Scientology pages index  |  Contact

The story of David Mayo (Snr C/S Int 1978-82) (1)  or   A detailed analysis of the data found in publications relating (Inquiring: Was he a Saint or a Judas?)

(to other Scientology pages)

1) G e n e r a l   o v e r v i e w / i n t r o d u c t i o n :   M i s s i o n   s t a t e m e n t ,   o v e r v i e w ,   r e s e a r c h   s p e c i f i c s I n t r o d u c t i o n   t o   S c i e n t o l o g y   a n d   L R H K e e p i n g   S c i e n t o l o g y   W o r k i n g ,   f u n d a m en t al s S c i e n t o l o g y   i n   m e d i a   a nd   I n t e r n e t   ( +   f o r u m s ,   W i k i p e d i a ) S c i e n t o l o g y :   I t s   t r u e   h i s t o r y   e x p o s e d ? S c i e n t o l o g y   Q & A   ( F A Q ) E x t e r n a l   l i n k s M a t e r i a l s   w a n t   l i s t R e c o m m e n d e d   l i s t   o f   m a t e r i a l s 2) R e s p o n s e s   ( w i t h   a n n o t a t i o n s ) : A p p r e c i a t i v e   r e s p o n s e s   t o   m y   p a g e s C r i t i q u e   r e c e i v e d   ( 1 )   f r o m   c h u r c h g o i n g   S c i e n t o l o g i s t s C r i t i q u e   r e c e i v e d   ( 2 )   f r o m   o u t - o f - c h u r c h   S c i e n t o l o g i s t s C r i t i q u e   r e c e i v e d    ( 3 )   f r o m   a n t i - S c i e n t o l o g i s t s 3) T o p i c s   o f   p a r t i c u l a r   i n t e r e s t : (a): G e n e r a l   t o p i c s H o l y   S c r i p t u r e s   v s   S c i e n t o l o g y L R H   v s   D i c t i o n a r i e s L R H   v s   t h e o r y   o f   e v o l u t i o n L R H ' s   w o r k s   o f   f i c t i o n (b): O r g a n i z a t i o n a l   t o p i c s A   p r i n t i n g   h i s t o r y   o f   t h e   m a t e r i a l s   o f   S c i e n t o l o g y S c i e n t o l o g y   M e m b e r s h i p :   H A S I   v s   I A S L R H   v s   p r i c i n g   p o l i c i e s T h e   c o p y r i g h t s   i s s u e   a n d   l i c e n s i n g (c): T e c h n i c a l   t o p i c s H i s t o r y   o f   G r a d e   C h a r t :   a )   G e n e r a l H i s t o r y   o f   G r a d e   C h a r t :   b )   D e t a i l e d ‘ C l e a r ’   d e f i n e d N E D   f o r   O T s T h e   ‘ P r i m a r y   R u n d o w n ’ 4) C o n t r o v e r s i a l   t o p i c s : M i s t a k e n   i d e a s   o f   ‘ E t h i c s ’   c l a r i f i e d T h e   F a i r    G a m e   L a w P r a c t i c e   o f   D i s c o n n e c t i o n S e c u r i t y   C h e c k i n g F r e e l o a d e r s   v s   E x - s t a f f   m e m b e r s T h e   ‘ R e h a b i l i t a t i o n   P r o j e c t   F o r c e ’   ( R P F ) 5) C h a n g e s   i n   t h e   f l o w   o f   ‘ i n f o r m a t i o n ’: (a): A l t e r a t i o n s   ( L R H   o r   n o n- L R H ? ) L R H   v s   A l t e r a t i o n s N o n - L R H   t u r n s   i n t o   L R H ?   &   P r o p o s a l   t o   s o l u t i o n T h e    ‘ C r a m m i n g   S e r i e s ’   -   L R H   o r   n o t   L R H ? B a s e d   o n   L R H   p u b l i c a t i o n s (b): G e n e r a l   o v e r v i e w L R H   v s   A   N e w   O r d e r   ( i n t r o d u c t i o n ) → A d m i n i s t r a t i v e   a n d    o r g a n i z a t i o n a l   m a t t e r s S e t u p   o f   t h e   p r i n t e d   m a t e r i a l s   ( 1 9 7 3 - 8 6 ) T h e   R T R C ,   t h e   u n i t   t h a t   w r o t e   L R H   i s s u e s   ( 1 9 7 3 - 8 2 ) T h e   d a w n i n g   o f   R T C   a n d   n e w   m a n a g e m e n t   ( 1 9 8 2 - 8 3 ) → T e c h n i c a l   m a t t e r s I n t r o d u c t i o n   t o   t h e   e v e n t   o f   l o s i n g   a   B r i d g e ) A n a l y s i s   o f   H C O B   “ T e c h   C o r r e c t i o n   R o u n d - u p ” L o s t   B r i d g e :   T e c h   c h a n g e s   d u r i n g   1 9 7 8 - 8 2 T h e   h i s t o r y   o f   t h e   o r i g i n a l   O T   V I I I ‘ G o l d e n   A g e   o f   T e c h ’   ( G A T )   a n a l y s i s D r i l l i n g   i n   S c i e n t o l o g y (c): T h e   m a t t e r   o f   D a v i d   M a y o S t o r y   o f   D a v i d   M a y o ‘ S O   E D   2 3 4 4   I n t’   a n a l y s i s T r a i n i n g   d r i l l s   ( T R s ) M a y o   r e f e r e n c e   l i s t 6) C o n s p i r a c i e s   -   I n   L .   R o n   H u b b a r d ' s   f o o t s t e p s S c i e n t o l o g y   v s   a   N e w   W o r l d   O r d e r → W h e r e   i s   L .   R o n   H u b b a r d ?   ( c h r o n o l o g y   o f   S c n   h i s t o r y ) W h e r e a b o u t s   o f   L .   R o n   H u b b a r d   c h r o n o l o g y T h e   e r a   o f   a d o r a t i o n ;   P r e s e n t a t i o n   o f   L .   R o n   H u b b a r d L .   R o n   H u b b a r d   i n t o   a r t i s t r y :   M u s i c   &   F i l m → W h e r e   i s   h i s   w i f e   a n d   f a m i l y ? S t o r y   o f   M a r y   S u e   H u b b a r d T h e   l a s t   s t a n d :   T h e   G u a r d i a n   O f f i c e 7) S c i e n t o l o g y   u n d e r   a t t a c k (a): A   p r e m e d i t a t e d   s e r i e s   o f   o c c u r r e n c e s ?   ( ’ 8 0 s   c o n s p i r a c y ) I n t r o d u c t i o n   &   R o n   D e W o l f G e r r y   A r m s t r o n g   ( ‘ a f f i r m a t i o n s ’ ) R u s s e l l   M i l l e r    ( ‘ B a r e - F a c e d   M e s s i a h ’ ) A   r e l i g i o n   c r e a t e d   f o r   t h e   m o n e y ? (b): B a t t l e s   f o u g h t   a n d   t h e   i n t e r n e t   ( 2 0 1 6 -   ) L e a h   R e m i n i :   S c i e n t o l o g y   a n d   t h e   A f t e r m a t h   ( T V   s h o w )

>> Do you want to help with preserving the original technology? <<  Consult my want list here!

Please note that words with an asterisk (*) are defined at the bottom of this page! Only first appearances are indicated.

	“Individual staff members, secretaries and executive secretaries are commended, promoted, demoted or Comm Eved* on the basis of their stats*. A person with high stats has Ethics protection. A person with low stats not only has no Ethics protection but tends to be hounded. ...
	Run only by statistics.”
	L. Ron Hubbard
	(from HCO PL 5 Feb 70 “Statistics, Management by”)

The story of David Mayo (Snr C/S Int 1978-82)  (page 1)

 
Index:

		What's the deal with David Mayo really? (page 1)
			(Includes: Saint or Judas?; A conspiracy theory? Disrupting a Bridge ...; Where is David Mayo today? Did he quit Scientology?)
		A necessary word of introduction to this study ...  (includes disclaimer)
			- A communication ...  (How I fell into this) - Provisional release of these pages
	General information
		An introductory note about references written and issued by David Mayo
			(Includes: Initial observations and findings; ‘Robotic TRs’; Actions taken by the church)
		Statistics and some considerations ...
		About David Mayo
			- A few historical facts concerning David Mayo
				(Includes notes about “‘Flag Conditions Order 7138’, 2 Mar 83” & “SO ED 2344 Int’, 20 Aug 83”)
			- A few notes about the person David Mayo and how people perceived him - The ‘Senior C/S International’  (incl. ‘Senior C/S Int Bulletin’)
		David Mayo about attributed authorship
		‘SO ED 2344 Int’, 20 Aug 83 “The Story of a Squirrel: David Mayo”   (on different page)
			- “misdefinition of the State of Clear” (The definition of Clear, A note about NOTs (NED for OTs) & Its relation with the NOTs materials);  “Mixing Rundowns”? & “Torpedoing of a Qual Division”?;  “Sabotage of Ethics Technology”?;  “Attempt to Wreck Auditor Training”? (Professional TRs removed as a prerequisite for Academy Levels, ‘Training Routines Remodernized’ & Additional TR references);  ‘Destructive “KSW” Issues by Mayo’;  Assuming the “hat of Source”?;  “Deliberately mis-C/Sed the auditing of his wife, Merrill Mayo”?;  Attempting to overrule ‘Religious Technology Center’?;  “further information on what Mayo did” and “many other crimes”?;  The ‘scare’ factor;  Final comments about this SO ED ...
	Technical matters
		The matter of “misdefinition of the State of Clear” and related (page 2)
		The source of ‘NED for OTs’ (NOTs) and its direct consequence (1978)
		Some notes concerning the ‘Happiness Rundown’ (HRD) (1980-81)
			- The Happiness Rundown - Some observations made while comparing the 1980-81 with the 1984 version - Notes about authorship
		The matter of ‘Training Routines’ (TRs)   (on separate page)
		Did David Mayo cause sequence change: First grades then Dianetics? (Nov 81)
		‘No-Interference Area’ interfered with & stiffening Sec Checking procedures implemented by David Mayo? (Mar 82)
		The ‘David Mayo Bridge’, established 1978-82 and still going strong this day...
		Course checksheets and some peculiarities concerning the ‘Hubbard Solo Auditor Course’
	Reference material
		List of any and all references that are relating, possibly relating, or may bear any relevance to David Mayo and/or his assistant Merrill Mayo (1978-83)   (on separate page)

 
What's the deal with David Mayo really?
(Includes:  Saint or Judas?; A conspiracy theory? Disrupting a Bridge ...; Where is David Mayo today? Did he quit Scientology?)

	“But the moment that you move even a sixteenth of a millimeter sideways off of what is generally applicable to all minds, you are again into the particularities and opinions. ...
	In other words, even if you arrive at the technology, you still have the task of safeguarding the technology because, once more, it can easily turn and become a false technology.”          LRH (from Saint Hill Special Briefing Course lecture #308, renumbered 1991: #338 “Saint Hill Service Facsimile Handling”, given on 18 Sept 63)

Saint or Judas?

David Mayo, once top dog and then thrown down the gutter. Is it possible to maintain the position of top tech person (after L. Ron Hubbard) for a period of 9 years to then find out he was all bad? In effect this is the tale that the Church of Scientology is conveying to us! Well, would that be possible, this in an organization that claims it has an advanced technology that specializes in making man more sane and able, where such a really bad person is able to stay on that long without exposing himself at a much earlier date? It doesn't sound very plausible, but what then is the deal with David Mayo really?

We have these 2 published writings, that Condition Order and that Executive Directive, both written and issued in 1983, obviously with the intent to defame and demolish the reputation of that person David Mayo, concluding and telling how immensely bad he really was. We find that the Executive Directive is littered with paraphrases signed with L. Ron Hubbard, adjudicating that “Mayo was simply a bird dog. The definition of a bird dog is: ‘Somebody sent in by an enemy to mess things up.’”. It would thus seem here that L. Ron Hubbard himself was in on it.

Scientologists that practice Scientology outside of the church however tell that David Mayo had been framed and that all the accusations of the church were bogus and had no base of truth whatsoever. They say that this Executive Directive was just a made up thing filled with inaccuracies. So, who is right here? Did the church follow the rules of the game or was it an uncalled-for witch hunt? Both tales are being told. So, which is it?

A conspiracy theory? Disrupting a Bridge ...

Isn't that all a rather strange thing? Just think about it! Therefore, was this a mission accomplished? Could this possibly have been an indeed very carefully planned operation that had been met with a success? After all the whole field of Scientology practitioners that were active outside of the reign of the Church of Scientology and those within the Church of Scientology, they all had now adopted and were promoting that very same route that we appropriately will refer to as the David Mayo Bridge.

What happened was that David Mayo, after leaving the church, established the Church of the New Civilization, with its Advanced Ability Center (AAC) in Santa Barbara, California in 1983. It was met with a steady success, after which it then expanded to more and more places, including Europe. Everyone that disagreed with the church basically saw David Mayo as a good guy that had been put through ordeals and was harassed by the Church of Scientology. David Mayo also had the repute of being a competent tech person, after all he had been top tech dog for a great number of years. We had now additional Scientology groups starting up that were adjusting to and fully accepting the status quo of the tech established during 1978-82 as it was in use by David Mayo in his group at the Advanced Ability Center.

“Who is talking, really?” This obviously raises some questions here. After all, this technology itself is considered the most valuable aspect of Scientology! Now, if you can't get rid of an effective technology, the only option you have left is to attempt to somehow disrupt it. Was David Mayo the means and the grain of sand that was added to the clockwork mechanism to disrupt it? Could he have been an undercover or sleeper agent of some sort send out to accomplish exactly that! You see, we have to face the situation here that virtually no person or group today is delivering the original LRH Bridge or is delivering Standard Dianetics. Now, why is that? Didn't L. Ron Hubbard forewarn long since that “As the organization rapidly expands, so will it be a growing temptation for antisurvival elements to gain entry and infiltrate, and attempts to plant will be made.” and that “the United States government and the efforts of that government since 1955, stepped up since 1963, to seize Scientology rather than forbid or stop it”. Coincidentally the same year that David Mayo had joined up with Scientology.

Well, reflect for a moment again on that paraphrase that we find in that Executive Directive in where a supposed L. Ron Hubbard wrote: “Mayo was simply a bird dog. ... ‘Somebody sent in by an enemy to mess things up.’”. There may indeed be more angles to this then one originally had figured! See, this was interpreted by the out of church Scientologist as an untruth, when it in reality was true. Whereas the Church of Scientology parishioner believed it be true, but he figured that for the wrong reason. So, are people being played here?

We have two reasons to think if David Mayo may have been a person that could be lead behind the curtain rather easily. This because of
	(1)	that he thought it plausible, or just assumed, that the work was not completed as yet, and
	(2)	that he believed that L. Ron Hubbard would have had any reason at all to come back after 20-25 years to resume leadership of the organization.
When in effect L. Ron Hubbard had resigned the executive posts already in 1966 , this coupled with that he had announced in 1970 that the work was completed. Additionally L. Ron Hubbard had written earlier in 1957 that “I'll not always be here on guard.” Therefore neither of these reasons here above listed at (1) and (2) are worthy plausible options by any measure! Consult further arguments on this here (separate window).

Where is David Mayo today? Did he quit Scientology?

Next time we hear from a David Mayo again was in 2011, when we have a likely imposter appearing on that infamous anti-Scientology forum. It seemed serious at first, but it was not for long that this individual started to post as a typical run-of-the-mill anti-Scientologist and was referring to spacecooties. It would not have been very likely that a previous tech person of the repute of David Mayo would use such derogatory expressions. Soon he was joined by a Merrill Mayo. They got quite a few fooled there, including the forum owner and various Scientology old-timers, for a while at least. I had 3 persons contacting me and confiding to me David Mayo finally had returned. Well, if this would have been an unlikely case of mistaken identity, and it indeed would have been David Mayo, then what would this tell us about him in regards to him referring to spacecooties?

Finally in 2017 the news came that David Mayo had passed away. (19 Nov. 1940 - 23 Oct. 2017)

I am told his family put up this website in his memory (no Scientology is shared on there though). It has pictures and other things. Visit https://davidmayo.smugmug.com/ (last checked: 28 Juni 2021).

• A communication ...  (How I fell into this)
• Provisional release of these pages

This may very well be the most charged subject concerning Scientology of them all! The person David Mayo has been displayed since the early ’80s as the evil of evils, truly as being the worst squirrel* of them all! Today he is still regarded and considered like that, i.e. within the Church of Scientology. There, everything he has touched is supposed to be taken out of reach of everyone. For example on a copy of a checksheet of the “Hubbard Basic Career Auditor Course” issued March 1982 I found the entry: “TAPE:  8103C10  INTRODUCTION TO THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN COURSE by Senior C/S International” crossed out and someone had added the handwritten notice: “Cancelled, tape to be destroyed.”. Another instance of this I found in a copy of ‘The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology: Volume XII, 1978-1979’ (1980). On page 264 we find HCOB 13 Dec 78R “PC Set-Ups and C/S 53”, a handwritten notice had been added saying: “Cancelled — Mayo issue”.

In spite of the overwhelming efforts taken by the Church of Scientology to defame the person David Mayo, the story now also has to be told on a dicey area where automatic group think only dictates he was a bad dude. Hence various persons may even exert the very same automatic A=A in regards to the person that has the nerve to start looking a little bit closer at things and tells about his findings! Well, this is certainly a risk that ‘I’ am taking. This is what can happen, however not necessary a totally will happen. What can I say? Pixilated parrots always will associate A=B=C etc.. I have been advised by a friend: “If you were to really tap into the area of Mayo you have to be like 10 times more delicate as you have been with your other pages.”.

Any inconsistencies and illogics that I encountered are noted and commented upon. This dissertation is not meant to be for a quick read through. It is rather offered as a sort of database that can be referred to, in where particular information can be found, where answers may be found of any wonderings or questions that any may have regarding the material offered. Most of the information offered is for the insider that is familiar with this material.

This little ‘necessary word of introduction’ is also my disclaimer. I basically claim nothing, I ask questions. I offer logical deductions as per the data at hand. The answers given however may very well not be in the liking of various people at all! I can't help that and I am not worried about that either. I am certainly willing to accept the challenge if it is found that I am doing something that I am not supposed to do, although I have no interest to be approached about this with sole opinion or make-wrong with absence of any serious arguments!

 
A communication ...  (How I fell into this)

I knew about these Happiness Rundown Series but hadn't really thought about it when I wrote my little David Mayo section. In fact I was so reluctant about the idea to create a page about David Mayo that I responded: “‘separate page’? I am not sure if it would be wise. I might draw too much attention to the person David Mayo. Mayo is a very sensitive ‘item’ in the orgs.”.

Anyway, things evolved and I also recalled these ‘NED for OTs Series’ of which many witness of the involvement of David Mayo. Previously I had already started a little project to make a list of HCO PLs issued during 1978-83 which in detail noted the composer and publication information simply for enabling me to determine at which time exactly what practice of how to deal with these physically changed. I extracted the ‘DM’ and ‘dm’ indicated issues from this list and then added the HCOBs to that.

Well, and this is how I fell into this!

 
Provisional release of these pages

	“The information that they relay may force various persons to have a look in a new dimension of time at things. This in particular in regards to the role played by David Mayo, but also the changes implemented and introduced during his time of reign. Then the validity or possibly the invalidity of NOTs is given attention. These particular changes are folded out in detail on especially page #3 (Definition of Clear) and #5 (History of Grade Chart).
	These are sensitive and serious matters, and I hope that I may receive some responses or arguments that can point out any errors in that I have found. That is prior to me distributing this information broadly.”

The intent was to get some responses about their content. May be I missed something? May be I was seriously wrong about some of the data presented? May be it was better to rewrite some parts of it as it may get misinterpreted?

Due to the nature of the various responses that I received I can conclude that this is a touchy subject indeed. The reactions are of a rather mixed nature. Most of them are appreciative, a few however have judged that my pages attempt to take down the icon David Mayo from his pedestal. In a sense this is actually funny, as no such thing had even crossed my mind! That is just not interesting at all! Research is about taking the information as it is found. It is not about disregarding some data or looking in the other direction because some person(s) may not be very appreciative towards some of the findings that surface. It is my sole intent to attempt to tell history as it happened, it is most definitely not my intent to rewrite history! If some persons do not take kindly of the things that I say, because it may actually shake their stable datum, (and it will clash with many a person's stable datum), then that is entirely their problem. After all it appears always to have been a habit of man to turn the eye the other direction when something surfaces that is somehow hard to face. No person wants to hear or feel he has been cheated and lied to. Instead one may then resort to either silence (plain denial) or one attacks it. Well, I can't make it into the liking of all, nor have I any interest to do so!

One response said: “I doubt it was David Mayo who made all the fuss. I have not enough data what happened behind the curtain but I rather would point out John Eastment.”. John Eastment for a while was also the Senior C/S International (1989-92), although this is a kind of late in time. Primarily the changes that I discuss took place much earlier in time. In addition there is no detectable evidence found in church publications what John Eastment may have done or not done, which may be questionable or sensitive, at any point in time. But we have an avalanche of this kind of data concerning David Mayo. I requested more argumentation and data regarding John Eastment, which I received. While looking over the various information it could not be substantiated that John Eastment was in any way involved in the particular changes that I discuss in the matters regarding David Mayo.

As I said, I primarily work with those things that can be substantiated preferably in printed and published materials. I am not interested in ideas or reasoning without proper support why something may be or may not be so. The facts that can be verified and the data that is around will have to defend itself. Circular reasoning or anything resembling this will not be given much attention. If you have some verifiable data that actually shows me being in error about some things, then forward that data. I actually have already received a variety of suggestions and alternate interpretations, and to date I have already implemented the plausible ones into my pages.

An introductory note about references written and issued by David Mayo
(Includes:  Initial observations and findings; ‘Robotic TRs’; Actions taken by the church)

The person David Mayo was active as the Senior C/S International in the time period 1978-82 in the Church of Scientology. One could say that circumstances arose regarding David Mayo in 1982, and as a result of that he is since that time not considered to be in good standing with the Church of Scientology anymore. What followed was that everything that he had published or had participated in was considered bad or squirrel* material.

Initial observations and findings

When scanning through the latest edition of ‘The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology’ and ‘The Organization Executive Course’ volumes (issued 1991) I happen to catch three HCOBs (two of them also issued as HCO PLs) that at one time were said to have been written and issued by David Mayo. And indeed the original releases of these references did indicate on them “Assisted by Senior C/S International”. With composer initials found at the bottom of the references saying ‘DM’. This should at least confirm that the person David Mayo had been involved with these releases. What follows from this is that it is really worthy of notice when we find that all these three references are till this very day still found in their original form although they were now instead fully attributed to have been written by L. Ron Hubbard. The only difference here is that they were now stripped from the mention of his post title and initials. Particularly the Mimeo release notices are interesting for how they explain matters (only found in the Mimeo releases, not in the volume versions).

These three references are:

HCO PL  Details  Volume  Found as HCOB/PL 6 Mar 82 “Confessional Tech Policies” This is found with very minor revisions three times in the ‘The Organizational Executive Course’ volumes (1991). ‘Volume 1’ on pages 642-644 ‘Volume 4’ on pages 985-987 ‘Volume 5’ on page 448-450 HCOB/PL 6 Mar 82R (Revised 10 Dec 88) “Confessional Tech Policies” Mimeo release says: “(Revised to ... correct the signatory. ...)” And one time in ‘The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology’ volumes (1991). ‘Volume XII, 1980-1984’ on pages 387-388                             HCOB 8 Mar 82 “Confessionals and the Non Interference Zone” This is found just one time in the‘The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology’ volumes (1991). ‘Volume XII, 1980-1984’ on pages 389-390 HCOB 8 Mar 82R (Revised 24 Apr 83) “Confessionals and the Non-Interference Zone” Mimeo release says: “Revised to ... correct the signatory.”                             HCOB/PL 10 Mar 82 “Confessionals - Ethics Reports Required” This is found two times in ‘The Organizational Executive Course’ volumes (1991). ‘Volume 1’ on pages 645-647 ‘Volume 4’ on pages 1197-1199 [same] Mimeo release says: “(Reissued 20 June 1986 to correct a typographical error in the signatory)” And one time in ‘The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology’ volumes (1991). ‘Volume XII, 1980-1984’ on pages 391-393

Since that time a fair majority of references originally written David Mayo had been taken out of circulation. The above three noted references here above are just some examples of them. More examples are found in David Mayo reference list, consult here (separate window).

There are however also other ways to maintain references, you can also rewrite them. Here below are listed three such references that are also still in use today. They carry the same reference date and title although they had been rewritten. Nonetheless they were not that much different in actual context compared with the original releases. Apparently it had been found that the information they contained needed to be preserved in some form.

These are:

‘Robotic TRs’

We also find that various chapters and texts that had originally been written by David Mayo are copied into references published at a much later date, with the difference that they were now fully attributed as if written by L. Ron Hubbard. An interesting example for this is a reference that today in use is as HCOB 7 Aug 83 “Robotic TRs”. But it was obviously that it had been imported from HCOB 16 Aug 71RA (Re-Revised 4 Sept 80) II “Training Drills Remodernized”. The text originally appeared as a chapter entitled: “ROBOTIC TRS (Anatomy Of A Robot)”, and it is identical.

“This HCOB was revised by others and published as HCOB 16 Aug 71RA, revised 4 Sept 80, same title. That revision ... also added sections of text to the issue. Those ... additives were not written by or approved by me and that revision of 4 Sept 80 is herewith CANCELLED.”

Then we have ‘SO ED 2344 Int’, 20 Aug 83 “The Story of a Squirrel: David Mayo” confirming that these “others” is in fact was referring to the person David Mayo. It reads: “‘I notice that Mr. ... Mayo, ..., rewrote HCOB TRAINING DRILLS REMODERNIZED.’  (LRH)”.

Actions taken by the church

The whole thing turns a bit ironic as by actual examination of the previous release of ‘The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology’ volumes it appears that only ‘Volume XII, 1978-1979’ (issued 1980) contain some references that witness of a David Mayo collaboration, and there are just 3 of them. The argument has been forwarded, this by International Management of the Church of Scientology, to physically destroy all these volumes, including thus ‘Volume I-XI’. The forwarded reason for that is then that there would be David Mayo materials contained within them, which is thus only ‘Volume XII’. Now, ain't all this interesting?

Now, a while back there was quite a bit of attention on this whole affair with that situation involving David Mayo. Newcomers in the Scientology organization will though not learn anything about this, as since that time all the materials have been edited, removing his name and all that. Original Qual Libraries with old material also have been disappearing. So, there is no way they can find out anymore about this from within the Church of Scientology itself.

Much effort had been taken to destroy the reputation of David Mayo. However, if you are a bad dude, you leave tracks, these tracks can be recognized and evaluated right there. Now, how could such a really bad dude actually ending up as the top technical person within Scientology in the first place? David Mayo was also the first Senior C/S International worth of mention. Why was this position actually instigated in the first place and why was David Mayo chosen to fill this position?

It is a bother that David Mayo is claimed being wrong and being in error virtually about everything. In a sense this is actually strange as within the Scientology organization promotions are entirely based upon the products you deliver, results which are measured by so-called statistics.

	“Individual staff members, secretaries and executive secretaries are commended, promoted, demoted or Comm Eved on the basis of their stats. A person with high stats has Ethics protection. A person with low stats not only has no Ethics protection but tends to be hounded. ...
	Run only by statistics.”          LRH (from HCO PL 5 Feb 70 “Statistics, Management by”)

The fact that David Mayo became Flag C/S in 1973 and was later in 1978 promoted to Senior C/S International and stayed on there till 1982 simply must have been because of the proven good results he must have gotten during this time. In addition this reflects a fairly long time span. It is rule within the Scientology organization that if it is shown that you are unable to continue to deliver the products expected from you that you will be demoted. What we see however is that David Mayo continued to stay on! We do not learn about his actual achievements, and they must have been there!

	“The most direct observation in an org (or a country) is statistics.
	These tell of production. They measure what is done.
	It cannot be said too often that management is best done by statistics.
	Each division in an org has a GROSS DIVISIONAL STATISTIC. This is calculated to reflect the production of that division by all its divisional members.
	An EXECUTIVE COUNCIL has all these GDSs available to it every week. This is done by the OIC system (Organization Information Centre). The stats are collected by each division and compiled by Dept 3 Div 1 Inspection and Reports into graphs. No matter how small an org, it has to have an OIC.
	The EC* as a Council runs the org by observation of the GDSs.
	Conditions are assigned each Division by the EC each week according to these GDS stats.”          LRH (from HCO PL 5 Feb 70 “Statistics, Management by”)

• A few historical facts concerning David Mayo
          - Includes notices about “‘Flag Conditions Order 7138’, 2 Mar 83” & “SO ED 2344 Int’, 20 Aug 83”
• A few notes about the person David Mayo and how people perceived him
• The ‘Senior C/S International’  (incl. ‘Senior C/S Int Bulletin’)

 
A few historical facts concerning David Mayo
(Includes notices about “‘Flag Conditions Order 7138’, 2 Mar 83” & “SO ED 2344 Int’, 20 Aug 83”)

He was born on 19 Nov 40. He grew up in King Country in North Island of New Zealand.

Janis Gillham Grady says on one of her videos on her channel on YouTube ‘Scientology - Peeling the Onion’ at 1:54 that “So David got into Scientology in New Zealand back around 1958-59 and I know that because in 1959 when the Melbourne congress was on he came over to Melbourne where he met my parents and then he went back to New Zealand as an auditor”.

He met Merrill, his future partner in marriage “in the early part of 1962” at “the Briefing course at Saint Hill.” They were “married ... there by Ron.”

Various of his earlier achievements are recorded in Scientology magazines such as Ability, The Auditor, Source and so on.

Auckland HASI Staff. David Mayo (HCO Secretary), 4th person standing from the right. Merrill Mayo (his wife) is 2nd person sitting from the right. Sept/Oct ’64.

Auckland staff on Clearing Course, standing on the outer right on the podium are David Mayo and Merrill Mayo. Late ’66/early ’67.

Congress attendees in Sydney press to buy books from the congress book stand, ca March 1969. (David Mayo on the right in the back)
	Students on the Class VIII Auditor's Course at the Advanced Org United Kingdom in Edinburgh, ca April 1969. (David Mayo left at the front)

There is a mention of a David Mayo in the Saint Hill (UK) periodical ‘Expand No. 1’, (1968), as him being posted as the Dissem Dir AK (AK stands for Auckland). It is further reported that he was the Flag CS since 1973 (per David Mayo himself this was in September of that year), which was then located at the Flag ship ‘Apollo’. In 1975 this location was moved to the Flag Land Base (FLB) which was located in Clearwater, Fl. His office was at the Fort Harrison Hotel. At least since that time he was also referred to as Class XII Senior C/S Flag. In late 1977 he was starring as the C/S in the film ‘Secret of Flag Results’. Picture here on the right: “The Flag Senior Case Supervisor has worked with Ron and has been personally trained by him for many years. He is the senior terminal on Flag responsible for overseeing the technical perfection at the Flag Land Base and ensuring that the tech is applied absolutely standardly and flublessly.”    (picture & text from Flag Land Base promo ©1977)

(from ‘Source 14’, Feb-Mar 78)

His contributions in form of releases in official references such as HCOBs and HCO PLs cover the period Sept 78 to Jul 82. This is close to 4 years.

In Oct 78 he turned Senior C/S International. And was removed from this post late Aug 82.

David Mayo himself reveals various details of his own time line in Scientology, this in a series of interviews that he had with Russell Miller in Palo Alto, California, 28 Aug 86. Audio-files have not been released, but transcripts are available. Consult these time line excerpts here (pop-up window).

	“Interviewer:  Well Merrill, When did you come in to Scientology?
	Well, I came in in 1961. And shortly after that, in the early part of 1962, I went to the Briefing course at Saint Hill. And that's where I met David and was married to him there by Ron. And then after that I worked in the local org in New Zealand until 1968 when I went into the Sea Org. And then, then be around the ship for a while and for a time I did the Class VIII course. And then in the early part of 71 we went to the ship again and I was working in the HGC from early 71 until rather latish October, about mid-October 1978. And I learned to do Ls there, that's Class XII Auditor, in 1974 at Flag, which was pretty great! And then I was brought out to Int, well just preceding that, David had suddenly gotten called away from flag to go help LRH, area. ...
	Interviewer:  This is CMO Int is it?
	That's right, and where LRH was. And so he went out there to help LRH, and then I got called out there several weeks later to be with him. And so, that's how I moved permanently from Flag to where CMO Int was and where LRH was.
	Interviewer:  And where is CMO Int?
	CMO Int is at Gilman Hot Springs ... about 60 miles from LA.”

(Note: David Mayo was posted as Senior C/S Int in October 1978, and Merrill Mayo was called from Flag to become part of the Snr C/S Int office.)

	Sound snippet
	(Please note that above sound snippet is slightly longer than the printed text that you find here above.)

 
A few notes about the person David Mayo and how people perceived him

David Mayo, ca 1984

The responses that I find and get concerning the person David Mayo are of a mixed nature. The parishioners of the Church of Scientology don't want to know anything about him. Eyebrows are raised as soon as his name is mentioned. The persons however that are found in the Free Zone* are generally pretty much in favour of him. Most persons at that time and today that are active in the Free Zone figure that David Mayo must be all right as he was kicked out from the Church of Scientology. This may however not be a fully rational deduction. Things are not all black and white. It is urged to be careful here.

The persons that knew him personally generally appear to appreciate him fairly highly, as a person and as a C/S. One other interesting response that I received reads: “In my view he was a fair guy who was dedicated to the tech and who was fed up with CoS (Church of Scientology) bull shit, false PR and sales crap and just wanted to deliver the tech for what it was.”. But also considers that “he was not the person to make it on that post and not the person to be the spiritual leader, he was simply not the right type of character.”.

Another Scientology old-timer told me that his impression was that David Mayo was very popular with the auditors. He tells me that one Charlie Rush there referred to him fondly as THE GREEN D, because he used green ink in signing his C/Ses, and the nickname caught on. The D stands for David. This would have been around 1978.

 
The ‘Senior C/S International’  (incl. ‘Senior C/S Int Bulletin’)

The following was relayed by Janis Grady (highly-placed executive during the late ’70s): “The first person to have the post of Snr CS Int was Paulette Cohen. Paulette was over the rainbow with us as the Qual Sec. She also audited LRH and C/Sed the crew. As such she worked very closely with LRH on all tech matters and any tech queries coming from Flag would go to Paulette who would then discuss them with LRH and respond. I believe it was after the L1 campaign, Paulette got busted and Mayo replaced her. It was not published world wide, it was a position at Special Unit working directly with LRH on technical points and research such as NOTs - the post then expanded from there as Special Unit started growing and dividing up into various different functions, such as Messengers handling all LRH traffic directly and Mayo handling the tech queries or matters - this was the start of WDC and Snr CS Int Office getting onto management lines while LRH got more involved in Cine and tapes.”.

	“Subsequent investigation first brought to light that Mayo engineered the reinstatement of a highly dangerous auditor (declared SP Paulette Cohen). This person was directly responsible for the infamous ‘List 1 Project’ in the late 70's which labelled literally hundreds of well meaning staff and public falsely as ‘List 1 R/Sers’ and ‘Suppressives’.
	For this Cohen had been forcibly removed from any and all technical lines forever. Her severe infractions of the standard technology of Scientology were blatant and documented many times over.
	Despite her gross auditing errors, severe and disreputable code breaks, squirrel application of technical rundowns, and clearly false reports time and time again in worksheets, Mayo over a two year period worked steadily to position this person back onto technical lines where she once again committed serious squirrel technical procedures on key staff members at senior level.
	Mayo himself personally acted as the Case Supervisor for these cases while SP Cohen squirrelled horribly under his direction and approval.” (from ‘FCO 7138’, 2 Mar 83 “Writ of Expulsion and Suppressive Person Declare David Mayo”)

This ‘List 1 Project’ and ‘List 1 R/Sers’ are further explained in a chapter on my page “The whereabouts of L. Ron Hubbard chronology”. Consult here (separate window).

It is rumoured that David Mayo was appointed by L. Ron Hubbard personally for the position of Senior C/S Int. These appointments then would likely have been announced through so-called Personnel Orders. As a rule these announcements would not appear in Scientology magazines as ‘The Auditor’, ‘Ability’ or ‘Advance!’. Although one may have expected this for particular important appointments, but we fail to find them. It would either have been announced verbally at events/meetings and/or by such a posting order which would go internally by the communication basket system as in use by the organization. Was it actually broadly and publicly announced to the Scientology community, and if so how was this done? I have forwarded this question to various old-timer Scientologists, none of these recall any official announcements. Various of these persons consulted were during these times either at Flag, or other major Scientology organizations.

After David Mayo a new Senior C/S Int did its entry at least since the reference HCOB 28 Sept 82 “Mixing Rundowns & Repairs” (attributed to: “LRH, Data collected by Cmdr R. Mithoff Snr C/S Int”; initials: ‘CSI:LRH:RM:dr/iw’). Prior to becoming Senior C/S Int and therewith replacing David Mayo he appears to have been active as Snr C/S FLB (=Flag Land Base) as per HCOB 23 Jul 81 “Pregnancy and Auditing” (attributed to: “LRH, Assisted by Snr C/S FLB”; initials: ‘BDCSC:LRH:RM:bk’). And he still acted as such one year later which we have confirmed with HCOB 11 Jul 82 I “Questionable Auditing Repair List” (attributed to: “LRH, as assisted by Senior C/S FLB”; initials: ‘LRH:RM:gal’). This is an interesting note as this actually matches the career of David Mayo who prior to becoming Senior C/S Int is said to have been active as Flag C/S during 1973-78 (technically this is pretty much the equivalent of being Sr C/S Flagship Apollo, that since 1975 was located on the Flag Land Base in Clearwater, Fl. At such time they went onshore).

Posted as: Senior C/S International D/Senior C/S International  Paulette Cohen*  ca Jun 78?* / early Oct 78    David Mayo early Oct 78 / late Aug 82*    Ray Mithoff 28 Sept 82 / 26 Feb 87    Jeff Walker 7 May 87 / 26 Apr 89 8 Dec 86 / 26 Feb 87  John Eastment 17 Nov 89 / 14 Oct 92    Ray Mithoff 26 Jul 93 / present time

* There are still uncertainties concerning if she officially was posted as such or that she only may have acted in such a capacity as the LRH Tech Expeditor. Anything to add then please contact me! * Prior to June 1978 she still acted as LRH Tech Expeditor (see HCOB 26 May 78 I “Dianetics: Urgent Command Change”). * David Mayo himself depicts the morning of 29 Aug 82 as the time he was removed from his position as the Senior C/S International in a letter that he wrote on 8 Dec ’83.

The dates given in the above are those that I have been able to positively confirm that each acted as such during given time period. It is fairly obvious that they replaced each other, but I don't have the exact dates (months) when that happened. It is reported that Paulette Cohen got ‘busted’ (exact reason unknown) and replaced by David Mayo. David Mayo in turn also got excommunicated and was replaced by Ray Mithoff. Then Ray Mithoff went on to function as the Inspector General for Technical in the newly established Inspector General Network (April 1987). This can be considered a promotion on his part. Jeff Walker who had been his deputy during a few months then followed him up as the Senior C/S International. I am unsure about why Jeff Walker and John Eastment left the position, although I recall rumours that went around at Flag. Anyway after John Eastment quitting the post Mr. Ray Mithoff resumed his position as the Senior C/S International, and he has been holding that position ever since.

‘Senior C/S Int Bulletin’

The history of Scientology does witness about rather many references that have not been attributed correct authorship designations. Most particularly during the second half of the ’70s it becomes rather difficult to determine actual authorship. A new rule introduced (endorsed in 1977) that would demote actual authors to be indicated as assistants just didn't facilitate matters. But since then there were also many references that had come out over L. Ron Hubbard's name, when he had not actually written them or even seen them.

“As you know I used to be on the post of Senior C/S International, for a few years, not until over a year ago. And one of the main purposes of that post was to ensure the high standards and the high quality of the tech. There were some things which occurred which made it difficult to continue doing that at the time. And without going into those things particularly very much here, apart for one of them, which is the subject of how issues are written. You know HCOBs and issues. And you've probably seen various HCOBs or PLs that have come out over L. Ron Hubbard's name. And at other times you have seen issues that have come out as assisted by somebody. One of the things that I used to feel very strongly about at the time was that I felt that if I or somebody else was ordered to write an HCOB by LRH that it should state assisted by and who it was assisted by at the bottom of it. In other words it shouldn't, I felt, that an issue should state who wrote it. In other words if it was written by LRH it should state so and if it was written by somebody else it should state that. It doesn't mean it is not valid but I feel that the correct authorship should be assigned to these things. As a matter of ethics and as a matter of principle.” (from Advanced Ability Center (AAC) lecture #1, “The Quality and Standardness of Tech”, given on 4 Dec 83)

Sound snippet

Now, thus far the practice had always been to just state what the actual situation was. In the few occasions in where a reference was ordered by L. Ron Hubbard to be written it thus simply said at the bottom: “Ordered by L. Ron Hubbard.”, and the actual author indicated as the author, with his name and post title. Now, is it this that we see David Mayo recommending?

Mind here that the rule of issuing references in where authors were indicated as assistants was established by HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-up” (explained here, separate window).

The question to ask here is how much David Mayo himself actually has lived up to his preference that “... if it was written by LRH it should state so and if it was written by somebody else it should state that.”?

Vocabulary:

     ..R, ..RA, ..RB (etc) or #R, #RA (etc):
For example: ‘HCO PL 24 Sept 70R’ & ‘HCO PL 24 Sept 70RA’, etc. The given date denotes the first time it has been published in issue-form. The R, RA indication may also follow after an issue-number. The R stands for ‘Revision’ and would refer to that it has been revised since it was first published. If it is revised a 2nd time it is indicated as RA, a 3rd time RB, then RC, and so on.
     Advanced Org(anization) (AO):
The denominates a Scientology organization which delivers higher level auditing and training. The first Advanced Organization was located in Saint Hill, England. The initials AO will appear somewhere in the name for the various AOs. For example: AOLA, ASHO, AOSH EU, etc.. This may also be referred to as a Saint-Hill organization.
     AO:
Short for ‘Advanced Organization’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     C/S:
‘Case/Supervisor’.  1. That person in a Scientology Church who gives instructions regarding, and supervises the auditing of preclears. The abbreviation C/S can refer to the Case Supervisor or to the written instructions of a case supervisor depending on context. (BTB 12 Apr 72R)  2. The C/S is the case supervisor. He has to be an accomplished and properly certified auditor and a person trained additionally to supervise cases. The C/S is the auditor's “handler.” He tells the auditor what to do, corrects his tech, keeps the lines straight and keeps the auditor calm and willing and winning. The C/S is the pc's case director. His actions are done for the pc. (Dianetics Today, Bk. 3, p. 545)
     Clear:
1. What we mean by Clear is an erasure of the mental mass which inhibits their thinking, postulating, and so on. (SH Spec 75, 6608C16)  2. An unaberrated person. He is rational in that he forms the best possible solutions he can on the data he has and from his viewpoint. He obtains the maximum pleasure for the organism, present and future, as well as for the subjects along the other dynamics. The Clear has no engrams which can be restimulated to throw out the correctness of computation by entering hidden and false data in it. (Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, p. 111)
     Comm Ev:
‘Committee of Evidence’. A fact-finding group appointed and empowered to impartially investigate and recommend upon Scientology matters of a fairly severe ethical nature. (Introduction to Scientology Ethics, p. 28)
     Free Zone:
Free Zone generally is regarded being those groups (as in plural) that practice Scientology outside of the control of the official Church of Scientology. Various of these groups may have their personal approach about how to use the Scientology technology. See also my note here (separate window). 
     HCOB:
‘Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin’. Color flash–red ink on white paper. Written by LRH only , but only so starting from January 1974. These are the technical issue line. All data for auditing and courses is contained in HCOBs. For more information go here (separate window).
    HCO PL:
‘Hubbard Communication Office Policy Letter’. Color flash–green ink on white paper. Written by LRH only, but only so starting from January 1974. These are the organizational and administrative issue line. For more information go here (separate window).
     HGC:
‘Hubbard Guidance Center’. The department of the technical division of a Scientology organization which sets you up for and delivers auditing.
     LRH:
An usual abbreviation for ‘L. Ron Hubbard’.
     Operating Thetan (OT):
1. Willing and knowing cause over life, thought, matter, energy, space and time. And that would of course be mind and that would of course be universe. (SH Spec 80, 6609C08)  2. An individual who could operate totally independently of his body whether he had one or didn't have one. He's now himself, he's not dependent on the universe around him. (SH Spec 66, 6509C09)  3. A being at cause over matter, energy, space, time, form and life. Operating comes from “able to operate without dependency on things” and thetan is the Greek letter theta (θ), which the Greeks used to represent “thought” or perhaps “spirit” to which an “n” is added to make a new noun in the modern style used to create words in engineering. (Book of Case Remedies, p. 10)
     ‘The Organization Executive Course’:
Subtitled in the 1970-74 release: ‘An Encyclopedia of Scientology Policy’. This is a series of books that contain the HCO PLs, and any references that are primarily dealing with administrative matters. They are divided up division wise. The HCO PLs are printed in green ink on white paper, and the volumes themselves come in green bindings. These books may also be referred to as the ‘green volumes’ or even ‘OEC volumes’. The ‘old green volumes’ then would refer to the 1970-74 release, the ‘new green volumes’ instead to the 1991 release. See a listing of published volumes here (pop-up window).
     OT:
Short for ‘Operating Thetan’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     SH (org):
‘Saint Hill (organization)’. A Saint Hill organization applies to any organization authorized to deliver the advanced level Scientology services. May also be referred to as an AO (Advanced Organization). For example AOSH UK or AOLA. The first AO was located in Saint-Hill, England.
     squirrel:
Going off into weird practices or altering Scientology. (HCO PL 7 Feb 65, Keeping Scientology Working)
     stat(s):
Short for statistic(s).
     ‘The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology’:
This is a series of books that contain the HCOBs, and any references that are primarily dealing with technical matters. The HCOBs are printed in red ink on white paper, and the volumes themselves come in red bindings. The references are arranged in chronological release order (per issue date). These books may also be referred to as the ‘red volumes’. The ‘old red volumes’ then would refer to the 1976-80 release, the ‘new red volumes’ instead to the 1991 release. See a listing of published volumes here (pop-up window).