Geoffrey C. Filbert

haiqu

haiqu

Well-known member
Hatshepsut said:
The binder has a few pages missing from decades ago because I used them in a separate folder to do processes. But, which paragraphs do you want to verify. My copy is not from the internet. Someone physically took their own original to Kinko's and ran off duplicates of the pages. The internet copy seems bigger in volume, at a glance.
Click to expand...
Good to know it still (mostly) exists. A cursory read failed to locate the passage in question, I'll get back to you.

I knew I should have written myself a note. :p
 
D

Deleted member 51

Guest
Zertel said:
Wow! Some people really got in DEEP. I hesitate to even comment.
Click to expand...
Ah, yes and no. Hats is like some kind of self-studied Professor of Sci-Fi and Past Life Religious Studies. It appears she’s found a buddy or two with similar interests. But she’s cool, she just enjoys it like discussing philosophy. Turns every stone, every possibility, but she’s also incredibly normal in a good way.

IDK the other guy yet, but it’s cool they’re enjoying whatever it is they’re talking about, lol. I got lost a long time ago. :LOL:
 
ILove2Lurk

ILove2Lurk

Lisbeth Salander Redux
Ed8 said:
Server can't handle the zip, too big. And it refuses to load any of the mp3 files.
Click to expand...
I just happened upon this thread in passing.

To share files, you have to put them in your dropbox account (file sharing platform) and provide a link,
where people can go and download what you want them to have. You are not going to upload zips or MP3s
to the message board or via a PM (private message). Message board does not work that way. I have shared
things with others by giving them a dropbox link to use. A dropbox link is non-identifying, AFAIK. Not a
worry. Best of my knowledge, it's secure and very obfuscated, in terms of who owns the dropbox:
​
Can a Dropbox shared link be traced back to the user who shared it? Not anymore. ​
Some time before the shared link from the public folder used to include the username ​
on the URL. This has changed now, so there's no way anymore to trace back the user​
that generated a shared link.​
​
Another way to go is to put the file(s) up on dropbox and tell people it will only be available for a day or
two and then delete the file(s) from your dropbox. That way it's not available forever. That's what happened
to those files you got a 404 on. Guy just deleted them after a while. That's all.

Hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
programmer_guy

programmer_guy

True ex-Scientologist
Chuck J. said:
Reminds me of Star Trek TNG with the Borg. You have to be very smart to fight them and beat them.

I have some of those McMaster's audio's on an Ext. HD. Unfortunately the HD will not mount on my laptop. Or I'd post them all here in .mp3

The drive itself still works, but it's a bit beyond my Linux abilities to troubleshoot & fix the problem. It's probably a simple 5 minute line of code easy fix.... but IDK how to do it.
Click to expand...
A USB adapter for an external HDD for Linux Mint should work.
 
Barile

Barile

Well-known member
ILove2Lurk said:
I just happened upon this thread in passing.

To share files, you have to put them in your dropbox account (file sharing platform) and provide a link,
where people can go and download what you want them to have. You are not going to upload zips or MP3s
to the message board or via a PM (private message). Message board does not work that way. I have shared
things with others by giving them a dropbox link to use. A dropbox link is non-identifying, AFAIK. Not a
worry. Best of my knowledge, it's secure and very obfuscated, in terms of who owns the dropbox:
​
Can a Dropbox shared link be traced back to the user who shared it? Not anymore. ​
Some time before the shared link from the public folder used to include the username ​
on the URL. This has changed now, so there's no way anymore to trace back the user​
that generated a shared link.​
​
Hope this helps.
Click to expand...
absolutely, dropbox accounts are free, and you don't need to have local storage enabled, as it's stored remotely.
why didn't I suggest that? hmmm. oh.. ya, it does cost.
 
Hatshepsut

Hatshepsut

Well-known member
Last edited:
Is-Was

Is-Was

Member
Hatshepsut said:
They do open up. I had wanted to listen to Every Man His Own Messiah. Thanks for the working links. I wouldn't have known where to look for those. Was hoping the audio would be in the Clearbird files..

Your cache is the same one Ed was trying to share, minus one or two?
Click to expand...
Don't know. The two links to "Power Processes" appear to be to two (identical) copies of a single lecture, which is not one of the three you posted above.
 
haiqu

haiqu

Well-known member
JustSheila said:
IDK the other guy yet, but it’s cool they’re enjoying whatever it is they’re talking about, lol. I got lost a long time ago. :LOL:
Click to expand...
"I'm just this guy, you know ..." (to paraphrase the shrink on HHGTTG when describing Zaphod Beeblebrox)
 
haiqu

haiqu

Well-known member
Hatshepsut said:
The binder has a few pages missing from decades ago because I used them in a separate folder to do processes. But, which paragraphs do you want to verify. My copy is not from the internet. Someone physically took their own original to Kinko's and ran off duplicates of the pages. The internet copy seems bigger in volume, at a glance.
Click to expand...
Sheesh, sorry for the comm lag on this request. I finally re-read Excalibur Revisited from top to tail. There were a number of difficult areas, mainly brought about through Filbert's lack of formal English expression training. Also, actual procedures are not outlined for many of his advanced materials.

Here's an example of one difficulty that wasn't easily resolved, though it wasn't the one to which I referred in 2021.

In the first part of the Epilogue Process he says to run a "quartet" (item, nix item, un item, nix un item) on nine flows using the corners of five concentric triangles, and to clean off six specific things on each run (Objections, Intentions, Shoulds, Pretences, Expectations, Nothings). Then to do it again prefixing the items with not. The example he gives of the first command is: "Is there anything on self to self on absolute affinity?"

There are a number of issues with this description.

1. There is no reference to what a nix item, un item or nix un item might be. It could be in the tech but I've never seen it anywhere.
2. The outer triangle contains nix know, nix responsibility and nix contol. So by the end we're doing a very clumsy command that goes: "Are there any (Objections, Intentions, Shoulds, Pretences, Expectations, Nothings) on self to self on absolute nix un not nix know?" which is pure bullshit.
3. The additive word absolute in the above command is not explained.

I'm OT III and ran the first three groups (affinity, reality and communication) late last night. Each question did not get 1 div of charge off as claimed, and they took far less than 10 minutes per run, but then again my track isn't wide open as I'd expect would be necessary for maximum effect. However, there is a distinctly large chunk of case change this morning, so I have to admit he's onto something.

Edit: I found reference to a nix item in HCOB 12 May AD13 which was formerly considered confidential. This bulletin "RI FORM" covers GPM Implants, so I expect a complete study of all confidential GPM materials would be necessary in order to understand the Filbert process described. The process is not operating on GPMs however, which I know because I recently keyed out the whole subject of goals using a process of my own invention.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top