6404C16 SHSpec-16 Auditing By Lists

     The Auditor is a success as a magazine.  Fred Hare is the editor.

     One of the goals series has turned out to be nonexistent.  Why does it
always take LRH to find these things?  It puts a lot of responsibility on
him.  This puts some extra strain on his case.  He is currently in a zone of
over-correction, looking so hard for things wrong that all he finds is
invalidation of what is right.

     Auditing by list is done at Level III, the needle level.  Lower levels
are tone arm levels.  Few auditors getting started in auditing are aware of
the skill needed for good metering with the needle.  Unlike the TA, the needle
can be upset by session events, although the TA can show if the PC is not
getting gain.  But the process has a lot to do with the TA, too.

     The needle registers first the session and second the process or reaction
of the PC.  A TA is "not a direct representation of the reaction of the PC to
the session."  The TA does not analyze the session beyond saying whether the
PC is getting gain.  "Not so the needle, [which] first and foremost registers
the session and secondarily registers the process or reaction of the PC."  The
only difficult manifestation of the needle for the auditor to learn to cope
with is the dirty needle.  Its source is always the auditor, nothing else.  It
traces back to the auditor's failure to handle the auditing comm cycle, or the
larger auditing cycle.  The absolute of never having the PC's needle dirty is
unattainable, but it is the auditor's reaction that produces the dirty needle,
by not accepting his answer, not acknowledging, cutting his comm cycle, or
whatever.

     Level III is almost totally devoted to needle.  At this level, if you
follow the needle, you will get TA action, and if you don't, you won't.  The
PC may have no charge on a question.  He may have no interest in it.  If so,
the needle will not register.  If you miss seeing the no-reaction and give the
question again, you get a read by virtue of the PC's considerations, protest,
or whatever.  The first reaction of the needle is to the session.  The second
reaction of the needle is to the process or question.  If the auditor
overlooks this, the PC goes out of session, and the needle will never clean up
on the question, etc.

     Therefore, you don't let auditors at Level III assess anything, since if
they don't realize the read-on-session-first rule, they can foul up ARC break
assessments repeatedly and worsen the ARC break.

     The Mark V E-meter is beautifully balanced to read maximally on thought
and minimally on body motions.  It reads just below the PC's reality, at a
level where the PC can have reality.  The meter has a greater degree of
workability than you will ever need, so calls for improvement are passe.  A
bad meter won't give you needle response on thought.  When a needle is moving
fast, you can miss reads because the inertia of the needle prevents a
manifestation.  If the needle is quiet, it is more sensitive.

     If someone can really handle a meter at Level III, he will have no
trouble with assessments at Level IV.  At Level III, you have to learn to keep
the needle clean by keeping the session good, so the session at no time gets
in the road of the needle reads that you ars getting as you audit.  Cleaning a
clean causes the PC to go against the session.  The needle is now not reading
his bank.  It is reading his reaction in the session.  The auditor must know
first that this can happen and second what to do when it does and how it
manifests.  LRH claims to have made all these errors, with the additional
difficulty of not knowing that they were mistakes.

     Any change of pace of the needle is a read.  It will be discoverable by
the PC if it read on the meter.  On Level VI, there comes a time when the PC
stops reading well on the meter anyway, because he doesn't have much reactive
mind left, and the PC's postulates in session are what give rocket reads.  If
one has an ability with which one has lots of problems, there is reactivity
mixed up in it, giving problems and taking the power out of the ability.
Getting rid of the reactivity gives a person the full scope of his ability.
The magnitude of his performance is then much greater.  A PC who fears that he
will lose his creative ability by getting rid of the bank needs to know this.

     At Level III, of course, there isn't too much of a problem.  The being is
mostly reactive, and the needle behaves pretty well on reactivity and doesn't
get in your face too much on the session.  "Somebody can still be upset about
the session and sometimes still even read a bit on the needle....  At Level
III, the reactive read is larger than the analytical read."  But you have to
be able to keep the needle clean by keeping the comm cycle straight.  And you
have to be able to tell when the PC is running right and not in need of
session-correcting.  Don't harass the PC when things are going all right, and
above all, don't blame the PC for the strange behavior of the needle.  Be
aware that something has happened in the session that is showing up on the
needle.

     Knowing these data, you can do auditing by list.  Auditing by lists has
nothing to do with assessment.  "On auditing by lists, you are not interested
in which level or item of the list reads [best].  You are simply interested in
going down the list and making sure that each one in turn is cleaned up if it
reads.  You're not trying to go down a list and find one of those levels!"
Assessment means reading down a list to find which item reads best, because
that is the item.  Auditing by list is no effort to find the item.  It is just
"making sure that each question, taken up in turn, is no longer reading, which
requires ... reading the question to find out if it reads, and then continuing
to get answers until [the question] no longer reads, noticing ... that the
question is no longer reading, and passing on to the next."  Differentiation
between reads on the list question and session reads caused by the PC's
reaction to something going on in session is a necessary part of this action,
so you clean up the right things. [On the above, cf. Method 3 and 5 list
handling.]

     What if the needle gives one indication and the PC says something else?
For instance, the PC may say, "No," and the meter reads.  Then clean up
possible session outnesses with "protest", "inval", and "cleaning a clean".
Then recheck the question.  This keeps the PC from being invalidated by your
insistence on something's being there.

     "These lists [by which you are auditing] are nothing more than the
plus-minus misdemeanors and upsets that a [person] could have."  An auditor
should be able to make up a list for a particular PC.  Only a few prepared
lists can be done over and over again.  L1 and L4 are the lists used for
auditing by list, with the questions asked for a broad scope.  You can
alternately clean L1 and L4 and keep getting different areas cleaned up.
Rudiments and prepchecking are, in fact, a kind of auditing by lists.  "Level
III is that level where you clean the list....  If [one] can get through that,
then [he] can assess."  At Level IV, you are using a list in a different way.
You are looking for the level to use in looking for a service fac.

     The reads that you get at Level III are much tinier than what you will
get at Level VI, so don't take little reads at Level VI.  A PC who has been
ARC breaky gets all his BPC cleaned up and will come up shining, when audited
by list on L1 and L4.

