Talk:Landmark Worldwide/Archive 24

discusting vs. disgusting

I wrote in my last "edit comment" that Spacefarer's edit is "discusting". Sorry, I meant that his last edit was "disgusting". -- Stan _talk 20:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Disappearance of reputation summary

At 1519 hours on 2008-02-06 a Wikipedian removed the paragraph: Landmark Education is a controversial organisation<ref>http://www.ex-cult.org/Groups/Landmark/landmark-cherries.dir/_XOOM/apostate/index.htm</ref><ref>http://www.landmarkeducation.com/display_content.jsp?top=26&mid=658&bottom=726</ref>, often accused of being a cult.<ref>http://skepdic.com/landmark.html</ref><ref> http://www.rickross.com/reference/landmark/landmark17.html</ref><ref> http://www.culthelp.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=8&id=73&Itemid=12</ref> annotating the edit with the summary: "removing an in appropriate edit". -- Since the disappeared paragraph documents its contentions well, including even a reference (since invalidated) to the web-site of Landmark Education itself, I propose restoring the material as an appropriate contribution to a balanced overall depiction of Landmark Education and of its perceived impact. We could say: Landmark Education has a reputation as a controversial organisation<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.ex-cult.org/Groups/Landmark/landmark-cherries.dir/_XOOM/apostate/index.htm |title= Landmark Forum: Just a bowl of cherries... bur watch out for the pits!" |accessdate= 2008-06-15 |date= 1999-19-20 |publisher= |quote= The FORUM, according to Landmark Education Corp. (LEC), is a personal growth workshop. It is also the first step which potentially leads into a labyrinth of courses, volunteering, and trainings. LEC's own promotion is entirely positive. Yet, many describe an experience which is less (in some cases, far less) positive. The purpose of this web site is to connect the reader with information and opinions which are not found on Landmark's web site nor at it's "Introduction to the Forum" events. }} </ref><ref> http://www.landmarkeducation.com/display_content.jsp?top=26&mid=658&bottom=726 - web-page moved or non-existent as at [[2008-06-12]]</ref>, with commentators often associating it with the word "[[cult]]".<ref> {{cite web |url= http://skepdic.com/cults.html |title= The Skeptic's Dictionary |accessdate= 2008-06-15 |last= Carroll |first= Robert todd |authorlink= Robert Todd Carroll |date= 2008-12-03 |quote= For example, there are some who refer to Amway and Landmark Forum as cults, ... }} </ref><ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.rickross.com/reference/landmark/landmark17.html |title= The Forum: Cult or comfort? |accessdate= 2008-06-15 |last= Bass |first= Alison |date= 1999-03-03 |work= Boston Globe |quote= ...the Forum has been dogged by claims that it comes close to being a cult. ... But whether the training gets people so hooked on the experience as to make them dependent on the Landmark company and thus engage in cultlike behavior is an open question for some.}}</ref><ref> {{cite web |url= http://www.culthelp.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=8&id=73&Itemid=12 |title=EST; The Forum; Landmark Education |accessdate= 2008-06-15 |last= groeveld |first= Jan |authorlink= Jan Groenveld |work= |publisher= [[Cult Awareness and Information Centre]] |quote= If the writers of the articles refer to Landmark as a cult ... [i]t is the opinion of the writers based on their own personal experience. }}</ref>. -- Pedant17 (talk) 01:55, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

At 0327 hours on 2008-02-22 a Wikipedian removed the information: Landmark Education is a controversial organisation<ref>http://www.ex-cult.org/Groups/Landmark/landmark-cherries.dir/_XOOM/apostate/index.htm</ref><ref>http://www.landmarkeducation.com/display_content.jsp?top=26&mid=658&bottom=726</ref>, often accused of being a cult.<ref>http://skepdic.com/landmark.html</ref><ref>http://www.rickross.com/reference/landmark/landmark17.html</ref><ref>http://www.culthelp.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=8&id=73&Itemid=12</ref> and made the edit-summary "Contraversy is fine but ths cult stuff does not belong in the lead". In the light of this endorsement and opinion we could compromise by adding a section to the article (perhaps immediately after the lead) called something like "Reputation and status as a cult" and restoring there a version of the disappeared (but well-referenced and relevant) material (as above) while keeping out of the lead the "cult stuff" that may offend some people. -- Pedant17 (talk) 06:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Is this any way to run a cult?

Hi all. I am a Landmark graduate, having attended the Curriculum for Living from 9/07 through 4/08. Like many people, I was very confronted by the constant pressure to "enroll" people, and the time taken to "advertise" other courses. Having said that, I do feel that I've benefited somewhat from the education and, down the road, will probably review at least part of the curriculum. I realize that where I haven't benefited as much as others have is probably related to the cynical approach I took to the courses. Like anything else in life, it is what you make of it.

For what it's worth, you can complete the course and never bring a person into Landmark. I met a lot of very successful, driven people at Landmark, as well as a lot of really lost, messed up people. Just like people you'd meet everyday, I didn't like everyone I came across in Landmark, nor was I forced to "like" them.

For all you cult conspirists out there, since I walked out of the Landmark offices in New York City this past April, I have not been contacted by anyone from Landmark to take any more of their courses, to volunteer to work any of the sessions, to bring new recruits...nothing!!! I guess they really got their hooks into me! Itchygoo (talk) 16:18, 10 July 2008 (UTC)