Talk:Church of Spiritual Technology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Template war

This is the silliest edit war I've seen in a while. Knock yourselves out, kids. Cleduc 20:32, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

It seems to have calmed down for a bit, from the peak of a bunch of add/delete/adds, to where concerns about size, location, appropriateness (etc.) are being hashed out. Ronabop 04:00, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

LOL Terryeo 18:19, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

OMG LOL!! Thats the stupidest thing I've ever heard! THERE IS NO SUCH THING OR ANYTHING CLOSE TO THAT. The steel tablets exist and thats all. They were put there by RTC. anonymous addition by 86.140.102.129 (talk • contribs)

There's an intersting response to the organization, Church of Spritual Technology at: [1]

[edit] Meade Emory and Special Directors

I do not understand this insistence on describing Meade Emory as an officer of the Church of Spiritual Technology beyond the fact that it makes it easier to promote IRS-related conspiracy theories. Meade Emory was an incorporator, but has no corporate position within the organisation whatsoever. Never did. The Special Directors - the non-Scientologist lawyers that get people going "huh?" - are Sherman and Steven Lenske, and Lawrence Heller. This is all explained very thoroughly in the Church of Spiritual Technology's articles of incorporation. Does anyone have a link? Zed 16:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Zed. I looked at that article which is non-peer reviewed and unreferenced. It represents the author's take on things, but could not be used as a wikipedia reference. --Fahrenheit451 16:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure which article you're referring to, as my modifications only extend to introducing new text without making any specific reference to outside articles. I *want* to include several references in regard to the Church of Spiritual Technology's copyright ownership, options over the Scientology trademarks and precise legal rights, as well as the rights and obligations of the Special Directors, but I'm not sure if such things exist online in a form suitable for reference by wikipedia. I have textfiles of some of the necessary documentation on my own computer, but I think that violates wikipedia's rules in some way if I include them directly in the article, doesn't it? Zed 16:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I see the miscommunication. That line above referencing an outside article wasn't written by me. --Zed 16:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] contradictory unsourced statements

First the article says: "The CST is unusual in that it has no members or clergy, which is allowed under California law." (No source given)

But then it goes on to say: "CST is the holder of the copyrights and licenses their use." and: "The CST oversees the Scientology scriptural archiving project, which aims to preserve the works of Hubbard on stainless steel tablets and encased in titanium capsules in specially constructed vaults throughout the world."

Hmmmmmm. So, if the CST has no members, who in the CST is doing these things? Highfructosecornsyrup 05:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)