Quote
ajinajan
Actually, this sounds exactly like Landmark Education EST "technology".

Virtually verbatim.

Again with the vague comparisons.

Though I have no idea what your Landmark Education is, it is clear that you hold it in contempt.

The basics of learning to play the trumpet or guitar are the same, virtually no matter who the teacher is.

Virtually every school in the world teaches 2+2=4 in a very simliar way.

If I say e=mc2 does that make me an Einstien clone because I said it just like he did?

Sorry, but your point is what exactly?

Why not address my posting specifically.

Is there some fundamental flaw with my words or in my example/explanation?

Are you taking exception to something specific about my posting?

Don't you hold yourself and others accountable for their conduct?

Do you disagree with what I said? If so, which part?

What is evil or wrong with holding your self accountable and accepting responsibility for your own life? What are you afraid of?

DG

DiverGuy:

You are here as an apologist to defend Klemmer.

It doesn't seem that you have much else to say.

But hopefully for anyone reading your statements, they can see the cult-like mindless repetition and sing-song quality they have.

Also, for anyone experienced in following LGAT threads on this message board, the same apologies are offered over and over again and again.

All anyone need do is go to a Landmark Education thread and they can read the same apologies and explanations almost verbatim.

Thanks for illustrating these points so well. And also for demonstrating through your posts some of the points about what to watch out for in LGATs or "mass marathon training."

In summary you quoted the cliche' "If you cant say something good about someone, don’t say anything at all" and attempted to twist it to "If you don’t have any facts, don’t make them up or imply that they exist."

First had experiences at Klemmer have been offered here and information about why LGATs like Klemmer may hurt people. But you are not here to deal with that. Instead, you dismiss or deny whatever facts you don't like.

See [members.aol.com]

You are a "troll."

And you are here to subvert this thread not meaningful dialog.

Quote

What are you afraid of?

jargon-alert, jargon-alert!!

:roll:

Quote
rrmoderator
DiverGuy:
You are here as an apologist to defend Klemmer.

I have not apologized for a single thing that Klemmer has done. If there were anything to be apologized for, then it would be up to them to apologize for it.

I am here to relate my experience with their coursework, which was an overall positive one.

[i:6a7a36d5a1]defend
Function: verb
1 a : to drive danger or attack away from <defend our shores>
b (1) : to maintain or support in the face of argument or hostile criticism <defend a theory>[/i:6a7a36d5a1][/size:6a7a36d5a1]

I suppose, if you feel that you are attacking Klemmer with hostile criticism, that you would be forced to consider my statements (of my experience with K&A) to be defending them.

Personally, I don't see where I defended them any more than I see where I have apologized for them.

I merely posted replies to questions and related what I saw when I went through their courses.

While it's clear that you aren't interested in anything that threatens your pre-conceived view, others might be here to gather factual information. It is for those people that I posted my replies.

Quote
rrmoderator
It doesn't seem that you have much else to say.

So you are saying that, because I won't jump on the LGAT bashing bandwagon with you and because I relate a positive experience, that I have nothing much to say? Now THAT is scary. How many times in history have we seen dictators and regimes take that stance?

Even in your generic postings, you say MAY BE and MAY DO. Yet when I post a positive experience, which seems to contradict your opinion, you refuse to accept that "they SOMETIMES" also implies MAY NOT. Apparently when you quote "they SOMETIMES" you read it as "they ALWAYS".

Did the Dr mistype his conclusions when he used the word SOMETIMES?
What happens when a group DOESN'T do those 13 things?
Is that possible?
Could such an organization exist?
Would you tolerate it?

Quote
rrmoderator
But hopefully for anyone reading your statements, they can see the cult-like mindless repetition and sing-song quality they have.

Also, for anyone experienced in following LGAT threads on this message board, the same apologies are offered over and over again and again.

All anyone need do is go to a Landmark Education thread and they can read the same apologies and explanations almost verbatim.

You will, of course, see what you expect to see and find what you expect to find. That's the cool thing about 'conspiracy' thinking. It can't be disproved and anything can be twisted to fit its conclusion.

Quote
rrmoderator
Thanks for illustrating these points so well. And also for demonstrating through your posts some of the points about what to watch out for in LGATs or "mass marathon training."

In summary you quoted the cliché' "If you cant say something good about someone, don’t say anything at all" and attempted to twist it to "If you don’t have any facts, don’t make them up or imply that they exist."

Actually, sir, I never heard any such quote or cliché at any of the Klemmer seminars. My mother taught me that some 40 odd years ago. I felt it was a bit restrictive in its original form, since both 'negative' and 'positive' information should be available on a forum such as this. Instead I felt it was more accurate or appropriate to say 'stick to the facts and the truth' and leave innuendo, rumor and speculation out of it.

My experience was a positive one, so my posts are positive.
If someone else has a bad experience, I would expect (and welcome) them to post their experience and I would anticipate that their post would have a negative tone.

Is there a problem with being held to an ethical standard of journalism? It appears that you have not attended any Klemmer seminars and yet you seem to have an opinion about them.

You believe "if it walks like a duck and looks like a duck, it IS A DUCK".
Yet, it is possible for something to "walk like a duck and look like a duck and be a baby SWAN".

See: Hans Christian Andersen - The Ugly Duckling[hca.gilead.org.il]

You will, no doubt, jump on this and say I am comparing Klemmer to a Swan, which is untrue. I am merely illustrating that your words leave the door open the possibility, but your opinions don't.

Quote
rrmoderator
First had experiences at Klemmer have been offered here and information about why LGATs like Klemmer may hurt people. But you are not here to deal with that. Instead, you dismiss or deny whatever facts you don't like.

LGATs "[u:6a7a36d5a1]like[/u:6a7a36d5a1]" Klemmer "[u:6a7a36d5a1]may[/u:6a7a36d5a1]" hurt people?

So, Klemmer "might not" be hurting people and Klemmer "might" be offering [u:6a7a36d5a1]good[/u:6a7a36d5a1] seminars?

I [u:6a7a36d5a1]am[/u:6a7a36d5a1] posting first hand information. In fact, you have not provided a single 'first hand fact' about 'Klemmer'. Yet you almost always have a reply to my posts.

It would appear that you are the one dismissing whatever facts you don't like.

Quote
rrmoderator
See [members.aol.com]

You are a "troll."
And you are here to subvert this thread not meaningful dialog.

[i:6a7a36d5a1]subvert

1 : to overturn or overthrow from the foundation : RUIN
2 : to pervert or corrupt by an undermining of morals, allegiance, or faith [/i:6a7a36d5a1][/size:6a7a36d5a1]

Two things are interesting there.

a) I see that 'flaming' does not apply to you. When you decide that you don't like what someone has posted, you change the subject, resort to name-calling and give them a label.

b) I wonder what your "underlying morals, allegiance and faith" are, that they are threatened by the facts of my experiences. You actually believe that I am here to overturn the entire foundation of this forum and that I can do that by posting a few replies? Now, THAT is paranoia!

I posted here to answer questions and to relate my overall experience with the Klemmer courses that I took.

And now, rather than stick to the thread topic, you attempt to subvert the thread to an attack on me personally!

You don't like that I have nothing 'bad' to say about Klemmer, so you slap a Troll label on me.

You are unhappy that I have not ranted and raved and given you ammunition, so you pretend that I am apologizing and defending.

In return, I thank you for your responses. I thank you for your paranoia closed-mindedness and fear. I thank you for being whom you are. Though it is a bit scary, it serves as a reminder that we are a free world, entitled to hold our own views and to express them.

Best Regards,
DG

DriverGuy:

An "apologist" is often defined as someone who defends a group.

You came here to defend Klemmer, which is a simple observation.

Quote

My experience was a positive one, so my posts are positive

And your posts therefore constitute a defense of Klemmer

Quote

You believe "if it walks like a duck and looks like a duck, it IS A DUCK".
Yet, it is possible for something to "walk like a duck and look like a duck and be a baby SWAN".

The most likely explanation is usually the correct one.

No one has said there is a "conspiracy," just that you are an apologist, plain and simple.

Nothing "paranoid" about noting what your intent here is.

Your attempt to label those that criticize Klemmer is revealing.

Appaently you cannot accept that others have a critical view of this company and don't appreciate it practices based upon their own firsthand experiences as posted on this thread.

And attempting to attack critics personally is not a meaningful response to the criticism posted here, but instead flaming, which is against the rules you agreed to before posting here.

I did work with Klemmer almost 2 years ago and had an overall positive experience. I found that my relationships with my family, friends and clients have improved overall.

In regards to PSI, which I have some familiarity with (having attended the "Basic" in 2004), I found the training to be very much the same as Klemmer. There was some variety in the exercises, however, the basic philosophy is much the same.

The training is about becoming aware of how we think and how we communicate. It is also similar to a business class I took called "conflict resolution" back in the 90's.

The main difference I found between PSI & Klemmer was that PSI was a little more "Ra ra" while Klemmer's was targeted at a more professional market.

In my experience, facilitators of both organizations were helpful, and encouraging and in no way innapropriate.

It's been 2 years and I have only noticed positive effects.

If you really want to know about the training, either do the Personal Mastery with Klemmer or the Basic with PSI. I don't believe you can "know" something without experiencing it.

PS: Just some info. I swear I'm not a "troll"

Klemmer is probably an exact copy of Landmark Education EST Werner Erhard and Associates "technology", they just probably thought they could make more money by going off on their own with all this stuff.

I wonder if it is just as dangerous, and if there exists mounds of litigation and settled psychotic episodes and wrongful death lawsuits somewhere - kind of like the ongoing attempts by Landmark Education to fight the internet, and the current open wrongful death of Robert Jenkins lawsuit against Landmark Education ?

The teachings of Klemmer & PSI may be silmilar to Landmark. I'm sure there's a wealth of information on the internet regarding any litigations if that is what you seek. I merely shared MY experience.

1light says:

Quote

In regards to PSI, which I have some familiarity with (having attended the "Basic" in 2004), I found the training to be very much the same as Klemmer. There was some variety in the exercises, however, the basic philosophy is much the same.

Thanks for that acknowledgement.

There are other threads at this message board with complaints about PSI and I have received serious complaints about PSI too by phone and email.

Quote

I don't believe you can "know" something without experiencing it.

This is an absurd statement, but consistent with and virtually the same response as all the other "mass marathon training" supporters make, such as Landmark Education, Sterling, Impact, est, Lifesrping etc.

Please understand that you don't have to smoke or drive drunk to know it's a bad idea.

Research, bad press, repeated complaints and lawsuits are enough for most people to understand why "mass marathon training" is not a good idea.

And of course there are much safer alternatives such as continuing education through a college business course, nonprofit community services and support groups and counseling from a licensed professional etc.

BTW--people that have firsthand experiences with both Klemmer and PSI have posted serious complaints on this message board.

Apparently, there are those that take the training and don't agree with your opinions.

I have bean very fascinated to read and observe the postings by DG and other K&A disciples.

It is typical of what my friends say, but I must say that DG is wAAAAAAAAAAAAAy beyond them when it comes to being hard-core. :shock:

DG, one of Klemmers catch phrases is "go by results". Well, the results I have seen in my friends have left me wishing they had never gone. They have alienated friends. They have become hard to reason with. How can these be good results? I have decided to be as good a friend as I can be to them in spite of it all. And I hope someday the people I used to know will re-apear.

So much of the stuff Klemmer teaches is common sense stuff. And I don't need to shell out 8,000 to "get it". But the pop psychology and one-size fits-all reasoning is just mind numbing. So my plan is to keep on being their friend and keep "exploring" the "POSSIBILITY" of getting them to see the light! :?