pragmatist:

I can see from your last post regarding my comments that you have no intention of addressing the relevant issues regarding Landmark.

No, I would not be willing to sign away any of my civil rights to attend any seminar or training session.

Yes, I am "sticking to my position" based upon the facts about Landmark.

And the idea that you think people should waive their rights for Landmark is quite revealing. That is, you have reached the point where you can rationalize almost anything.

Other than defending Landmark, pitching its programs and ignoring the facts about the company, do you have any other purpose here?

Quote
rrmoderator
And the idea that you think people should waive their rights for Landmark is quite revealing. That is, you have reached the point where you can rationalize almost anything.

Maybe he's trying his hardest to recruit you. It is getting tougher for them, I hear. :?

At present... there has been an overwhelming tendency for "self improvement semiarians"... well above and beyond the Landmarkians, to require the customer (regardless of what language evasion they use to disguise this basic business fact of customer-to-vendor) to sign away as many rights, recourses, and protections as they can induce one to do.

You simply cannot attend most of the popular events, Tony Robbins, Richard Bandler, Landmark, and Lord knows who and what else, without signing one or more releases.... often one release is for recording, such as you on stage with the "trainer" or whatever ends up on a widely distributed DVD, well, you signed off in advance... and the other is, naturally, to absolve THEM of any responsibility for whatever happens to you...

Which sounds somewhere between self contradictory, ridiculous, and malicious depending on the circumstances.

It IS high time that this entire "industry", as they seem to be trying to position themselves.... is subjected to some very close scrutiny at federal and state levels... and they have proven to be masters of the slippery tadpole game of evasion, No.... we aren't a business, we are a religion, except when we are an, ummm, "applied philosophy", well, OK, we do have contractual relationships with our... ummmm..... unwashed masses, err... children... I mean.... customers.... so you can't expect little old us to conform to that big bad regulatory framework....

[i:47addba7aa]However.... there presently IS a growing background hum, if you listen closely... to demanding concrete answers..... what, exactly, ARE they teaching, and who, exactly, owns or controls these organizations, and HOW, exactly do they monitor the "unplanned adverse reactions".???... and, best of all, HOW are their trainers trained, and what are their explicit and implicit goals, such as number of enrolees for advanced courses, projects, planes of enlightenment, of whatever[/color:47addba7aa]...[/i:47addba7aa]


The best thing anyone can do is to maintain a constant whiff of awareness with one's congressman or congresswoman... [b:47addba7aa]find out who your district representative is and write them a personal letter... believe it or not, personal letters that are not obviously part of a canned legislative project do get special attention... they represent the real concerns of real constituents[/color:47addba7aa].[/b:47addba7aa].. and slowly but surely they beging to develop into legislative focus....


Demand to know what is up with the LGATs, what their training processes consist of, WHY they believe that those processes are effective, WHAT their stated and unstated goals are, and WHICH large corporations utilize their "products" perhaps rebranded for corporate consumption, WHICH schools are using their materials, and WHAT is the outcome of this ?

I'd love to see a few Rosenbergs attempting standard english before some pointed questioning under oath from a congressional subcommittee....

Quote

I'd love to see a few Rosenbergs attempting standard english before some pointed questioning under oath from a congressional subcommittee....

Something tells me they practice standard english behind closed doors everyday of their lives. In my pessimistic mind I can envision conversations like.."how many suckers did we reel in today?" or maybe something like, "oh that shouldn't be a problem, we can do our banking offshore, and we've got enough VIP's in our back pockets, and the drones are responding according to program anyway..."



I don't think the term "oath" holds any specific value to the perpretators of this cult (at least not in the sense of telling the truth or in any process that involves integrity), and I doubt if they've assigned any 'professionals' with the task of giving this concept a new definition yet. Should any ever be held to account for their destructive and 'controversial' practices they might consider 'creating' a definition to sell to a committee.

Quote
Jack Oskar Larm

Quote
rrmoderator
And the idea that you think people should waive their rights for Landmark is quite revealing. That is, you have reached the point where you can rationalize almost anything.

Maybe he's trying his hardest to recruit you. It is getting tougher for them, I hear. :?

You've got me figured out "Jack".

Rick - I have no particular purpose here other than to see what you have to say about anything and everything. I like talking about things...

In the entire post where you outline the 'relevant issues' on LE, you listed three things that you were authentic about, with regards to yourself. And I didn't need a peer review study to detect what you are yearning for, and what it is that you don't have.

Do you want me to tell you how I noticed these things and what they are? I'll let you figure out who taught me how to do that...

Quote
rrmoderator
pragmatist:

I can see from your last post regarding my comments that you have no intention of addressing the relevant issues regarding Landmark.

No, I would not be willing to sign away any of my civil rights to attend any seminar or training session.

Yes, I am "sticking to my position" based upon the facts about Landmark.

And the idea that you think people should waive their rights for Landmark is quite revealing. That is, you have reached the point where you can rationalize almost anything.

Other than defending Landmark, pitching its programs and ignoring the facts about the company, do you have any other purpose here?

LOL On2 re speaking english behind closed doors!

Nutrino, good post and I'm glad you're thinking along the lines of political action :D . Last time we discussed regulation/legislation I recall that it wasn't a strategy you thought was useful.

I would love to see lgats scrutinized at state & federal levels and answer to the questions you've posed!

As I read your post I was seeing a lobby/educational group in the future (near future, I hope), as things are heating up. An organized effort to expose, lobby and educate about lgats. Lgats have gotten away with too much for too long.

Quote
skeptic
LOL On2 re speaking english behind closed doors!

Nutrino, good post and I'm glad you're thinking along the lines of political action :D . Last time we discussed regulation/legislation I recall that it wasn't a strategy you thought was useful.

I would love to see lgats scrutinized at state & federal levels and answer to the questions you've posed!

As I read your post I was seeing a lobby/educational group in the future (near future, I hope), as things are heating up. An organized effort to expose, lobby and educate about lgats. Lgats have gotten away with too much for too long.

Why don't the ex staff say here what they know? someone here must have seen their accounts..how the money moves and where...anything that they could denounce! landmark cannot reach the people of this forum, they tried once, they can't subpoena us....If i had any evidence whatsoever that could stop them i would put posters in Westminster... if i had their off shore account (or accounts) coordinates i would write to any tax inspector i could contact. I wish i worked in the lm office, i would have seen something. And I wouldn't be afraid to talk: i survived a cult, what can scare me now?

Quote
pragmatist
Rick, thanks for the heads up.

Yes, I am well aware that is how you perceive me. Wanna hear something else even more interesting? I knew about your site as well as other, similar in nature, websites, prior to attending the Forum - and for a while, I thought Landmark Education was a scam. Until I saw people who were far more intellectual and experienced than me, come out of it with something I couldn't quite put my finger on... which eventually had me enrolled in the Forum.

Then I went for it anyway, in spite of my prior beliefs about it. In your view, I must be stupid then because I paid for something I didn't like or didn't know anything about, yet was curious to find out what all the fuss was about since the 1970's ....

Since you've obviously already resigned yourself from attending the Landmark Forum, why do you continue to engage in smearing everything I have to say about my experience with it? As I said, I'm not offering advice, I'm merely sharing my experience - if someone wants to put that to use, that's fine. If not, that's fine too.

I hope we can continue the discussion in a civil tone, without namecalling and ad hominem arguments.

Quote
rrmoderator
pragmatist:

How about a pound of salt?

Considering your primary cited source of enlightenment (Landmark Education) concerning much of what you say, most people here will likely disregard your adives, or as you say "leave it."

Anyone that takes the time to seriously investigate Landmark and review its history objectively can easily understand this, i.e. a person that is not emotionally invested in the company's programs.

You don't come across so much "preachy" as a tape recorded message reciting Landmark's slogans and mantras.

Pragmatist: Are you that self focused? That arrogant?

That you ignore the people who have gone to these LGAT's and have had these philosphies destroy their lives as they tried to apply it in life.

If 5 people out of 100 come out of these LGAT's and create destruction from it in their lives.

Since 95 people didn't destroy their lives by it. Does that make you think these LGAT's are not bad?

I for one feel if 1 out of 100 hundred is destroying there life by these LGAT's. It is enough to be concerned about.

Even if it was 1 in 1000.

Who cares about the number ratio.

The ones that are having destruction in their lives are people. I am one of them. I matter, and even the messed up LGAT's say I matter.

Yet, for some reason when it comes to pointing out the destruction from these LGAT's that have been shared by myself, and many on this website.

The truth comes out. We (I) don't matter as we (I) are tossed on the pile of rubbish of others who have not had the results that are bragged about by these LGAT's in their lives.

Funny how slimy these companies become when faced with this destruction in past participants lives though.

Not coming from a victim mindset here. Just holding these LGAT's accountable for what they have taught us in these seminars.

ACCOUNTABILITY..... Something LGAT's don't want to be held too.

Quote
Rswinters
That you ignore the people who have gone to these LGAT's and have had these philosphies destroy their lives as they tried to apply it in life.

How did the Landmark Forum 'LGAT' destroy your life then? Mind telling us? If you're just going to throw everything and the kitchen sink, then obviously, this forum is useful for nothing but ranting.

So let's cut the b.s. - tell the story of your destruction by the Landmark Forum... I, for one, am interested in hearing the real deal about you. I _do_ care, in spite of what you may think of me.