*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
Just replying in general to the topics of the moment including the one about
"valences" by Janet.
I can see why ex scientologists might want to thrash out differences in Scio vs
TROM terminology.
But didn't Dennis claim that TROM was all that was needed? Why mix the two?
If there is a need for such discussions why not have them on a scientologist
discussion board,
an ex scientologists board, a Free Zone board etc.
If TROM is as good as it's supposed to be why not use it as it is?
Isn't it missing the point to be trying to interpret (and maybe practise) TROM
through very scientology tinted spectacles?
I'm not trying to censor people. And people won't be censored anyway,-
I'm just saying that TROM looks good so why not give it a fair go as it is?
Dennis seemed to be saying you don't have to have a lot of that scientology
stuff.
Are you interested in finding out if that's true or not?
ME
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 08:52:44 +1000
Subject: Re: [TROM1] Multiple Viewpoints
Yes indeed, Pete, I LUV being able to assume a new or another's viewpoint -
it's so refreshing (like taking a holiday)
And thanks for sharing yr experience re failed games as a toddler - the light
definitely went on for me with that.
PJ
www.wspca-international.org
Click Here View photos of singles in your area
_________________________________________________________________
Drag n’ drop—Get easy photo sharing with Windows Live™ Photos.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/products/photos.aspx
_______________________________________________
Trom mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
