go for nothing.

As the prepared list is the C/S's main tool for discovery and 
correction, an auditor failure to get a list to respond or note 
it then defeats the C/S completely.

               SUMMARY

THE ERROR OF AN AUDITOR BEING UNABLE TO GET A LIST TO READ ON A 
METER IS A PRIMARY CAUSE OF C/S FAILURE.

To win, correct it!


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt.jh.gm



******************************************************************

22. HCOB   22 Apr. 1980R      Assessment Drills


      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

     HCO BULLETIN OF 22 APRIL 1980R
          REVISED 26 JULY 1986

Remimeo
Auditors
Surveyors
Examiners
Ethics Officers


           ASSESSMENT DRILLS

  Refs:
  HCOB  6 Dec. 73   C/S Series 90
                    THE PRIMARY FAILURE
  HCOB 28 Feb. 71   C/S Series 24
                    METERING READING ITEMS
  HCOB 15 Oct. 73   C/S Series 87RC
    Rev. 26.7.86    NULLING AND F/Ning
                    PREPARED LISTS
  HCOB 22 July 78   ASSESSMENT TRs
  The Book of E-Meter Drills


According to HCOB 6 Dec. 73, the make or break point of an 
auditor was his ability to get reads on a prepared list. This 
depended upon (a) his TR 1 and (b) his metering.

In 1978 this was further studied, and in HCOB 22 July 78, 
ASSESSMENT TRs, it was found that correct voice pitches had 
everything to do with assessment.

I have just developed drills which improve this ability to make 
lists read and to improve an auditor's auditing in general.

These drills will also be found to have great value to people who 
do surveys, to Examiners and to Ethics Officers.

            LEVELS OF USAGE

There are three levels of usage of these drills:

1. AUDITOR TRAINING: A student auditor must become expert in the 
handling of prepared lists. Training the student to make a list 
read is the first usage level for the Assessment Drills. The 
prerequisites for this level of use are a professional TRs 
Course, Upper Indoc TRs and the drills of the E-Meter Drills 
book.

Before starting the Assessment Drills, the auditor should review 
his E-Meter drills and practice E-Meter Drill 27, E-Meter Drill 
CR0000-4 and, if found necessary, E-Meter Drill CR0000-3. It is 
called to attention that E-Meter Drill 5 of The Book of E-Meter 
Drills has been replaced with E-Meter Drill 5RA and, if not done, 
should be done. Being able to see and read and operate an E-Meter 
has everything to do with getting reads off a prepared list. 
Where an auditor misses, it is simply that he has not adequately 
done the drills in The Book of E-Meter Drills and has not 
practiced up to a point of full, easy familiarity with the E-
Meter. The point of being able to make lists read is pointless 
unless the auditor can set up, handle and read an E-Meter. But 
the skill is easily acquired.

2. SURVEYORS, ETHICS OFFICERS, EXAMINERS (and others not yet 
trained as auditors): The Assessment Drills are extremely 
valuable tools for those whose duties involve asking and getting 
answers to questions, as in surveying and doing interviews. Where 
the skill of asking questions well is needed, but E-Meter 
training hasn't yet been completed, the prerequisite to doing the 
Assessment Drills would be successful completion of TRs 0-4 and 
6-9. Such a student would not do any of the Assessment Drills 
calling for use of the meter.

3. AUDITOR CORRECTION: Sometimes a C/S needs to handle an auditor 
who is having trouble getting prepared lists to read and in such 
a case the Assessment Drills are the answer. So the third use 
level is simply a C/S ordering an auditor through Assessment 
Drills, where his lists are suspect. One is presupposing here 
that the auditor has already done the necessary courses as in (1) 
above.

        ASSESSMENT TRAINING DRILLS

The following drills have the letter Q after them to mean that 
they are used for QUESTIONS. The Q is followed by a number to 
show that they are drilled in that sequence.

In these Q drills, the practice of twinning and any other TR tech 
normal to TRs is followed.


                 TR 1-Q1

NUMBER: TR 1-Q1

NAME: Pitch of the Statement and Question.

POSITION: Coach sitting at the keyboard of a piano or organ or 
any useable instrument, student standing beside instrument.

PURPOSE: To establish the pitch differences of statements and 
questions.

DATA: [picture of a piano keyboard below]

        F      C      G A  C D
             MIDDLE

      [See the file Graph3-1.JPG on the CD for a better version.]

TRAINING PROCEDURE: If the student is a girl, the coach asks her 
to say "apple" as a statement. The coach then strikes the C above 
middle C (as given in the data above) and then the G above middle 
C. If the student is a man, the coach asks him to say "apple" as 
a statement and then strikes middle C and then the F below middle 
C. This is repeated -- saying "apple" and striking the two notes 
until the pitch of a statement can be duplicated by the student. 
(In the event the student has a voice pitch at variance with 
these notes, other notes can be found and used by the coach so 
long as the higher note is first and the second note is four or 
five whole notes below the first note. It must sound like a 
statement with the higher, then lower note.) Once the student has 
grasped this and can duplicate it, have the student use other 
two-syllable words (or single-syllable words preceded by an 
article), using these notes of the statement. Then, using these 
two notes, have the student make up sentences as statements, the 
bulk of the sentence said at the pitch of the higher note, but 
the end of the sentence at the pitch of the lower note. Once the 
student has this down and can easily do it and it sounds natural 
and he is satisfied that it does, go on to the question step.

The coach has the student say "apple" as a question. Then the 
coach (for a male student) strikes the F below middle C and then 
middle C. For a woman the coach strikes the A above middle C and 
then the D an octave above middle C. (In case this does not agree 
with the voice pitch of the student, the coach must work it out 
providing only that the upper note is three or four whole notes 
above the lower note. It must sound natural and must sound like a 
question.) The coach has the student say "apple" as a question 
and then strikes the lower and higher note until the student can 
duplicate it. Now take other two-syllable words (or single-
syllable words preceded by an article) and have the student say 
these as a question, following each one with the two instrument 
notes, lower to higher. When the student can do this, is 
satisfied that it sounds natural and doesn't have to think about 
doing it, go on to the next step. Here the student makes up banal 
questions. The first part of the question is said at the lower 
note and the last part is said at the higher note. At each 
question, the coach strikes the lower note and then the upper 
note. When this sounds natural and the student does not have to 
think to do it and is satisfied with it, the drill is ended.

END PHENOMENA: A person who can state statements and questions 
that sound like statements or questions.

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard, April 1980, while doing the 
script for the soon-to-be-produced training film Tone 40 
Assessment.


                 TR 1-Q2

NUMBER: TR 1-Q2

NAME: Walkabout Questions.

POSITION: There is no coach. Two students separate and walk 
around their neighborhood and then meet and compare notes. The 
object is to detect personal habits in questioning.

PURPOSE: To enlighten the student as to his own communication 
habits and people's reactions to his questions.

COMMANDS: The most common everyday social questions such as 
"How's it going?" "Do you like the weather?" etc., appropriate to 
the activities and circumstances of the person. Only one or two 
questions to a separate person. The questions must be banal, 
social and ordinary, but they must be questions.

TRAINING STRESS: The two students agree on the areas they will 
cover and the time they will meet again. They then go off 
individually, not together. The student pauses next to people 
encountered and asks a social question, listens to his OWN voice 
tones and notes the reaction of the person asked. In this drill 
the student does not necessarily try to use TR 1-Q1 but is just 
himself, speaking as he would normally speak. The students then 
meet and compare notes and discuss what they have discovered 
about themselves on the subject of asking questions. If they have 
not learned or observed anything, the drill must be repeated.

END PHENOMENA: A person who has detected any habits he has in 
handling pitch of voice in asking questions so that he can cure 
these in subsequent drills.

HISTORY: Recommended by L. Ron Hubbard in February 1978 in the 
pilot for HCOB 22 July 78, ASSESSMENT TRs. Developed into a TR in 
April 1980 by L. Ron Hubbard.


                 TR 1-Q3

NUMBER: TR 1-Q3

NAME: Single Word Question.

POSITION: Student and coach facing each other with a table in 
between them. The E-Meter is not used. The Book of E-Meter Drills 
used by student and another copy by coach.

PURPOSE: To be able to ask questions using a single word read 
from a list.

COMMANDS: The coach uses the usual TR directions of "Start," 
"Flunk," "That's it." The student uses single words from the 
prepared lists of The Book of E-Meter Drills.

TRAINING STRESS: To get the student to use the pitch of his voice 
to deliver a question consisting of a single word. It must sound 
like a question per TR 1-Q1 and use similar pitches to TR 1-Q1. 
The student is flunked for out-TR 1, for keeping his eyes glued 
to the list, for sounding unnatural. The student is also flunked 
for slow or comm-laggy delivery or pauses. The coach designates 
the list to be used, changes lists. When the student can do this 
easily, a second part of the drill is entered and the coach 
begins to use the Preclear Origination Sheet so as to interrupt 
the student and make him combine his questions with TR 4. In this 
case, the student acknowledges appropriately, uses "I will repeat 
the question," and does so.

END PHENOMENA: The ability to ask single-word questions that will 
be responded to as questions and to be able to handle pc origins 
while doing so.

HISTORY: Developed in April 1980 by L. Ron Hubbard.


                 TR 1-Q4A

NUMBER: TR 1-Q4A (For meter-trained students only)

NAME: Whole Sentence Questions.

POSITION: Student and coach sit facing each other across a table. 
The E-Meter is set up and used. Copies of The Book of E-Meter 
Drills are used.

PURPOSE: To train the student to ask whole questions that sound 
like questions, read an E-Meter and handle a session at the same 
time.

COMMANDS: The usual coach commands of TR drills. The prepared 
lists in The
Book of E-Meter Drills; the questions in these drills are 
reworded so that the item occurs as the last word. Example: List 
2 of The Book of E-Meter Drills states that the assessment 
question is "Which tree do you like best?" This is converted, for 
each question, to "Do you like ______?" Prepared List 4 is 
converted to "Do you dislike ______?" etc. A whole sentence is 
used in every case.

TRAINING STRESS: The usual TR commands are used by the coach. E-
Meter Drill 5RA must be used to start. Any TR errors or metering 
errors may be flunked, but special attention is paid to the 
student's ability to ask a question that sounds like a question 
(in accordance with TR 1-Q1) and that sounds natural. The drill 
has three parts. In the first part, although the coach is on the 
meter, the ability to ask the question is concentrated upon. The 
second part concentrates upon the student's ability to look at 
the written questions and then ask the coach directly without 
undue comm lag or hesitation. The third part is to do the first 
two parts and read the meter (in accordance with E-Meter Drills 
27 and CR0000-4 which may have to be reviewed if flubby) and to 
keep session admin, all smoothly and accurately. If a question 
arises about meter accuracy, a third person who can read a meter 
or a video tape is employed to ensure that the student is 
actually not missing or dubbing in reads.

END PHENOMENA: A person who can do all the necessary actions of 
asking questions from a prepared list and run a session smoothly 
without errors or confusions and be confident he can.

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in April 1980.


                TR 1-Q4B

NUMBER: TR 1-Q4B (For nonmeter-trained students only)

NAME: Whole Sentence Questions (nonmetered).

POSITION: Student and coach sit facing each other across a table, 
if that is the position the student would take when using this 
tech on post. If the student would do his post activities 
standing up (as in doing a survey), then that is the position 
used for the drill. The E-Meter is not used in this drill, but 
the tools of the student's post, such as a clipboard and survey 
forms, for a surveyor, are set up and used. Copies of The Book of 
E-Meter Drills are used.

PURPOSE: To train the student to ask whole questions that sound 
like questions, handle any admin he might have to handle in an 
interview (or while doing a survey, etc.) and carry on the 
interview at the same time.

COMMANDS: The usual coach commands of TR drills. The prepared 
lists in The
Book of E-Meter Drills; the questions in these drills are 
reworded so that the item occurs as the last word. Example: List 
2 of The Book of E-Meter Drills states that the Assessment 
Question is "Which tree do you like best?" This is converted, for 
each question, to "Do you like ______?" Prepared List 4 is 
converted to "Do you dislike ______?" etc. A whole sentence is 
used in every case.

TRAINING STRESS: Special attention is paid to the student's 
ability to ask a question that sounds like a question in 
accordance to TR 1-Q1 and that sounds natural. The drill has 
three parts:

1. In the first part the ability to ask the question is 
concentrated upon.

2. The second part concentrates upon the student's ability to 
look at the written question and then ask the coach directly 
without undue comm lag or hesitation.

3. The third part is to do the first two parts and keep interview 
admin, all smoothly and accurately, as well as keep the interview 
going.

END PHENOMENA: A person who can do all the necessary actions of 
asking questions from a prepared list and run an interview 
smoothly without errors or confusions and be confident he can.


                  TR 8-Q

NUMBER: TR 8-Q

NAME: Tone 40 Assessment.

POSITION: Same as TR-8 where the student is in one chair facing 
another chair on which sits an ashtray, the coach sitting beside 
the student in a third chair. A square, four-cornered ashtray is 
used.

PURPOSE: To deliver the THOUGHT of a question into an exact 
position, wide or narrow at decision, that is a question, with or 
without words.

COMMANDS: For the first part of the drill: "Are you an ashtray?" 
"Are you made of glass?" "Are you sitting there?" Second part of 
drill: Same questions silently. Third part of drill: "Are you a 
corner?" to each corner of the ashtray, verbal and with intention 
at the same time. Fourth part of drill: Any applicable question, 
verbal and with intention at the same time, put broad and narrow 
at choice into the ashtray, exact parts of it and the 
surroundings.

TRAINING STRESS: The coach uses usual TR coaching commands. There 
are four stages to the drill. The first stage is to land a verbal 
command into the ashtray. The second stage is to put the question 
with full intention silently into the ashtray. The third stage is 
to put verbal command and silent intention at the same time into 
exact parts of the ashtray. The fourth stage is to put any 
applicable question both verbally and with intention into any 
narrow or any broad portion of the ashtray or its surrounds at 
choice and at will. The coach puts out his finger or his hands to 
indicate various spots and locations in space around the ashtray. 
The coach also makes the student put thoughts precisely into 
areas, some narrow and some wide, above the student's head and 
behind his back by putting his finger or hands in those places. 
(Coach doesn't touch student's body.) At the conclusion of the 
whole drill imagine the ashtray saying "Yes, yes, yes, yes" in an 
avalanche of "yeses" to balance the flow (in actual life, people, 
pcs and meters do respond and return the flow).

END PHENOMENA: The ability to land a question with full intention 
into an exact target area, broad or narrow, at will and 
effectively, whether verbally or silently.

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in April 1980 as an 
extension of all earlier work on intention and Tone 40, as now 
applied to questions and assessments.


                TR 4/8-Q1

NUMBER: TR 4/8-Q1 (TR 4 for Pc Origin, TR 8 Intention and Q for 
Question, 1 for first part)

NAME: Tone 40 Assessment Prepared List Session Drill.

POSITION: Student and coach sitting across from each other at a 
table, E-Meter set up and in use, session admin, using prepared 
lists.

PURPOSE: To train a student to do all the actions necessary to a 
full, smooth, accurate session using prepared lists and to do 
Tone 40 Assessment of them.

COMMANDS: Coach commands are the usual TR commands of "Start," 
"Flunk,"
"That's it." For the student, all commands relating to starting a 
session, giving an R-factor, assessing a prepared list, keeping 
the admin, indicating any item found and ending a session. The 
Book of E-Meter Drills for prepared lists as in TR 1-Q4. Origins 
for coach as per the Preclear Origination Sheet of that book. 
"Squeeze the cans." "Take a deep breath and let it out." "This is 
the session." "We are going to assess a prepared list." 
(Assessment.) "Your item is ______." (Indicate any F/N.) "End of 
Assessment." "End of Session."

TRAINING STRESS: Permit the student to continue to his first 
error; then have him drill and correct that error and continue. 
Finally, to conclude, let the student go through the entire 
sequence of the drill beginning to end three times without error 
or flunk for a final pass. It is expected that the student will 
not flub any TRs or metering or session patter. Metering may be 
finally verified by a third student or video. All assessing must 
be in proper Tone 40 with full intention exactly placed. The 
student must not wait to see if the meter read but catch the read 
of the last question as he starts the next one. His vision may 
shift from list to pc but at all times must embrace list, meter 
and pc.

(This drill also would be the one used for tape or video passes 
as it includes all elements of metering and TRs.)

END PHENOMENA: A person who can do a flawless and productive 
assessment session, Tone 40.

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard, April 1980.


                TR 4/8-Q2

NUMBER: TR 4/8-Q2

NAME: Listing and Nulling Tone 40 Assessment.

POSITION: Same as TR 4/8-Q1.

PURPOSE: To teach a student to do the action of listing and 
nulling with all metering and admin, using Tone 40 Assessment.

COMMANDS: The usual coach TR commands. Two copies of The Book of 
E-Meter Drills. A prepared list is chosen by the coach and, both 
use the same prepared list. The student reads the question and 
asks it and the coach reads the replies from the same list but in 
his own copy. The student must write down the answers in a proper 
session worksheet and note and write down any reads. (An F/N 
terminates the listing if it occurs.) The coach need not use the 
whole list of replies but only half a dozen chosen at random. The 
sequence of commands is the same as TR 4/8-Q1 except that the R-
factor is "We are going to list a question." And, if no item F/Ns 
and no significant read has occurred, the additional action of 
nulling the list is undertaken with the command "I will now 
assess the list."

TRAINING STRESS: THE LAWS OF LISTING AND NULLING, HCOB 1 Aug. 68, 
apply in full as these are very important laws and ignoring them 
can result in severe ARC breaks, not so much in this drill, but 
in actual sessions. The coach may also require Suppress and 
Invalidate buttons be put in on the whole list. All errors, 
omissions, hesitations and lapses from Tone 40 on the part of the 
student are flunked. Coach similarly to TR 4/8-Q1. Pass when the 
student can do it flawlessly three consecutive times. (This drill 
may be used for internship tapes and videos for assessing and 
metering passes.)

END PHENOMENA: A person able to do a flawless L&N list as the 
session or as part of a session, with all TRs in, with perfect 
metering and proper admin and using Tone 40 in his listing and 
assessing.

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in April 1980.


                 SUMMARY

The purpose of these drills is to train the student to ask 
questions that will get answers and to assess prepared lists that 
will get accurate reads. If a student doing these drills has 
difficulty, it will be traced to false data, misunderstood words 
or not having passed earlier TRs, including Upper Indoc, or his 
metering drills as contained in The Book of E-Meter Drills. If a 
satisfactory result is not obtained, the faults in the above 
items should be located and remedied and these drills repeated. 
If any earlier omissions are found and repaired and if these 
drills are honestly done, heightened success as an auditor (or a 
Surveyor or Examiner or Ethics Officer) is assured.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations

LRH:RTRC:fa.sep.ja





