- continuation from earlier post about forum leader and seminar leaders:

I think a lot of people were disappointed as soon as the leaders wasn't part of the top dogs - the forum leader body. You have to give it to them -they are like standup comedians meets expert manipulator. In the beginning you think that they are just some course leader - after you GET IT they are like gods representative on earth. WOW! Please mr forum leader - tell me more - how can you be so good at everything - you seem to have knowledge that must be revealed to all of mankind. Why don't they teach this in school? Has someone alerted our government that we have THE SOLUTION?

People go bananas. I did and so did many, many other bright people. When will this nonsence stop?

nettie

Midonov,

Landmark changed the forum slightly in 2000/2001 using the new "distinction" of enrollment separate from registration. They taught us all how we had collasped the two and that they were sepparate.

Enrollment (according to landmark) is sharing possibility with another such that they are left moved touched and inspired.

When you enrol someone they want what you have and then you can talk to them about registering that person into the forum

Personally I belive the two are still collapsed together, just now its a lot more underhanded and manipulative in getting people recruited.

A forum leader is measured during the course on certain statistics

this is one of them; (in short)
- how many people was in their seat Friday morning
- how many people completes course

Let's say it's 150 on Friday and 145 at the end of the course. That gives a 97% rate in this category.

[b:d220e6d71d]BREAKING OF WILL[/b:d220e6d71d]

The course leader (this probably applies to other LGATs as well) will single out the person that will cause the most problems for him. He will ENGAGE that person in A CONVERSATION.

All the rules are designed for that person to speak up. The rules are really horrendous. They state that if you leave the room you might miss enlightment - even if you go out for 1 minute to go to the bathroom. That is just one of them. Designed for people to stay in the room and don't break any mind control influence over them. In a sense it might be correct that you will miss enlightenment. If you break the forum leaders "spell" on you might get out of the submissivness. That's is also why people should team up at breaks. People will not talk to outsiders. If they would find an outsider at a break they are usually very stressed about getting something to eat - also designed for keeping the "spell".

[b:d220e6d71d]READING OF THE RULES[/b:d220e6d71d]

Actual reading of the rules is so boring so the forum leader let's his course supervisor do this. The course supervisor get's a chance to show that he is an important person - standing on stage - usually they look and sound like a perfectionist. The forum leader stands in the back and observe people's reactions.

The course leader might not find the most resistant person at the first try but he knows how to handle that too. He goes on until there is CLARITY in the room that YOU CAN'T WIN AGAINST ME. The leader actually says that out loud. After someone has had his or hers brain picked at to the point of submissal or leaving the course, the forum leader now has a crowd that doesn't dare speak up. Ugly intimidation tactics are not nice to endure.

I salute those persons that stood up and left during the POSSIBILITY to change your mind and get a full refund. No questions asked. That came after the breakdown of the most resisting person of course. It would take a lot of guts to take them up on their offer. You might be ridiculed as the next victim. I saw very few take that opportunity to leave - actually I haven't seen any one.

I don't know what statistic value was considered ok - but that is irrelevant. What is relevant is that they are commanded by statistics. They will not think about what would be best for a human being. Well - one - themselves....

I actually liked that part of the course - the breaking of will - I certainly didn't want any STINGY person that wouldn't share himself to ride along at my expense.

So a good question to ask yourself is - what is my will? What do I like. Do I like this landmark thing? Do I agree what I've seen so far?

If you don't agree - please don't ask a landmark coach to coach you - they will do anything to bring you back into landmark coma.

I know this talk about landmark coma can be offensive to some people - they might say "hey I'm not the one in a coma - it's this nettie person who is running rackets on all of human kind - I have chosen to do this"

Have you really chosen?

[b:d220e6d71d]END NOTE[/b:d220e6d71d]

It was the course supervisor's job to talk to anybody that left and call anyone not showing up the next morning. They were to coach the person back. If they were successful the forum leader would think highly of his course supervisor - if he failed he would REQUEST another course supervisor the next time he came to town if he wasn't sure that the course supervisor was TRANSFORMED.

Course supervisors took a lot of anger from the course leader. Believe it- I've seen it. If statistics are bad the forum leader is not to blame. It's a cultural flaw, the course supervisor wasn't good enough, the assistants weren't good enough, the center manager stinks.

"I am creator of my world - why did I create going to this stupid country? I have to get some really good coaching. bad bad bad forum leader. Well - it doesn't MEAN ANYTHING! Oh, that's right - I am making it mean I am a bad forum leader because the stats are down - oh silly me. "
forum leader coma

nettie

PS this is my final post to this thread. I think I've proven my point. Do with it what you want. I did not mean to insult anyone - not even the landmark people - we're all in it together...

Good Morning,
I just wanted to thank you all once again for this information. I am enjoying my second day of NOT doing the Forum, spending most of my time researching Landmark Education instead. All I can say is Thank Goodness I didn't get sucked in to this. Keep the posts coming and I hope more people will become aware of the scam.

Quote
sonnie_dee
Midonov,

Landmark changed the forum slightly in 2000/2001 using the new "distinction" of enrollment separate from registration. They taught us all how we had collasped the two and that they were sepparate.

Enrollment (according to landmark) is sharing possibility with another such that they are left moved touched and inspired.

When you enrol someone they want what you have and then you can talk to them about registering that person into the forum

Personally I belive the two are still collapsed together, just now its a lot more underhanded and manipulative in getting people recruited.

Sonnie,

I agree fully with you. It's just another manipulative and mind twisting schema. Make people believe they had the idea to register in the first place although the idea was planted. Psychology 101.

From the dictionnary, Enrolling is to search for candidates that you want to register. Registering is to actually have them to sign up, here and now!

The two definitions are collapsed together without a doubt. Once again, Landmark is playing with words to confuse the participants and to better manipulate them.

BTW what is "BEING OUT OF INTEGRITY?" That is really taking liberties with the English language. I have been hearing a lot about "neuro linguistic programming." Is this what the Landmark programs use? Does anyone know any good research on this?[/quote]


Lookingfor help,
Here is a brief desciption of NLP. It is a complicated subject and to understand it would require reading some books. This will get you started.
I have not attended the Forum (and won't) but I suspect that Landmark relies heavily on NLP persuation models.
What Does the Name Mean?

by Steve Robbins:

The name Neuro-Linguistic Programming comes from the disciplines which influenced the early development of the field. It began as an exploration of the relationship between neurology, linguistics, and observable patterns ("programs") of behavior.
What is NLP?

NLP was developed in the mid-70s by John Grinder, a Professor at UC Santa Cruz and Richard Bandler, a graduate student. NLP, as most people use the term today, is a set of models of how communication impacts and is impacted by subjective experience. It's more a collection of tools than any overarching theory. NLP is heavily pragmatic: if a tool works, it's included in the model, even if there's no theory to back it up. None of the current NLP developers have done research to "prove" their models correct. The party line is "pretend it works, try it, and notice the results you get. If you don't get the result you want, try something else."

Much of early NLP was based on the work of Virginia Satir, a family therapist; Fritz Perls, founder of Gestalt therapy; Gregory Bateson, anthropologist; and Milton Erickson, hypnotist. It was Erickson's work that formed the foundation for a lot of NLP, thus the tight connection with hypnosis. Bandler and Grinder's book "Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, Volume I" is one of the best books I've ever read on how language influences mental states.

NLP consists of a number of models, and then techniques based on those models. The major models usually associated with NLP are:

Sensory acuity and physiology.
Thinking is tied closely to physiology. People's thought processes change their physiological state. Sufficiently sensitive sensory acuity will help a communicator fine-tune their communication to a person in ways over and above mere linguistics. The "meta-model."
A set of linguistic challenges for uncovering the "deep structure" underneath someone's "surface structure" sentences. [Sorry for the transformational grammar lingo.] Representational systems.
These actually appeared in Erickson's work and the work of others, though Bandler and Grinder took them much further. Different people seem to represent knowledge in different sensory modalities. Their language reveals their representation. Often, communication difficulties are little more than two people speaking in incompatible representation systems.

For example, the "same" sentence might be expressed differently by different people:
Auditory: "I really hear what you're saying."
Visual: "I see what you mean."
Kinesthetic: "I've got a handle on that."
The "Milton-model."
This is a set of linguistic patterns Milton Erickson used to induce trance and other states in people. It is the inverse of the meta-model; it teaches you how to be artfully vague, which is what you use to do therapeutic hypnosis with someone. Eye accessing cues.
When people access different representational systems, their eyes move in certain ways. Lots of research has been done on accessing cues, because it seems easy to test. Most research has "proven" they don't exist. My thesis was on accessing cues and concluded the same thing. My real conclusion was that a person is too complex a black box to test this effectively. Also, eyes move in ways that are not related to information accessing. While I can visually tell the difference between an "accessing cue" and a non-accessing movement, I can't quantify the difference enough to base research on it. Submodalities.
The structure of internal representations determines your response to the content. For example, picture someone you really like. Make the colors more intense, as if you were turning up the color knob on a TV. Now turn the color down, until it's black and white. For most people, high color intensifies the feeling, and B&W neutralizes it. The degree of color, part of the STRUCTURE of the representation, affects the intensity of your feelings about the content. Metaprograms.
These are aspects about how people process information and make decisions. For example, some people are motivated TOWARDS GOALS, while others are motivated AWAY FROM non-goals. TOWARDS or AWAY-FROM tells how they respond to their world; which one a person prefers in a given context will dramatically change how they behave.

NLP has several techniques for diagnosing and intervening in certain situations. They have a phobia cure, a way to detraumatize past traumas, ways to identify and integrate conflicting belief systems that keep you from doing things you want, etc.

I first read about NLP in 1978, and thought it sounded great, but couldn't possibly work. The founders made lots of claims about one-session cures, which seemed implausible. [Fourteen years later, I still think they overexaggerate at times, but I *have* seen two or three session results that rival traditional therapists' results over months.]

In 1984 I took an introductory workshop and discovered, much to my surprise, that it worked well. After messing someone up to the point where he almost needed hospitalization, I decided to be trained in it fully, so as not to repeat the mistake.

I find it works scarily well. So well that even someone with poor training in it can do a lot of damage. There was no quality control in the field, and a lot of people go around teaching NLP who know very little about it. Performing NLP techniques is a skill. Probably only one in ten NLP Practitioners are in the top 10% of NLP skill level, and maybe even fewer than that footnote .

One way an NLP therapist might approach a client session is by understanding the cognitive structure of how a client creates a problem. They then help figure out the cognitive structure of an area of life where the client deals satisfactorily. Then they would teach the client to use the good strategy in the problem situation.

For example: a friend of mine was obsessed with her ex-boyfriend. She was in such fear of him that she would fly into hysterics at the thought of him. Cognitively, she made a big, bright movie of him physically harassing her, with a soundtrack of him whining and lecturing her. The soundtrack seemed to come from around her left ear, and was in the boyfriend's voice.

She had another ex-boyfriend who she was fine about. Cognitively, his picture was small, framed, and in the distance. The soundtrack was her voice talking about how nice he had been, and how the relationship was firmly in the past.

The work I did with her involved representing the problem boyfriend with a small, framed picture. We removed the soundtrack of his voice, and added her narration, instead. The result: she stopped obsessing about her ex, and went on with her life, able to deal with him.

Some people have run into NLP trained people who annoyingly mimic body posture to distraction, in an attempt to gain "rapport." They were poorly trained. Go out in public; watch couples; watch good friends. They walk in synchronization. They move in synchronization. They naturally mirror each other movements. NLP just noticed this, and says "if you don't have rapport, here's one thing to pay attention to."

A common question is "Does knowing what's being done make it less effective?" I've found that knowing what someone is doing lets me barricade against certain things, but there are definite cases where knowledge is not sufficient to keep it from working. I was once in a group dynamics experiment where an outsider watched our group and pointed out to us how we kept getting stuck, because of certain behavioral loops we were in. Even with this knowledge, we were unable to break the loops without incredible effort. And then our efforts to break the loops fell into the same loops. Certain aspects of NLP are like this: if someone is matching your representational systems and doing it well, even if you know they're doing it, they'll still communicate better to you, as long as they're not incongruent about it.

Alas, there are few good NLP books out there. In part, that's because NLP is about communication on all levels, and is much easier to demonstrate than to write about. In part, that's because the people who have done the most creation of the models are out there creating new models and pushing the technology further. Writing books isn't high on their list of priorities. If you'd like to read about NLP, my favorites are listed in the NLP resource list.

Footnote: This i

Quote
nettie
I guess it is as you said - they take a normal business practise and redefine it to suit them. That nothing was allowed to interfere is the normal way for how a landmarker acts. That's exactly what BEING IN INTEGRITY means. She has probably COMMITTED herself to these conference calls. If you have COMMITTED yourself and don't do it then you are OUT OF INTEGRITY. When you are OUT OF INTEGRITY your life will start to "stop working" . There is also the concept of BEING YOUR WORD and a lot of other pieces of the puzzle.

The lgat that robbed 6 years of my life was just soooooo similar to Landmark. Their saying was: I HONOR MY WORD AND KEEP MY COMMITMENT.

And, yes, their tactics include redefining words and reality (MINDGAMES). They do truly scramble brains and cognitively disable people. So sinister.

Sgali,
Thanks for the response on NLP. Although I havent been to a Forum from what has happened to my loved one it appears this is part of what LE uses. She also tries to use it on us, doesnt work. We just see it as weird language. It is very sad because she really believes she is doing something good./

Quote
nettie
People go bananas. I did and so did many, many other bright people. When will this nonsence stop?

nettie

Nettie,

Thanks again for your excellent posts. I have one question. I understand that Landmark is all about having a breakthrough in your life. Could you tell us a little bit about the breakthrough that you have experienced at the time and would you say that you have benefited from that breakthrough while you were participating? Are you still benefiting from that breakthrough today despite all the negative aspects of the indoctrination process and brainwashing? If not your personal story, could you give an example?

tks.

Quote

what is "BEING OUT OF INTEGRITY?

being out of integrity is a term that is thrown around in landmark circles. basically it means you have not kept your word, you have lied or you have omitted the truth, so not that you have delibritly lied but that you just didn't tell something.

Its used to primarily as a means of getting you to do what they want. it also means that you take on a lot of guilt and blame when things go wrong

All staff members and senior leaders had to complete integrity files which would list everything we said we would do but didn't every thing we did that we shouldn't, every lie every ommission.

Then you would be shown how your lack of integrity had impacted the centre.