Guy, GC, and any other former staffers\volunteers,

Do you have any idea how many former LE participants or employees\volunteers are planted in a typical Forum?

Looking back, I'm almost convinced that 90% of the people who "shared" were working for LE. Some of the emotions were not consistent with the situations - really overdone. Another just seemed too complex to be "fixed" the way it was presented. The only one that seemed real was the poor woman who went and told her boss and everyone in the office the rackets she was playing on them - like asking a new person to lunch when she really didn't want to, and kissing up to the boss when she really didn't like him, stuff like that, which then got her into hot water. She was embarassed, pissed off for sharing with them, and now suffering the consequences. The leader advised her to postpone her wedding if she couldn't be honest with all the people in her life.

My Forum did not have a lot of sharing apparently. A participant in my seminar series group knew a volunteer who said our group was one of the toughest ones the leader ever encountered. So I suppose that means he got his butt kicked back at the center.

Hi - i don't know how many "plants" there are in a typical forum, but when i did mine there seemed to be at least one - the person who started off the discussion in the morning. Also there were loads of participants who were "reviewing" - ie they had done it before and were doing it again. I asked a few of them, why? if the forum is so good, why do they need to hear it again? (personally, I think they were doing it out of boredom and a lack of friends/things to do at the weekend). None of them gave me a satisfactory answer - but many of them were 'sharing'.

But then, I had very negative experience of my weekend (I've just posted separately on it).

Lil,

I also met several people who were "reviewing" - one said he comes back annually. They pay half price or less, but I also do not understand the need to review.

Hope

****Hi - i don't know how many "plants" there are in a typical forum, but when i did mine there seemed to be at least one - the person who started off the discussion in the morning. Also there were loads of participants who were "reviewing" - ie they had done it before and were doing it again. I asked a few of them, why? if the forum is so good, why do they need to hear it again? (personally, I think they were doing it out of boredom and a lack of friends/things to do at the weekend). None of them gave me a satisfactory answer - but many of them were 'sharing'.

But then, I had very negative experience of my weekend (I've just posted separately on it).*****


I reviewed the Forum recently. The reason I did it was because I forgot a lot of the stuff. It wasn't as earth-shattering the second time. I wouldn't call it a complete waste of time though. Plus, they are continually changing the Forum so it was kind of interesting to see some of the adaptations. Plus, each Forum Leader has their own unique style.

Your statement doesn't make sense about if it was so good, why would they want to hear it again. People tend to go back to things they like again. It is like saying that someone who had a good time at Disneyland, why would they bother to go back. Or why do I go to the same restaurant so often and order the exact same meal.

I don't know why other people do it. I didn't ask.

I don't think there are any 'plants'. I assisted a couple of times and I would have been aware of a plant I believe.

Sorry to hear you had a negative experience of the weekend. I don't know how one puts it out of their mind. I guess my advice is to just look at it as a lame seminar.

Cheers

"Your statement doesn't make sense about if it was so good, why would they want to hear it again. People tend to go back to things they like again. It is like saying that someone who had a good time at Disneyland, why would they bother to go back. Or why do I go to the same restaurant so often and order the exact same meal."


I didn't mean it to sound like that - I wasn't comparing it to something like going to Disneyland. more like learning to ride a bike. The Landmark "Education" forum is sold as training and learning how to do something better. My thought was that if the training is good you shouldn't have to be 'trained' again. (unless you were not properly trained in the first place).

Siam:

This is pretty much the same lame old sing-song apologetic any hard core Landmark groupie offers, though you seem to be trying to water it down a bit for this board.

However, if you are the same "Siam" and Landmark devotee that posts at alt.fan.Landmark, you are actually a real flamer and fanatic.

For the record, when people repeat the course it clearly supports the conclusion that there is such a thing as a "Landmark junkie" or addict. Moreover, they certainly do support and essentially shill for the leader. In this sense they serve as not only repeat income, but also as a useful tool to manipulate newcomers.

And Landmark leaders don't stray from the set formula. The Forum is the Forum is the Forum. After all, its Werner's licensed "technology" and it hasn't been modified much since the 1970s when it was called EST.

By the way, I have repeatedly agreed to take the Forum when various Landmark devotees offered to sponsor me.

You know how that goes, "You have to experience Landmark"...blah, blah, blah.

But I explicitly refused to sign away any of my rights through Landmark's paperwork.

Subsequently, the home office in San Francisco didn't follow up.

Big surprise.

Landmark has been sued so many times for personal injuries that they attempt to protect themselves through paperwork that requires anyone that signs/attends to binding arbitration, thus relinquishing rights to the option of a civil suit in court with a jury.

Neat trick, but no thanks.

My advice to anyone is to read the paperwork carefully and don't sign anything.

Obviously, Landmark/EST has a deeply troubled history. So troubled in fact, that it really defies logic why anyone who is aware of that history would even bother to take any of its courses.

There are better alternatives for education with less risk and more value elsewhere, such as community colleges, support groups, social services etc.

Counseling and/or education from qualified professionals is preferable to learning borrowed philosophies devised by a encyclopedia salesman.

The point is that no one really needs Landmark's courses and there are more cost-effective and safer ways to "get it," i.e. read about Landmark for free on the Internet.

After all the hype Landmark is actually a for-profit business, not some kind of philosophic philanthropy. And given the cost of its courses and the inherent risks involved, which have well established, it really isn't worth it.

I don't know a whole lot about the law, (perhaps someone with more background could corroborate or refute this), but I don't believe one relinquishes one's rights by signing a binding arbitration agreement when there is deception involved. In my business, a full disclosure, including all possible risks and complications, must accompany the arbitration agreement. The fact that Landmark uses what has been recognized by professionals as hypnotic or trance inducing techniques, what they refer to as "processes" or guided visualization, without disclosing them would put them in the fraud category, legally, along with all the other things they don't disclose. I imagine their propensity to assign different words to describe what they do could be used against them.

Also, I have been told many times by various lawyers that such documents are worthless. Just something to intimidate people into thinking they have given up their rights. As I understand it, in a legal proceeding, anyone can claim they didn't understand or read the thing they signed. I don't know how this plays out in court. I think scientologists do the same thing, i.e. get people to sign away their rights to recompense, but this has been seen for what it is. Anyone know otherwise?


Ellen

***This is pretty much the same lame old sing-song apologetic any hard core Landmark groupie offers, though you seem to be trying to water it down a bit for this board.***

Negative.


***However, if you are the same "Siam" and Landmark devotee that posts at alt.fan.Landmark, you are actually a real flamer and fanatic.***

Yes, I am the same Landmark devotee and a real flamer and fanatic. I have a Landmark tattoo on my right ankle and a picture of Werner Erhard on my left forearm.

Have you posted on AFL?


***For the record, when people repeat the course it clearly supports the conclusion that there is such a thing as a "Landmark junkie" or addict. Moreover, they certainly do support and essentially shill for the leader. In this sense they serve as not only repeat income, but also as a useful tool to manipulate newcomers.***

I don't know why other people went. Maybe there are some Landmark junkies. If that place makes them happy, then big deal. There are Church junkies, golf junkies, poker junkies, etc. They are all supporting some 'industry' as well. If people 'enjoy' Landmark, than let them live there.


***And Landmark leaders don't stray from the set formula. The Forum is the Forum is the Forum. After all, its Werner's licensed "technology" and it hasn't been modified much since the 1970s when it was called EST.***

When was the last time you did the Forum/est to make that comparison. Every person is different no matter if the 'formula' is basically static.



***By the way, I have repeatedly agreed to take the Forum when various Landmark devotees offered to sponsor me.

You know how that goes, "You have to experience Landmark"...blah, blah, blah.

But I explicitly refused to sign away any of my rights through Landmark's paperwork.

Subsequently, the home office in San Francisco didn't follow up.

Big surprise.***

So don't do the Landmark Forum. Who really cares?


***Landmark has been sued so many times for personal injuries that they attempt to protect themselves through paperwork that requires anyone that signs/attends to binding arbitration, thus relinquishing rights to the option of a civil suit in court with a jury.***

Unfortunately our society has become so litigious that every business has to take extreme measures to protect themselves. People can sue for anything and there are so many lawyers who will take a case on contigency or just provide enough hassle that an insurance company will pay off the case rather than spend resources on a court trial -- even one where they are 100% sure they will win.



***Neat trick, but no thanks.

My advice to anyone is to read the paperwork carefully and don't sign anything.***

Then they can't do Landmark. And if you don't sign papers, you can't see a doctor, rent a car, get a driver's license or vote. You always have a choice.


***Obviously, Landmark/EST has a deeply troubled history. So troubled in fact, that it really defies logic why anyone who is aware of that history would even bother to take any of its courses.***

America has such a troubled history of slavery, racism, and war that it really defies logic why anyone who is aware of that history wouldn't bother to emigrate.



****There are better alternatives for education with less risk and more value elsewhere, such as community colleges, support groups, social services etc.

Counseling and/or education from qualified professionals is preferable to learning borrowed philosophies devised by a encyclopedia salesman.***

Sure.


***The point is that no one really needs Landmark's courses***

Nobody ~needs~ anything in life except food and shelter.


*** and there are more cost-effective and safer ways to "get it," i.e. read about Landmark for free on the Internet.***

Go ahead and read about counseling on the Internet and see how far that gets you. Or read about how to play golf so you don't have to waste money seeing a golf pro and let's see the improvement in your golf game.



***After all the hype Landmark is actually a for-profit business, not some kind of philosophic philanthropy.***

This is not hidden one bit. 100% FOR-PROFIT business.



***And given the cost of its courses and the inherent risks involved, which have well established, it really isn't worth it.***

In your ~humble~ opinion. I think it is well worth it, given the low cost of the courses and low inherent risk.

Cheers

As you admit, "I am the same Landmark devotee and a real flamer and fanatic."

Thanks.

Now everyone on this board can clearly understand where you are coming from and what your agenda is.

FYI--your flames will not be posted.

Thanks GC,

So I suppose it's possible that what I witnessed was each participant's unique emotional reaction to being manipulated and hearing some of the material for the first time. For someone who has not done much reading in psychology or philosophy or even watched Oprah for that matter, doing the Forum must be akin to being hit between the eyes with a sledge hammer. To be told everything is your racket - even your health problems - is not easy to take. To go in believing you're a screw-up and having it confirmed must be just as depressing.