At 01:55 PM 1/21/98 -0500, Homer W. Smith wrote:

>> LRH cleaned the lists up, on the original L1 about 40% were exactly as I
>> wrote them. Later all my indications were eliminated. I remember feeling
>> quite a loss when this occurred.
>    Have you posted the missing items?
>    Homer


But I can reconstruct most of the original list.

The most important aspect of Correction List processing is the prefix, for
that directs the pc's attention and narrows the area being restimulated.
And as the being is already over restimulated it eases of the pressure.

At Saint Hill it was fairly easy to prefix the question by date, as the pc
usually was doing okay a day or two before the massive BPC event.

So the prefix would be something like this: Since Wednesday have you been
........., Or: Since you started on the problems intensive have you been

1. Reminded of s/t you couldn't tell your auditor about?

(This question would handle 70% of the BPC on most cases.) I still use
versions of this today.

2. Thinking of s/t you couldn't tell your auditor?

3. Audited over an upset?

4. Audited over problem?

5 Audited over a withhold?

6. Left with an unflat process?

7. Left with an unflat incident?

8. A cleaned clean?

9. An earlier auditing mistake restimulated?

10. S/t you were not able to tell your auditor about?

11. An area restimulated that had nothing to do with what you are running?

12. A chopped communication?

13. A failure to acknowledge?

14. An evaluation?

15. An invalidation?

16. Flinched from looking at?

17. Didn't want to know about?

18. S/t your auditor wouldn't let you look at or run?

19. S/t else?

If the pc was a basket case and unable to respond, you just quickly
assessed the list and indicated what read. Usually the indication would be
enough to move the charge off, so that the pc could respond.

If the question read or the pc responded by putting their itsa-maker line
in, you would get the item or area named, when, where, get them to tell
all, then go earlier similar to a win. (Before F/N's.) As you can see it
was very simple basic stuff.

The goals processing and item handling was even simpler.

1. Wrong goal?

2. Wrong item?

3. Missed the right goal?

4. Jumped GPM's?

5. By-passed a GPM package?

6. S/one elses goal?

7. S/one elses item?

8. A lock item?

9. A combination item?

10. Missed a reliable item?

11. Found a wrong package of items?

On these you would indicate the wrongness and correct and find the rightness.

Usually the pc would spot what was out and correct it themselves. They
basically needed to get separate from the BPC.

Most good auditors can tailor make correction lists that parallel the pcs
case and processing history.