Musubi

I would like a simple question.
Does a Master Practitioner certification allow me to work with phobias,
or emotional issues, and open up a therapy practice?

A.k.a Does an MP certification give me the same rights as a "Hypnotist"
certification?
(They are allowed to work with phobias (if they have referal), bad
habits ( smoking) etc.)

Cameron

"Musubi" <p2prince@interia.pl> wrote in message
news:1145697873.501655.187680@z34g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> I would like a simple question.
> Does a Master Practitioner certification allow me to work with phobias,
> or emotional issues, and open up a therapy practice?
>
> A.k.a Does an MP certification give me the same rights as a "Hypnotist"
> certification?
> (They are allowed to work with phobias (if they have referal), bad
> habits ( smoking) etc.)

I do not believe it gives you any rights at all.

It may give you the ability to work with phobias and bad habits.

Frankly I'ld want at least a master praticioner to deal with clients at all,
but then I'ld rather perfection to confidence and that's not real at all.

15 days of training (praticioner level) spread over a half a year gives you
the chance to pick up some amazing skills and intergrate them to some
degree. No one that I know of can controll what is called a praticioner
level course, or a "master" praticioner.

A compitment within yourself, and a couple of years of guidance will, in my
experience let you do things that you may not have believed possible before.
It will definately give you insight into neuro/lingusitc functioning unless
you have had a lot of exposure to the concepts beforehand.

Bart Loos

Hey,

There's no value to a Master Practitioner certification, and it doesn't
allow you to do anything you couldn't have done without it.

What's your outcome here?

Starting up a therapy practice is often regulationrestricted depending
on the country where the practice is located. So you might check out
what is needed over there.

You'll learn some skills and tools studying NLP and becoming a Master
Practitioner

....So you could learn how to help people over there phobia's,
smokinghabits, ...

And I can tell you a cute story about a bunch of NLP Master
Practitioners trying to cure someone with a phobia for rolling
stairway's using the so famous VK dissociation. Which was a real
funny thing to watch, the MP's gettin more and more confused,
wondering why it doesn't work, until they gave up...

That's when I volunteered to run her through the 3DMind process and
fixed her, .. now that was years ago when I didn't even have any clue
how to do 3DMind in a propper manner... although I thought I really
did, seeing the results... :-)

So it was about then that the NLP "changework" techniques, ended up in
the garbagecan.


Have fun

Bart

Tom Vizzini

You just have to tell me that full story sometime


"Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1145716073.507358.326600@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com...

>
> And I can tell you a cute story about a bunch of NLP Master
> Practitioners trying to cure someone with a phobia for rolling
> stairway's using the so famous VK dissociation. Which was a real
> funny thing to watch, the MP's gettin more and more confused,
> wondering why it doesn't work, until they gave up...

It is funny to see the NLP smirk fade into confusion.

>
> That's when I volunteered to run her through the 3DMind process and
> fixed her, .. now that was years ago when I didn't even have any clue
> how to do 3DMind in a propper manner... although I thought I really
> did, seeing the results... :-)
>
> So it was about then that the NLP "changework" techniques, ended up in
> the garbagecan.

LOL!!! If I remember correctly...Bart a trained Master Practitioner of NLP.
So his opinion is very credible

Have fun

Tom


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043




>
>
> Have fun
>
> Bart
>

John

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 10:40:46 -0400, "Tom Vizzini"
<Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote:

>
>You just have to tell me that full story sometime

<snip>

>> So it was about then that the NLP "changework" techniques, ended up in
>> the garbagecan.
>
>LOL!!! If I remember correctly...Bart a trained Master Practitioner of NLP.
>So his opinion is very credible

That may be true and it is still an opinion.

--
John

UnKa

What is true John, is that many disillusioned NLP prac and masters come
to essential skills because they want real world skills that WORK, not
25 or 35 or even 75% of the time but 99.9% of the time. We've never
encountered a problem the 3-D Mind couldn't handle but I'd like to
reserve a .1 % in case someone does run into that problem.

Also, people who attend and essential skills seminar come away knowing
full well how to anchor or calibrate, or what ever other skill is
taught at that particular seminar.

The difference is that the NLP people think they know what they are
doing.
The essential-skills people KNOW what they are doing.

Your pathetic agenda is very clear, to discredit essential-skills any
way you can using your bullshit opinions.

UnKa

You just can't stand it when you and your NLP people gets their ass's
handed to them time and time again, you can save your self time and if
you just admit your a clueless asshole, when it is so apparent to every
one else..

Keep plugging away John, so that you can draw the weak minded, easily
lead people, away to fill your NLP seminars, so you can teach them
useless crap. Thanks Buddy.

John

On 22 Apr 2006 23:21:01 -0700, "UnKa" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote:

>You just can't stand it when you and your NLP people gets their ass's
>handed to them time and time again, you can save your self time and if
>you just admit your a clueless asshole, when it is so apparent to every
>one else..
>
>Keep plugging away John, so that you can draw the weak minded, easily
>lead people, away to fill your NLP seminars, so you can teach them
>useless crap. Thanks Buddy.

Was Bart's comment an opinion or not whether well informed or
otherwise? Yes or No?

It is so easy to slip over and treat these things as facts, don't you
agree?

Here is one example or inaccuracie among a plethora - I do not run NLP
seminars.

--
John

John

On 22 Apr 2006 23:15:04 -0700, "UnKa" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote:

>What is true John, is that many disillusioned NLP prac and masters come
>to essential skills because they want real world skills that WORK, not
>25 or 35 or even 75% of the time but 99.9% of the time. We've never
>encountered a problem the 3-D Mind couldn't handle but I'd like to
>reserve a .1 % in case someone does run into that problem.
>
>Also, people who attend and essential skills seminar come away knowing
>full well how to anchor or calibrate, or what ever other skill is
>taught at that particular seminar.
>
>The difference is that the NLP people think they know what they are
>doing.
>The essential-skills people KNOW what they are doing.

Another opinion of yours I'm afraid, not a fact


>Your pathetic agenda is very clear, to discredit essential-skills any
>way you can using your bullshit opinions.

Show me 1 single post where I have tried to discredit essential
skills.

You will however find many posts where I have challenged peoples
opinions and other sloppy points dressed up as facts.

--
John

UnKa

Cameron, you stated:

>compitment within yourself, and a couple of years of guidance will, in my
>experience let you do things that you may not have believed possible before.
I>t will definately give you insight into neuro/lingusitc functioning
unless
>you have had a lot of exposure to the concepts beforehand.

Now please explain what is different now, with yourself, that was not
possible before you began your NLP trainings?

Cameron

"UnKa" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1145808724.286418.305660@i40g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Cameron, you stated:
>
>>compitment within yourself, and a couple of years of guidance will, in my
>>experience let you do things that you may not have believed possible
>>before.
> I>t will definately give you insight into neuro/lingusitc functioning
> unless
>>you have had a lot of exposure to the concepts beforehand.
>
> Now please explain what is different now, with yourself, that was not
> possible before you began your NLP trainings?

Well in the full knowledge that within three replies you will be calling me
a moron and that nothing I say I can do I can actually do till I give Tom
some money.

Lets start with a conversatinal trance induction?
Or prehaps a values sort.

Tom Vizzini

"John" <yhqwasgo@d8mklotfu> wrote in message
news:9gok425ltt80lgkq1tfvpmd6nuej1g3fkq@4ax.com...

>
> That may be true and it is still an opinion.

So now we are being asked to discount trained people's opinions? If you
discount the opinion of people who are actually trained, what his left?

I would take the word someone who has actual experience rather than somebody
who is making a judgment with no knowledge whatsoever to back it up.

John, you have no knowledge whatsoever of the 3-D Mind. So in the land of
opinions yours has much less credibility than somebody who has been trained
in both processes.


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043







>
> --
> John
>
>

Cameron

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:tYCdnfHVwfcH1dHZRVn-tw@adelphia.com...
>
> "John" <yhqwasgo@d8mklotfu> wrote in message
> news:9gok425ltt80lgkq1tfvpmd6nuej1g3fkq@4ax.com...
>
>>
>> That may be true and it is still an opinion.
>
> So now we are being asked to discount trained people's opinions? If you
> discount the opinion of people who are actually trained, what his left?

Trained?

I've been trained, every nlper has been trained, are you suggesting that you
take everyone who has been trained seriously?

Who were they trained by? what effect has their training had?

Have you bothered to answer any of the questions Phil asked?

Am I entirely incorrect in assuming that you dont answer questions very
often at all but rather rely on the belief that the best defense is a good
offense?

> I would take the word someone who has actual experience rather than
> >somebody who is making a judgment with no knowledge whatsoever to back it
> >up.

I know how much you love the metta model, Who actualy has what experience?

Who is making what judgement and what knowledge specifically are they
lacking?

> John, you have no knowledge whatsoever of the 3-D Mind. So in the land of
> opinions yours has much less credibility than somebody who has been
> trained
> in both processes.

And Tom, prehaps because it is the earth shatteringly wonderfull technology
you claim it is, but the fact remains that only by paying you can any one
find anything about it. Exactly how much would someone need to pay you
before you could accept that they had looked at your shit and made a
judgement on it?

Would that figure be larger or smaller than the point where the money they
had invested would give them grounds for cognitave dissonance and a vested
intrest in the effectiveness of the thousands they paid you?

Have you ever had a disatisfied coustomer?

Have you ever paid anyone with your money back "gaurentee"

It doesn't include P&H or the time spent viewing your re-take on NLP. (or at
least your re-take on some of the elements that were included in NLP.)

There is more free information on NLP available than I can index quickly,
the best you have offered is the 3-dbrain list which is a sorry excuse (by
the opinion of your authority source an anethotogolist no less)

Bart Loos

> > So now we are being asked to discount trained people's opinions? If you
> > discount the opinion of people who are actually trained, what his left?
>
> Trained?
>
> I've been trained, every nlper has been trained, are you suggesting that you
> take everyone who has been trained seriously?
>

NO I don't think so, .. though the NLPcommunity like to do that ..
that's why they love waving with those certificates which means shit...

.... now on the other hand...

It was for me enough to watch the 3Dmind video's, try it a few times
to allow me to fix someone who couldn't be fixed with the NLP
changetools used by NLP Masterpractitioners, who have gone through a 19
day Practitioner training and a 21 day Masterpractitioner training.

Now whatever you want to rate the level of training they all got, .
a videotape which is about an hour and a half, beats some 40 day
practice training... when I fixed that person with the rolling
staircase phobia, in less then 5 min.

Even the biggest mismatcher, is going to raise an eyebrow out of
curiosity... before deciding that it can't be true...



>>
> > I would take the word someone who has actual experience rather than
> > >somebody who is making a judgment with no knowledge whatsoever to back it
> > >up.
>
> I know how much you love the metta model, Who actualy has what experience?

I guess he was talking about me, Bart... who at least has the
experience of using both NLP changetools aswell the 3Dmind,..... but I
guess that was not so obvious....



>
> Who is making what judgement and what knowledge specifically are they
> lacking?
>
> > John, you have no knowledge whatsoever of the 3-D Mind. So in the land of
> > opinions yours has much less credibility than somebody who has been
> > trained
> > in both processes.
>
> And Tom, prehaps because it is the earth shatteringly wonderfull technology
> you claim it is, but the fact remains that only by paying you can any one
> find anything about it.

Geezes this is still where you stumble. How silly ... don't ya think
so.

Try to name one changetool training here where you will learn
something that will give you a lifechanging skill without paying a
dime...

How much stuff did you clear out using NLP?
ANd how much have you payed for the training, for being able to do
that?

Or are you so fed up with having payed so much money on it, and haven't
seen any results so you now take it out on 70$ 3Dmind tapes?



Exactly how much would someone need to pay you
> before you could accept that they had looked at your shit and made a
> judgement on it?
>
> Would that figure be larger or smaller than the point where the money they
> had invested would give them grounds for cognitave dissonance and a vested
> intrest in the effectiveness of the thousands they paid you?
>
> Have you ever had a disatisfied coustomer?

Yes, who does not, .everyone has.. there are always people who are so
stuck in there own worldview that they are not able to grasp just an
easy to understand concept like the 3DMind.

I've seen people run out of different kind of trainings, ... maybe
some thougth they knew it already or maybe some just didn't like the
trainer, or they're just to damn lazy to do what it takes to get the
skill.

So what's your point?

>
> Have you ever paid anyone with your money back "gaurentee"



>
> It doesn't include P&H or the time spent viewing your re-take on NLP. (or at
> least your re-take on some of the elements that were included in NLP.


Are ya serious .. ?


..".. refund the time spent viewing .. "

Geezes can this get more stupid.

Damn sorry Cameron, this shows everyone here how stupid things can get
..

Blaming the trainer for your own fuckin choice to watch a tape .

Are you just one of those that run around blaming everyone for there
own missery, or are you someone who doesn't avoid taking responsibility
for your own life, behaviours and beliefs?

Can't you really do better then this?

> There is more free information on NLP available than I can index quickly,
> the best you have offered is the 3-dbrain list which is a sorry excuse (by
> the opinion of your authority source an anethotogolist no less)

Another analogy that doesn't make sense ::

Here you compare NLP which is been around for more then 30 years,
hundreds of books written, thousands and thousands people trained, ...

With a new changetool that's been around for just a couple of years.

And then you wonder why there's not so much info out on the 3DMind ...

How wierd..

Have fun

Bart

Tom Vizzini

"Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:444c4b76$0$7532$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
>
> >
> >>
> >> That may be true and it is still an opinion.
> >
> > So now we are being asked to discount trained people's opinions? If you
> > discount the opinion of people who are actually trained, what his left?
>
> Trained?
>
> I've been trained, every nlper has been trained, are you suggesting that
you
> take everyone who has been trained seriously?

I am suggesting that sonmeone trained in both styles of change ( NLP and 3D
Mind ) has a more informed opinion that someone who is not. Add to that
someone who has USED both styles and has experience of the results has a
more informed opinion than someone who does not.

>
> Who were they trained by? what effect has their training had?

More circular questions....... Bottom line....They are trained.
>
> Have you bothered to answer any of the questions Phil asked?

Phil who?

>
> Am I entirely incorrect in assuming that you dont answer questions very
> often at all but rather rely on the belief that the best defense is a good
> offense?

You are rarely correct about anything and again incorrect entirely. Where
are these questions?

>
> > I would take the word someone who has actual experience rather than
> > >somebody who is making a judgment with no knowledge whatsoever to back
it
> > >up.
>
> I know how much you love the metta model, Who actualy has what experience?

Uh...Bart...the guy who wrote the post.

>
> And Tom, prehaps because it is the earth shatteringly wonderfull
technology
> you claim it is, but the fact remains that only by paying you can any one
> find anything about it. Exactly how much would someone need to pay you
> before you could accept that they had looked at your shit and made a
> judgement on it?

70 dollars and use it on something, with an open mind.

>
> Would that figure be larger or smaller than the point where the money they
> had invested would give them grounds for cognitave dissonance and a vested
> intrest in the effectiveness of the thousands they paid you?

Thousands? Uh the 3D Mind is 70 dollars and comes with a money back
guarantee.

>
> Have you ever had a disatisfied coustomer?
>
> Have you ever paid anyone with your money back "gaurentee"

LOL! Yes and Yes.

>
> There is more free information on NLP available than I can index quickly,
> the best you have offered is the 3-dbrain list which is a sorry excuse (by
> the opinion of your authority source an anethotogolist no less)

That is not a list about the 3D Mind. It is a list about brain theory.

To get more information about the 3D Mind you can fish through the 40,000
posts on the Essential Skills Yahoogroup for free.


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043

Tom Vizzini

"Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1145877107.594070.181760@u72g2000cwu.googlegr oups.com...

>
> Now whatever you want to rate the level of training they all got, .
> a videotape which is about an hour and a half, beats some 40 day
> practice training... when I fixed that person with the rolling
> staircase phobia, in less then 5 min.

This is a great point. 40 DAYS OF TRAINING vs one hour and a half video.

Read that again.

No matter how you slice it, that is a drastic difference.

40 HOURS OF TRAINING FAILED

An hour and a half video succeeded.

I am not sure what the 40 hours of training cost. I bet it was in the
thousands.

An hour and a half video cost 70 dollars.

Bart watched a GROUP of master practitioners FAIL. He was successful in ONLY
5 minutes using the 3D Mind.

This is a real life example that is very common.

I don't care how you look at it, anyone with half a brain HAS to be curious
about a technology that is seriously outperforming NLP. Doing so with less
time and money to learn and is EASY to use.

Look.....I spent years as a NLP devotee. I thought it was the best thing in
the world and that I was well educated in what real personal change is all
about. I studied hypnosis and got all wrapped up in the power of trance. I
fell in love with the structure of language. I was amazed by submodalities.

The only thing missed was.....results. It was out of the frustration on not
being able to get NLP to life up to the hype that generated the 3D Mind.

The really amazing part of this is the attacks I recieve. I thought people
wanted a way to change. It seems some are looking for a religion or maybe a
club to belong to but they certainly do not want change.

In all the constant attacks I recieve thet one thing that cannot be attacked
is that the 3D Mind WORKS.

The focus is to discredit me personally or discredit Bart or Tim or Harun or
Dave or Phill or many of the others who have told of their experiences with
the 3D Mind.

What I can say is that if you are reading this and you are looking for
something that works, then I suggest you go to www.essential-skills.com and
watch the video testimonials.

Have fun,

Tom

Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043

Bart Loos

> Read that again.
>
> No matter how you slice it, that is a drastic difference.
>
> 40 HOURS OF TRAINING FAILED
>

Well actually it was more likely about 240 hours of training and
practicing, not included all the weekly practicing groups.

> An hour and a half video succeeded.
>
> I am not sure what the 40 hours of training cost. I bet it was in the
> thousands.

It was about 5725 $


.... And you know what the most interesting part of the whole NLP
practitioner and Master Practitioner training was an additional day
they gave on the Bert Hellinger Method
... the family constellations therapy model...

... which is a such an amazing thing that still blows my mind...

> An hour and a half video cost 70 dollars.
>

Yep it does.


Have fun.

Bart

UnKa

Which Comment are you refering too? If your refering to the one where
all those NLP Master Practioners who couldn't cure a simple phobia? Or
the comment where he decided to dump the NLP techniques because they
don't work?

First off, it was his experience not an opinion, funny how NLP people
can't do shit, yet still swear by it. Bandler being the prime example.
You NLP folks seem to ignor facts, but anyways, no skin off my nose.

I'm glad to hear you don't run seminars John, ripping off people
teaching them useless skills, I'll give ya Kudo's for that one.

UnKa

Well John, it is yet another opinion? I'll offer to you the same
challenge I offered to Cameron, put your skills where you mouth is.

We continually go back and forth, we've provided you with evidence
beyond, hear that beyond what is need to prove to you and the rest of
this NG where the 3-D Mind has it's scientific basis, yet you lazy rat
bastard, you refuse to look. Then has the audacity to call me lazy when
I wouldn't do the research, when you provided no links or knowledge to
go after.

Let's do this, let's both work with someone who will post to this list
about a problem they have, I will let you go first, so that when you
fail so miserably, all will know then it is not about opinions, BUT
FACTS, which you seem to conviently ignor.

If I can help someone and you can't then the proof is in the pudding,
or even vise versa, if you can help someone and I can't then, again,
all will know, once and for all, who is full of shit and who isn't.

I may be an asshole, ( that's probably and understatement ) I may be
rude, I may be lots of unpleasant things to you, but the fact remains,
I get results.

Now, are you going to come meet this challenge, or do like Cameron did
and just make excuses, run and hide.

Tom Vizzini

"Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1145888071.062142.235990@t31g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
> > Read that again.
> >
> > No matter how you slice it, that is a drastic difference.
> >
> > 40 HOURS OF TRAINING FAILED
> >
>
> Well actually it was more likely about 240 hours of training and
> practicing, not included all the weekly practicing groups.

Your right I meant to say 40 DAYS!!!


>
> > An hour and a half video succeeded.
> >
> > I am not sure what the 40 hours of training cost. I bet it was in the
> > thousands.
>
> It was about 5725 $

$5725 and 40 days vs $70 and an hour and a half. Even if the 3D mind only
worked as well as NLP the difference in amazing as far as time and money
invested.


>
>
> ... And you know what the most interesting part of the whole NLP
> practitioner and Master Practitioner training was an additional day
> they gave on the Bert Hellinger Method
> ... the family constellations therapy model...
>
> .. which is a such an amazing thing that still blows my mind...

I will have to look into that

Thanks Bart!

Tom


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043


>

Cameron

"UnKa" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1145889030.771170.33780@t31g2000cwb.googlegro ups.com...
> Well John, it is yet another opinion? I'll offer to you the same
> challenge I offered to Cameron, put your skills where you mouth is.

However unk when I pointed out to you that I did not consider it ethical to
attempt to use random passers through who had not given their permission to
in your grandstanding. You just dissapeared. Then you issued another
challenge.

You still havent proved anything, except that you consider humans pawns in
your sales efforts and you cant put your skills where your mouth is.

> We continually go back and forth, we've provided you with evidence
> beyond, hear that beyond what is need to prove to you and the rest of
> this NG where the 3-D Mind has it's scientific basis.

You have asserted there is evidence and consisistantly failed to provide it?


> Let's do this, let's both work with someone who will post to this list
> about a problem they have, I will let you go first, so that when you
> fail so miserably, all will know then it is not about opinions, BUT
> FACTS, which you seem to conviently ignore.

No you go first! you actually do something! you dont seem to be able to go
second, or achieve any effect at all. In fact go back in the google history
and find a single example over the last ten years where 3-d mind
praticioners have actually helped someone here.

Cameron

"Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1145877107.594070.181760@u72g2000cwu.googlegr oups.com...
>> > So now we are being asked to discount trained people's opinions? If
>> > you
>> > discount the opinion of people who are actually trained, what his left?
>>
>> Trained?
>>
>> I've been trained, every nlper has been trained, are you suggesting that
>> you
>> take everyone who has been trained seriously?
>>
>
> NO I don't think so, .. though the NLPcommunity like to do that ..
> that's why they love waving with those certificates which means shit...

Well then, Bart, look at your guru's words above mine.

He's telling John to take people with training seriously.

Now you are saying that people with "training" are not to be taken
seriously.

Cameron

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:Wr2dneoC3tA2KtHZRVn-vQ@adelphia.com...
>
> "Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:444c4b76$0$7532$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...

> You are rarely correct about anything and again incorrect entirely. Where
> are these questions?

And Tom, prehaps because it is the earth shatteringly wonderfull technology
you claim it is, but the fact remains that only by paying you can any one
find anything about it. Exactly how much would someone need to pay you
before you could accept that they had looked at your shit and made a
judgement on it?

Would that figure be larger or smaller than the point where the money they
had invested would give them grounds for cognitave dissonance and a vested
intrest in the effectiveness of the thousands they paid you?

Have you ever had a disatisfied coustomer?

Have you ever paid anyone with your money back "gaurentee"

Tom Vizzini

Again the same questions over and over.....


"Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d38af$0$7531$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...

>
> And Tom, prehaps because it is the earth shatteringly wonderfull
technology
> you claim it is, but the fact remains that only by paying you can any one
> find anything about it.


Already answered

Exactly how much would someone need to pay you
> before you could accept that they had looked at your shit and made a
> judgement on it?

already answered that.


>
> Would that figure be larger or smaller than the point where the money they
> had invested would give them grounds for cognitave dissonance and a vested
> intrest in the effectiveness of the thousands they paid you?

Already answered

>
> Have you ever had a disatisfied coustomer?

Already answered

>
> Have you ever paid anyone with your money back "gaurentee"

Already answered

Anything new?


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043

Tom Vizzini

"Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d382e$0$29881$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...

>
> Well then, Bart, look at your guru's words above mine.
>
> He's telling John to take people with training seriously.

Get some help Camoron. What I said in that context is that someone who has
ther training has the ability to compare the 2 systems.

>
> Now you are saying that people with "training" are not to be taken
> seriously.

I think you aren't to be taken seriously.

Learn to read


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043


>
>

Cameron

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:F8-dnYLVoorG1tDZRVn-uA@adelphia.com...
> Again the same questions over and over.....
>
>
> "Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:444d38af$0$7531$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
>
>>
>> And Tom, prehaps because it is the earth shatteringly wonderfull
> technology
>> you claim it is, but the fact remains that only by paying you can any one
>> find anything about it.
>
>
> Already answered

Not a question.

> Exactly how much would someone need to pay you
>> before you could accept that they had looked at your shit and made a
>> judgement on it?
>
> already answered that.

Just pretend for a monent that I dont remember.

How much would someone need to pay you before you were satisfied that they
had adaquately been trained in your system to make a judgement on it?

>
>>
>> Would that figure be larger or smaller than the point where the money
>> they
>> had invested would give them grounds for cognitave dissonance and a
>> vested
>> intrest in the effectiveness of the thousands they paid you?
>
> Already answered

Yeah? when? I can google and check the message if you give me a reference.


>>
>> Have you ever had a disatisfied coustomer?
>
> Already answered
>
>>
>> Have you ever paid anyone with your money back "gaurentee"
>
> Already answered
>
> Anything new?

No, you still dont answer questions.

Tom Vizzini

"Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d4f9a$0$9697$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...

>
> Yeah? when? I can google and check the message if you give me a reference.

Why so you could whine some more? It was today. Figure out the rest.


>
> No, you still dont answer questions.

Answered them all. Sorry you can't read.

--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043




>
>

Cameron

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:Mo-dnSC78baOytDZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@adelphia.com...
> "Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:444d4f9a$0$9697$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
>
>>
>> Yeah? when? I can google and check the message if you give me a
>> reference.
>
> Why so you could whine some more? It was today. Figure out the rest.
>
>
>>
>> No, you still dont answer questions.
>
> Answered them all. Sorry you can't read.

you answered a statement and a series of questions with

Answered already.

They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the
Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo
the Clown.

-- Carl Sagan

Bart Loos

LOL

Gee how stupid are you really?

you asked: ".. are you suggesting that you take EVERYONE who has been
trained seriously " ?

where I answered " I don't think so.... "

how does that differ from : that people with 'training' are not to be
taken seriously... ?

and where did Tom tell John to take people with training seriously?

Seems it's about time you learn to fuckin read dude without distorting
to make it fit in your frame of the world, and making again a fool of
yourself..











you seem to have this amazing reading disorder

Tom Vizzini

"Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d5894$0$7604$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...

>
> you answered a statement and a series of questions with
>
> Answered already.

Are you really this stupid? Look for the damn post. I answered all you
idiotic questions. I think it is no accident that the two biggest whiners on
this list are also the two laziest.

Cameron

"Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1145920124.443680.20550@v46g2000cwv.googlegro ups.com...

> and where did Tom tell John to take people with training seriously?

Right here, couple of posts ago, same thread.

Try to keep up. I know you have reading disorders on the mind recently.
Comprehension is also a good skill. Or at least realising just because your
guru calls yet another person a moron they might actually still posess a
memory that spans a couple of days.

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:tYCdnfHVwfcH1dHZRVn-tw@adelphia.com...
>
> "John" <yhqwasgo@d8mklotfu> wrote in message
> news:9gok425ltt80lgkq1tfvpmd6nuej1g3fkq@4ax.com...
>
>>
>> That may be true and it is still an opinion.
>
> So now we are being asked to discount trained people's opinions? If you
> discount the opinion of people who are actually trained, what his left?

Tom Vizzini

"Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1145920124.443680.20550@v46g2000cwv.googlegro ups.com...

>
> Seems it's about time you learn to fuckin read dude without distorting
> to make it fit in your frame of the world, and making again a fool of
> yourself..

Bart I just don't think he is capable. You just can't fix stupid. He is
lazy, incompetent, confused and unable to read.

No matter what you write he is only going to read what he wants to see.

Just sit back and enjoy the show. Yes it sounds cruel but it is not like
Camoron is being nice


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043


>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> you seem to have this amazing reading disorder
>

Cameron

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:abudndllGK-3xtDZRVn-ig@adelphia.com...
>
> "Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:444d5894$0$7604$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
>
>>
>> you answered a statement and a series of questions with
>>
>> Answered already.
>
> Are you really this stupid? Look for the damn post. I answered all you
> idiotic questions. I think it is no accident that the two biggest whiners
> on
> this list are also the two laziest.


No Tom, you havent.


You answered a statement with the comment.

Answered already.


Then you replied with a series of the same two words in response to all the
questions in your post.

Too lazy to read you appear to be.

And, as I asked in the begining of this exchange.

"Am I entirely incorrect in assuming that you dont answer questions very
often at all but rather rely on the belief that the best defense is a good
offense?"

It seems I am. maybe at some stage in the past you answered these questions.

It seems like you are unwilling to answer them at all.

You seem to prefer to insult and abuse than inform.

They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the
Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo
the Clown.

-- Carl Sagan

Bart Loos

Maybe you can ask John to help you learn to read dude.

John can you do that for him?

Tom Vizzini

"Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d5e38$0$7601$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...

> You answered a statement with the comment.
>
> Answered already.

Nope....I amswered in full. I gave that answer the SECOND time you posted
the same questions. Try again.

>
> You seem to prefer to insult and abuse than inform.

Hey asshole......you have been insulting me for 2 months. If you can't take
it them piss off. You lie, you distort and you ignore. Then you whine when
you are not trerated well. Duh.......

The answers to your stupid questions was posted at 7:21 eastern time today.
I will accept your apology when you find them.

Bart Loos

lol ... common can someone help this guy out of his missery

26 posts back you where giving us a good laugh...

Keep it up dude!

Have fun

Bart

Cameron

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:i4qdnZ1LN7CHwtDZRVn-uA@adelphia.com...
>
> "Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:444d5e38$0$7601$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
>
>> You answered a statement with the comment.
>>
>> Answered already.
>
> Nope....I amswered in full. I gave that answer the SECOND time you posted
> the same questions. Try again.

Read again. STATEMENT, "already answered".

A statement is not a question.

The staement was.

"And Tom, prehaps because it is the earth shatteringly wonderfull technology
you claim it is, but the fact remains that only by paying you can any one
find anything about it."

This might deserve a rebuttal, but it is not a question.


There were no answers posted to the rest of the questions, Or at least if
you did post a response, it has been lost by the internet, even though your
other posts keep coming through.

Do us both a favour and repost them?

Tom Vizzini

"Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d67da$0$7603$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
>
> Read again. STATEMENT, "already answered".

You cannot be this stupid. You mean you can't even find a post from this
morning? You are a complete moron. The already answered response was because
I already answered all those questions this morning.

>
> There were no answers posted to the rest of the questions, Or at least if
> you did post a response, it has been lost by the internet, even though
your
> other posts keep coming through.
>
> Do us both a favour and repost them?

Do me a favor and go **** yourself.

Get of your lazy ass and find the answers you coward. You have shown
yourself for what you really are. Nothing more that a flamer who has nothing
of substance to offer. You just want to fight and I no longer have the time.
I have 2 sold out seminars in Manchester England to get ready for.

So run along little boy. Let me know when you grow a pair.


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043

UnKa

>What does an NLP master practitioner certification give me?

Something to use when you run out of toilet paper

Cameron

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news8KdnRPI4-YIC9DZnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@adelphia.com...
>
> "Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:444d67da$0$7603$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
>>
>> Read again. STATEMENT, "already answered".
>
> You cannot be this stupid. You mean you can't even find a post from this
> morning? You are a complete moron. The already answered response was
> because

Got me there I only read the post as far as you asking "Where are these
questions" and assumed you were in your usual form.

You did however go on and respond more to them later in the post.

Thank you.

However then answers you gave did not seem to be answers to the questions I
asked.

now the answer to my question.
>> Exactly how much would someone need to pay you
>>before you could accept that they had looked at your shit and made a
>>judgement on it?
>> Would that figure be larger or smaller than the point where the money
>> they
>> had invested would give them grounds for cognitave dissonance and a
>> vested
>> intrest in the effectiveness of the thousands they paid you?

your response was.

>Thousands? Uh the 3D Mind is 70 dollars.

This is a response to a question not an answer.

The first DVD costs $70 yes?

There is a lot more material than that to the 3-d mind? <just based on your
website someone could spend a lot more than your inital buy in.>

Getting back to the question you were asked, would you would accept someone
who viewed the first DVD as a fully informed critic of the 3-d mind?

Or would they have to invest more before you were satisfied that they had a
right to critique your work.


I'me asking this because one of your commenest defenses (apart from name
calling) is telling people that they are ignorant because they do not
understand your system, by definition, having not spent their money with
you.

I'me wondering if there is any point where you would accept criticism or is
your system so perfect (or fragile) that no one has a right to question it?

Bart Loos

"... There is a lot more material than that to the 3-d mind? <just
based on your
website someone could spend a lot more than your inital buy in.>... "

And this is free available for you on the 3DMind support list where you
get access to when you have bought the 3DMind DVD's.

I guess it's really to hard to understand that all it takes is just
70$, an open mind, some practice, the reading skills to get feedback
from the support list, following the steps and some playfullness ...

"Getting back to the question you were asked, would you would accept
someone
who viewed the first DVD as a fully informed critic of the 3-d mind?"

NO because it takes :, an open mind, some practice, the reading skills
to get feedback from the support list, following the steps and some
playfullness , .. to become fully informed.

"... are ignorant because they do not understand your system, by
definition, having not spent their money with you..."

NO there are people who spend 70$, and they are still ignorant,
because they fail to do what it takes : an open mind, some practice,
the reading skills to get feedback from the support list, following the
steps and some playfullness...

....and I guess that's really to big of an investment to change your
life for the better...



Have fun

Bart

Tom Vizzini

"Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:444dbd3a$0$4760$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
>


> Got me there I only read the post as far as you asking "Where are these
> questions" and assumed you were in your usual form.

Yes you were again an ass. It just AGAIN proves that you fail to read the
responses to your posts.


>
> This is a response to a question not an answer.
>
> The first DVD costs $70 yes?
>
> There is a lot more material than that to the 3-d mind? <just based on
your
> website someone could spend a lot more than your inital buy in.>

Where? Soemone must be making a BUNCH of money off of me that I don't see.
There are no other 3D Mind DVDs. Just the one 70 dollar set.

>
> Getting back to the question you were asked, would you would accept
someone
> who viewed the first DVD as a fully informed critic of the 3-d mind?

I already answered this. If done so with an open mind and without an agenda
sure. Someone like you is not capable of that. Your agenda is to discredit.
Wouldn't it just screw you up if you did the proces and it worked?

>
> Or would they have to invest more before you were satisfied that they had
a
> right to critique your work.

Nope.

>
>
> I'me asking this because one of your commenest defenses (apart from name
> calling) is telling people that they are ignorant because they do not
> understand your system, by definition, having not spent their money with
> you.

No YOU are ignorant.

It is just common sense that someone have actual knowledge of something they
are criticizing.

>
> I'me wondering if there is any point where you would accept criticism or
is
> your system so perfect (or fragile) that no one has a right to question
it?

Your an idiot. I have already undergone that trial by fire right here in
this group by several NLP trainers. I got slammed, flamed, questioned and
attacked but....the 3D Mind held its own against all attacks.

They all ended up where you are now. With nothing to attack but me.



>
>
>

UnKa

Let me settle this matter in a way that Camoron can understand.

Cost of 3-D Mind, 70 bucks plus shipping.

Now is there any part of that you don't understand, 70 dollars, not 71
or 72.50 but 70 ( Seventy ) Plus shipping, which will cost you
depending on where you live and how fast you want it.

3-D Mind takes about 1 and 1/2 hour to learn, this is an approximate
time depending on how slow or fast one learns. Now is there any part of
that you don't understand?

3-D Mind comes with free..................and I do mean
free.............updates.
No extra or hidden cost to you so Granny won't have to get on her back
to get you yet another toy.

Is there any part of that you don't understand??

There are other things they sell on thier site, like anchoring and
rapport, those are seperate skills, which are nice to have but NOT, let
me repeat, so that if you got someone's dick in your ear you won't
misunderstand, those are not neccessary to the 3-D Mind but a nice
skill to have to complement the 3-D Mind. These are skills that can be
applied outside the frame of 3-d Mind, so hence if ya want to learn it,
like anything else you have to pay for it.

It's sort of like you wanting to become double jointed so you can give
yourself a blowjob, but instead of learning to stretch and become
limber, you just keep wanking on yourself, hoping one day you will
become limber enough to use your mouth instead of your hand.

I still think your a funny guy Cameron, even if all your other skills
are lacking.

Tom Vizzini

"UnKa" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1145974087.988634.299520@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com...
> Let me settle this matter in a way that Camoron can understand.
>
> Cost of 3-D Mind, 70 bucks plus shipping.
>
> Now is there any part of that you don't understand, 70 dollars, not 71
> or 72.50 but 70 ( Seventy ) Plus shipping, which will cost you
> depending on where you live and how fast you want it.
>
> 3-D Mind takes about 1 and 1/2 hour to learn, this is an approximate
> time depending on how slow or fast one learns. Now is there any part of
> that you don't understand?

I don't think he understands. Bart said that people spent over $5,000 and
40 days to become a master practitioner of NLP. Those 40 days did not make
you an expert they just introduced the concepts of NLP.

Compare that with $70 and an hour and a half of your time.

Even a monkey to do this is math!

Even if the effectiveness was equal, the 3-D Mind is so much easier to learn
and use.

But according to Bart, a GROUP of NLP Master Practitioners could not cure a
simple phobia after 40 days and $5,000 of training.

Using the 3-D Mind Bart took care of it in five minutes.

Criticize me all you want to but those results speak for themselves.


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043

Ronald St-Maurice

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message...
>
>
> I don't think he understands. Bart said that people spent over $5,000 and
> 40 days to become a master practitioner of NLP. Those 40 days did not make
> you an expert they just introduced the concepts of NLP.
>

He does fully understand. He's emotionaly right in his narrow mind. It's
either that he just wants his view to win over yours. To which the way he
took, he'll never be able to even if he posts resources links to free stuff.
Or plan B: stir more shit like a good like pathetic intarweb troll.

UnKa

You see Cammy

This is not about who has the bigger dick, or who can scream the
loudest, or who is smarter, this is really about what works and what
doesn't work. Those of us who have had previous training in NLP was
dissatisfied with NLP and it's promise of excellence.

As Bart stated, NLP master practioners couldn't cure a simple phobia,
and this is common place within the NLP world, but you refuse to
acknowledge that, why is that? because your either stupid or so
convinced that NLP is the shit, eveything that come contrary to NLP is
easily dismissed as they don't want to change or it's their fault.

I''ve asked you, like I've asked so many NLP'er, what changes have you
made with NLP, and there are yet none that have come back with a solid
answer, like I used to smoke and don't now or I used to have this
belief that I couldn't get a date, changed that and am now currently
dating x amount of women, depending on your sex and sexual preference.

Ya better wake up and take a good gander Bubba, NLP isn't all what it
is cracked up to be, your just still believing the hype, yet hoping one
day to see the results.

We love you cameron, even if you are a dickhead. Now let's all join in
a round of beer and sing kum-bi-ya my lord.

John

On 24 Apr 2006 16:24:44 -0700, "Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Maybe you can ask John to help you learn to read dude.
>
>John can you do that for him?

I think that would be just about as difficult as doing it for Tom

--
John

John

On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 23:40:13 -0400, "Tom Vizzini"
<Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote:

>
>"John" <yhqwasgo@d8mklotfu> wrote in message
>news:9gok425ltt80lgkq1tfvpmd6nuej1g3fkq@4ax.com.. .
>
>>

Someone mentioned mention reading abilities and I find it astonishing
that a trainer who has a need to ask precise questions of clients and
listening to the answers, such that therapy is done before the waiter
arrives, has such trouble communication on this form. Or maybe its
deliberate.


>> That may be true and it is still an opinion.
>
>So now we are being asked to discount trained people's opinions?

Where on earth day it say that opinions should be discounted? I
believe some call this a straw man approach. Set up an untruth and
then prove is false.

I have said in another post that opinions need to be seen for what
they are. One person's (or many) judgement of a situation based on
their life experience, beliefs and so on which by definition will all
contribute to that judgement.

A number of people have come to the 3D having spent thousands of
dollars on NLP. In comparison I have spent hundreds of pounds on NLP.
If they feel that their money was wasted that will affect their
opinion. Nothing wrong with that in their case.

However whilst their opinion is not to be discounted at the same time
it is not some sort of absolute truth.


>If you discount the opinion of people who are actually trained, what his left?

Does that apply to people opinions of NLP training as well?


>I would take the word someone who has actual experience rather than somebody
>who is making a judgment with no knowledge whatsoever to back it up.

What do you mean by "Take the word"?

Are you saying this means they must be telling some sort of all time,
universal truth or that are you recognising the experience they had,
which was true for them and you understand how they are currently
making sense of that experience in a way that appears to be useful to
them?

When people tell you about THEIR experiences the challenging bit is
separating out data that might be useful to YOUR future experience and
judgements by them which are generally not useful even if interesting
to hear about.


>John, you have no knowledge whatsoever of the 3-D Mind.

Really? Perhaps you could correct any of these statements that are
inaccurate for me.

The 3D mind is based on science.
The metaphor of an imbalance of brain chemicals which cause problems
is the scientific bases
Beliefs are built out of associated states which can become unbalanced
The 3D mind process is permanent because it works at the level of
beliefs not behaviours
This imbalance cause certain emotions and behaviours to occur that are
symptoms of this imbalance not he cause
The aim of the 3D process is to rebalance the states that affect the
belief.
The process is quick and therefore cheap and easy to understand and
apply.
There is an inaccurate belief that is responsible for the imbalance
that needs to be identified before the 3D mind process can be applied
effectively



>So in the land of opinions yours has much less credibility than somebody who has been trained
>in both processes.

Opinions don't have a credibility. Like emotions they are always true
for individual that holds them until such time as they wish to change
them in the light of new information.

How other individuals used the data wrapped up in those opinions is up
to them. If they simply take other peoples judgements on board without
question then there may be unwelcome consequences.

--
John

Tom Vizzini

"John" <yhqwasgo@d8mklotfu> wrote in message
news:kq1552p53d34ikpj5v6779r3u8bbre17lk@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 23:40:13 -0400, "Tom Vizzini"


> >> That may be true and it is still an opinion.
> >
> >So now we are being asked to discount trained people's opinions?
>
> Where on earth day it say that opinions should be discounted? I
> believe some call this a straw man approach. Set up an untruth and
> then prove is false.

uh...in the sentence above. I am not going to relive history for you since
you don't seem to remember what your wrote. You must think peple are stupid.
You make this statement then fo on to discount the value of opinion.

Her eis an example:
>
> However whilst their opinion is not to be discounted at the same time
> it is not some sort of absolute truth.

I may still be foggy becuase I have not gotten my coffee yet. That sentence
dscounts opinion. If someone goes to X and does not get it to work then goes
to Y and does then it is NOT opinion. It is fact. The FACT is that a group
of NLP MASTER practitioners with 40 days of training could not cure a guy of
a phobia. The FACT is that in 5 minutes that phobia was gone using the 3D
Mind.

That was done by someone trained in both NLP and 3D Mind.

Where was the opinion in that?

Now you what follows is meta crap and milton mess. Nothing more than a few
paragraphs trying to twist words around to change the menaing.

>
>
> >If you discount the opinion of people who are actually trained, what his
left?
>
> Does that apply to people opinions of NLP training as well?
>
>
> >I would take the word someone who has actual experience rather than
somebody
> >who is making a judgment with no knowledge whatsoever to back it up.
>
> What do you mean by "Take the word"?
>
> Are you saying this means they must be telling some sort of all time,
> universal truth or that are you recognising the experience they had,
> which was true for them and you understand how they are currently
> making sense of that experience in a way that appears to be useful to
> them?
>
> When people tell you about THEIR experiences the challenging bit is
> separating out data that might be useful to YOUR future experience and
> judgements by them which are generally not useful even if interesting
> to hear about.
>
>
> >John, you have no knowledge whatsoever of the 3-D Mind.
>
> Really? Perhaps you could correct any of these statements that are
> inaccurate for me.
>
> The 3D mind is based on science.
> The metaphor of an imbalance of brain chemicals which cause problems
> is the scientific bases
> Beliefs are built out of associated states which can become unbalanced
> The 3D mind process is permanent because it works at the level of
> beliefs not behaviours
> This imbalance cause certain emotions and behaviours to occur that are
> symptoms of this imbalance not he cause
> The aim of the 3D process is to rebalance the states that affect the
> belief.
> The process is quick and therefore cheap and easy to understand and
> apply.
> There is an inaccurate belief that is responsible for the imbalance
> that needs to be identified before the 3D mind process can be applied
> effectively

Yep I would say you hav no knowledge. You have a bunch of definitions but no
knowledge of the process.

>
> How other individuals used the data wrapped up in those opinions is up
> to them. If they simply take other peoples judgements on board without
> question then there may be unwelcome consequences.

Thsis is so stupid that it is hard to reply to.

You took a fact and said it was JUST and opinion.

Then you decided to discount all opinions as just how people feel.

Then you suggest that opinons cannot be facts

The fact is that you only have one agenda in this thread. That is to
discount anything that makes NLP look bad.

You bias makes you lok stupid. I am not sure if that is a fact or not.


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043

Cameron

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:u9CdnQwhrNic6c7ZnZ2dnUVZ_vudnZ2d@adelphia.com ...
>
> "John" <yhqwasgo@d8mklotfu> wrote in message
> news:kq1552p53d34ikpj5v6779r3u8bbre17lk@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 23:40:13 -0400, "Tom Vizzini"
>
> {John}
>> >> That may be true and it is still an opinion.

>> > {Tom}
>> >So now we are being asked to discount trained people's opinions?

{John}
>> Where on earth day it say that opinions should be discounted? I
>> believe some call this a straw man approach. Set up an untruth and
>> then prove is false.

{Tom}
> uh...in the sentence above. I am not going to relive history for you since
> you don't seem to remember what your wrote. You must think peple are
> stupid.
> You make this statement then fo on to discount the value of opinion.
>
> Her eis an example:


{john}
>> However whilst their opinion is not to be discounted at the same time
>> it is not some sort of absolute truth.

{tom}

> I may still be foggy becuase I have not gotten my coffee yet. That
> sentence
> dscounts opinion.

So, in order, in your world Tom, to avoid discounting opinion we must treat
it as absolute truth?

Does this apply to all peoples opinions or only the 3-d mind people's
opinions?

What about my opinion of your online behaviour? you seem to me to be a
disturbed almost messanaic figure who will abuse anyone of a different
opinion, and compares itself to Freud and Einstien with a frightening
regularity.

Should this be considered an absolute truth in order to avoid discounting
it, or is it only your opinions, or opinions that support yours that should
be treated in this way?

John

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:11:21 -0400, "Tom Vizzini"
<Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote:

>
>"John" <yhqwasgo@d8mklotfu> wrote in message
>news:kq1552p53d34ikpj5v6779r3u8bbre17lk@4ax.com.. .
>> On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 23:40:13 -0400, "Tom Vizzini"
>
>
>> >> That may be true and it is still an opinion.
>> >
>> >So now we are being asked to discount trained people's opinions?

OK, thread has degenerated into confusion so let's rewind a bit.

You said "LOL!!! If I remember correctly...Bart a trained Master
Practitioner of NLP.
So his opinion is very credible "

Which opinion of Bart's were you referring to ?

--
John

John

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:11:21 -0400, "Tom Vizzini"
<Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote:

>
>"John" <yhqwasgo@d8mklotfu> wrote in message
>news:kq1552p53d34ikpj5v6779r3u8bbre17lk@4ax.com.. .
>> On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 23:40:13 -0400, "Tom Vizzini"
>
>
>> >> That may be true and it is still an opinion.
>> >
>> >So now we are being asked to discount trained people's opinions?
>>
>> Where on earth day it say that opinions should be discounted? I
>> believe some call this a straw man approach. Set up an untruth and
>> then prove is false.
>
>uh...in the sentence above. I am not going to relive history for you since
>you don't seem to remember what your wrote. You must think peple are stupid.
>You make this statement then fo on to discount the value of opinion.

No that sentence does NOT discount opinions but seeks to recognise it
for what it is, a PERSONAL JUDGEMENT based on the unique experience of
his life as he has lived it. I'm not sure how many ways of saying this
there are but it seems straight forward to me.


>Her eis an example:
>>
>> However whilst their opinion is not to be discounted at the same time
>> it is not some sort of absolute truth.
>
>I may still be foggy becuase I have not gotten my coffee yet. That sentence
>dscounts opinion. If someone goes to X and does not get it to work then goes
>to Y and does then it is NOT opinion. It is fact. The FACT is that a group
>of NLP MASTER practitioners with 40 days of training could not cure a guy of
>a phobia. The FACT is that in 5 minutes that phobia was gone using the 3D
>Mind.
>
>That was done by someone trained in both NLP and 3D Mind.
>
>Where was the opinion in that?
>
>Now you what follows is meta crap and milton mess. Nothing more than a few
>paragraphs trying to twist words around to change the menaing.

Ok I presume that means you disagree with it.

However you description doesn't explain how it's wrong. I am sure if
one of your 3D clients gave you that response while you were trying to
elicit an accurate belief you would challenge it.

<Snip>


>Yep I would say you hav no knowledge.

Yes I do, you haven't said the definitions were wrong.


> You have a bunch of definitions but no
>knowledge of the process.

Ahh, the process? You see, Tom, this is why you need to take care when
you are writing here and you speech system may need to be upgraded. I
didn't realise you meant "knowledge of the 3D Mind Process".

Can't disagree with that of course since I haven't used it. Perhaps I
will have a look on ebay and see if I can get it cheap now that my
wife has signed up.

Does that still entitle me to free support on your forum or do I have
to put up any questions I may have here for your acolytes to answer
for me?


>> How other individuals used the data wrapped up in those opinions is up
>> to them. If they simply take other peoples judgements on board without
>> question then there may be unwelcome consequences.
>
>Thsis is so stupid that it is hard to reply to.

You could always have a try. You'll be surprised how clear things can
get when you think about them especially if it another's point of view
rather than your own. There are only 2 sentences.


Oh dear, lets try and unpick this little lot.

>You took a fact and said it was JUST and opinion.

Where did I use the word JUST?

I never used that word which gives a particulary slant to the meaning
of the sentence which I don't have. You see now I hope, how important
it is not to let your own filters and distortions cloud the facts
because it could affect the opinion you form

I don't disagree there were some facts in Barts statements. I wasn't
queering these. I was highlighting (not discounting) the opinion he
arrived at as a result of assimilating these facts.


>Then you decided to discount all opinions as just how people feel.

No. You need read the posts properly. I said opinions should NOT be
discounted but at the same time, not treated as facts.

It is not about what they feel more about what they have come to
believe.


>Then you suggest that opinons cannot be facts

Correct. Opinions are NOT facts. They are someone's point of view
based on their sensory experiences and beliefs.


>The fact is that you only have one agenda in this thread.

No that is an opinion.


>That is to discount anything that makes NLP look bad.

I don't have to worry about that, NLP can take care of itself.


>You bias makes you lok stupid. I am not sure if that is a fact or not.

Another opinion I'm afraid.

Good try but more work required.

--
JOhn

Tom Vizzini

"Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:44545a14$0$20115$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...

>
> So, in order, in your world Tom, to avoid discounting opinion we must
treat
> it as absolute truth

Where was that stated? How in the world can you read what I wrote and come
up with anywhere near that interpretation?

Bart stated a fact. A group of NLP people could not get a change after 40
days of training. Then Bart did so in 5 minutes usinmg the 3D Mind.

Those are facts not opinion.

>
> What about my opinion of your online behaviour? you seem to me to be a
> disturbed almost messanaic figure who will abuse anyone of a different
> opinion, and compares itself to Freud and Einstien with a frightening
> regularity.

Sorry Camoron, you are the one who is abusive. You lie, distort and insult.

>
> Should this be considered an absolute truth in order to avoid discounting
> it, or is it only your opinions, or opinions that support yours that
should
> be treated in this way?

How old are you, 12?


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043


>
>

Tom Vizzini

"John" <yhqwasgo@d8mklotfu> wrote in message
news8s852p4rsmbnp5ljsjunbuj0cpn49ujvd@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:11:21 -0400, "Tom Vizzini"
> <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote:

> Correct. Opinions are NOT facts. They are someone's point of view
> based on their sensory experiences and beliefs.


This is hard to take seriously. You are squirming. This boils down to facts.
Since you like to go back in time lets look at Bart's orginal post. Show me
something in here that is not a fact.
..................

There's no value to a Master Practitioner certification, and it doesn't
allow you to do anything you couldn't have done without it.

What's your outcome here?

Starting up a therapy practice is often regulation restricted depending
on the country where the practice is located. So you might check out
what is needed over there.

You'll learn some skills and tools studying NLP and becoming a Master
Practitioner

....So you could learn how to help people over there phobia's,
smokinghabits, ...

And I can tell you a cute story about a bunch of NLP Master
Practitioners trying to cure someone with a phobia for rolling
stairway's using the so famous VK dissociation. Which was a real
funny thing to watch, the MP's gettin more and more confused,
wondering why it doesn't work, until they gave up...

That's when I volunteered to run her through the 3DMind process and
fixed her, .. now that was years ago when I didn't even have any clue
how to do 3DMind in a propper manner... although I thought I really
did, seeing the results... :-)

So it was about then that the NLP "changework" techniques, ended up in
the garbagecan."
........................................

All fact. No opinions. Yes I really screwed up said that Bart is a trained
Master practitioner of NLP and his opinion was very credible.

You grasped the word "opinion" to try and discredit his account by
suggesting that all the facts he stated were opinions. It is an exercise in
desperation from you to try and discount his FACTUAL report of the failing
Master Practitioners.....

Nice try but I am not wasting any more time on it.

Between you and Camoron it is hard to tell which has their heads further up
Bandler's ass.

Tom

Cameron

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:Gc2dnZqpbPYWK8nZnZ2dnUVZ_u2dnZ2d@adelphia.com ...
>
> "Cameron" <cbrown1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:44545a14$0$20115$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
>
>>
>> So, in order, in your world Tom, to avoid discounting opinion we must
> treat
>> it as absolute truth
>
> Where was that stated? How in the world can you read what I wrote and come
> up with anywhere near that interpretation?

>
> {John}
>> >> That may be true and it is still an opinion.

>> > {Tom}
>> >So now we are being asked to discount trained people's opinions?

Set up the idea that Truth and Opinion are two different things?


{John}
>> Where on earth day it say that opinions should be discounted? I
>> believe some call this a straw man approach. Set up an untruth and
>> then prove is false.

{Tom}
> uh...in the sentence above. I am not going to relive history for you since
> you don't seem to remember what your wrote. You must think peple are
> stupid.
> You make this statement then fo (go?) on to discount the value of opinion.
>
> Here is an example:

Pointed out that Opinion can be regarded as something other than Truth
without discounting it. Most sane people are not locked in a balck and white
world unless under extreme stress.


{john}
>> However whilst their opinion is not to be discounted at the same time
>> it is not some sort of absolute truth.

{tom}

> I may still be foggy becuase I have not gotten my coffee yet. That
> sentence
> dscounts opinion.

Have another coffe, it might help, on the other hand, you shoudl probally be
avoiding all stimulants if your thinking is working in a black and white
manner.

Prehpas you are talking about a slight discount, say 10% off the opinion for
recognising that while it may be a truthfull statement of personal
experience it is not factual.

I'ld suspect that you meant discounted totally by your reaction. <shrugs>
when I use english masterfully I'll get back to you and pick on your
vagueness and innaccuracies, in the mean time clarification is all I ask.


>> What about my opinion of your online behaviour? you seem to me to be a
>> disturbed almost messanaic figure who will abuse anyone of a different
>> opinion, and compares itself to Freud and Einstien with a frightening
>> regularity.
>
> Sorry Camoron, you are the one who is abusive. You lie, distort and
> insult.

Ahh yes it is not the Glorious Tom is is the CamMORON.

I see.

Unlike your devotees I question as well.

Is it a lie or a distortion that you often compare yourself to Freud and
Einstien?
It is my opinion, and a quick google search will reveal it as a fact as
well.


>> Should this be considered an absolute truth in order to avoid discounting
>> it, or is it only your opinions, or opinions that support yours that
> should
>> be treated in this way?
>
> How old are you, 12?

Touche sir, brilliantly reasoned in the finest non reactive style.

John

On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 09:36:36 -0400, "Tom Vizzini"
<Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote:

>"John" <yhqwasgo@d8mklotfu> wrote in message
>news8s852p4rsmbnp5ljsjunbuj0cpn49ujvd@4ax.com.. .
>> On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:11:21 -0400, "Tom Vizzini"
>> <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote:
>
>> Correct. Opinions are NOT facts. They are someone's point of view
>> based on their sensory experiences and beliefs.
>
>
>This is hard to take seriously.

I am truly surprised you have a problem agreeing with this.


>You are squirming. This boils down to facts.
>Since you like to go back in time lets look at Bart's orginal post. Show me
>something in here that is not a fact.

<snip>

>
>All fact. No opinions. Yes I really screwed up said that Bart is a trained
>Master practitioner of NLP and his opinion was very credible.

At last a fact appears.

Thanks

--
John

MindFX

On 22 Apr 2006 07:27:53 -0700, "Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>And I can tell you a cute story about a bunch of NLP Master
>Practitioners trying to cure someone with a phobia for rolling
>stairway's using the so famous VK dissociation. Which was a real
>funny thing to watch, the MP's gettin more and more confused,
>wondering why it doesn't work, until they gave up...
>
>That's when I volunteered to run her through the 3DMind process and
>fixed her, .. now that was years ago when I didn't even have any clue
>how to do 3DMind in a propper manner... although I thought I really
>did, seeing the results... :-)
>
>So it was about then that the NLP "changework" techniques, ended up in
>the garbagecan.


Funny. So why were you with a bunch of master pracs? What was the
event or purpose of the gathering?

Was it a Vizzini event? (I use the term "event" loosely)

Was it a master prac training?

Was it some other reason for a bunch of MPs to be in the same place at
the same time?

It's VERY unusual for "a bunch" of MPs to be in the same room at the
same time... unless they are there for trainer's training.

And, quite frankly, if they were THAT poorly trained that they were
getting confused by trying to put together a strategy using VK and
dissociation, then I'd question the veracity of their claim to being
MPs.

Nice use of this thread to promote more Vizzini stuff, though.
Clearly, you're another of Vizzini's sheeple. Sad, really, that.

Vizzini is in denial that 3DBlind is really just an NLP strategy.
Anyone who has seen the video knows that. And the chubby guy it is
used on near the end of the instructional video (again, I use those
terms loosely) seems to have got some pretty ethereal results. If I
were him, I would wonder going forward how practical those results
really are. I mean, your "change" to "who gives a shit" could apply to
ANYTHING at that moment in time. The real test is in the real world.
When he actually HAS to go to an interview or listen to someone give
an opinion about him.

Then the proof of the puddin' is in the eatin'.

ITMT, your future pacing is all speculation and about as solid as a
loose turd in a flushing toilet. And that ain't too solid, as you
know.


TTFN,

Tom (*not* Vizzini)

Harun

"Vizzini is in denial that 3DBlind is really just an NLP strategy. "

How is it an NLP strategy specifically and what is the strategy? Could
you please enlighten us?

Harun

Cameron

"Harun" <gunerharun@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147722196.069123.274140@i39g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...


>> "Vizzini is in denial that 3DBlind is really just an NLP strategy. "

> How is it an NLP strategy specifically and what is the strategy? Could
> you please enlighten us?


Well, Tom himself said

" NLP is SIMPLE if you have the
Essentials. If you want jargon go someplace else. If you want to REALLY
learn street level skills then we are for you! "

This seems to imply to me that there may be a NLP essential skills link
somewhere.

Admittedly at about the same time he said

"This truly shows you NLP skills. You must be proud.
Your expansive vocabulary will truly add to the quality
of postings to this group. Of course you are the main reason that
people leave..... Keep posting. The more you post the better
everyone else looks. "

and

" If you can't make a point without name calling then
just please do not post "

So prehaps it is not representative of where he is at right now.

Aparently before he became the conscience against NLP he was the conscience
against Speed Seduction while training NLP.

Everyone has a right to grow and change, but to fail to acknowledge the
infulences that brought you where you are....

There is in my opinion a good comercial reason why DHE, Time line therapy
3-d whatever speed seduction and all of the rest of the registered spinoffs
from NLP trained individuals occur, to have a right to call it your own and
to differentiate the trainer from what is now an ocean of NLP'ers. Often the
specific techniques are easily recoganisable but the marketing is branded.

You have done both some NLP and some 3-dmind Huran? what similarities could
you see between any of the NLP processes and the tools Tom uses? Just sort
for similarity instead of difference for a while.

Harun

"You have done both some NLP and some 3-dmind Huran? what similarities
could
you see between any of the NLP processes and the tools Tom uses? Just
sort
for similarity instead of difference for a while. "

There are some similarities , there are ecology checks in 3dmind like
nlp and also timeline for future pacing. The other thing that is used
is dissociation, which is in no way an NLP property, its a feature of
the brain.

Anything other than that in 3dmind is in no way related to NLP.
Actually the main theory is significantly diffrent than the way NLP
looks at doing change work. NLP deals with strategies when changing a
person. There is no strategy in 3dmind and we treat strategies as only
the tip of the iceberg meaning symptoms.

As for the other tools, rapport is in no way an NLP trademark and the
way Tom teaches it is totally different than the way NLP talks about
it.

For anchoring, its the way the brain naturally learns, thus people had
it the same way even 100000 years ago, waaay before NLP.

Trance... Do I need to say a word about this?
Tonality... again, do i need to ?

The fact is there really isnt anything new about NLP other than
strategies, rep systems, and submodalities.

Strategies are surely cool, but modelling Milton Erickson(another human
being with his own problems) doesnt mean NLP has come to the end in
terms of changework. It just means it has modelled a good therapist.
After all, the way the brain changes and creates problems may be (and
is) different from the way Milton and hypnosis thought about it. That
is why there are still lots of problematic people NLP hasn't been able
to solve.


Harun

Cameron

"Harun" <gunerharun@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147731712.258040.224760@y43g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> "You have done both some NLP and some 3-dmind Huran? what similarities
> could you see between any of the NLP processes and the tools Tom uses?
> Just
>sort for similarity instead of difference for a while. "
>
> There are some similarities , there are ecology checks in 3dmind like
> nlp and also timeline for future pacing. The other thing that is used
> is dissociation, which is in no way an NLP property, its a feature of
> the brain.

I dont think NLP has a trademark on any technique, that's why some people
choose to move on from their NLP background and create their own brandname.

From the bit I've seen thrown round there are also some value work AKA dilts
in the 3-d mind?

> Anything other than that in 3dmind is in no way related to NLP.

But <blinks> we just managed to list a bunch of similarities?

Tom was a NLP'er before whatever event brought about his amazing
revelationof the true 3-d process?

Essential skills could have been the name ofhis training frim before he
branched out into the 3-d mind thing, but he was relating what he was doing
then to NLP.

How exactly is is not related in any way?

Call it superior, call it revolutionary but not related in _ANY_ way?

> Actually the main theory is significantly diffrent than the way NLP
> looks at doing change work. NLP deals with strategies when changing a
> person.

There, in my experience of NLP, has been a little more than just that.
Obviously your experience is different.

> As for the other tools, rapport is in no way an NLP trademark and the
> way Tom teaches it is totally different than the way NLP talks about
> it.

Actually the quote that he put up the other day (gaining rapport with the
internal centerline warmth rather than through matching and mirroring) isn't
unique or unrepresented within the NLP community.

Tom does have a very strong sort for differences mettaprogram that seems to
be quite consistant. Initally anti speed seduction pro NLP, then anti NLP
pro 3-d mind and obviously given his market placement it is in his intrests
to project heaviy that NLP and 3-d mind have no similarities. They do have
similarities, they depending on the level you look at them seem to have a
lot of the same terminology at least.

No NLP does not have trademark on any technique, and yes generally they
were modeled from others who have been using them for probally as long as
people have been thinking and communicating.

> For anchoring, its the way the brain naturally learns, thus people had
> it the same way even 100000 years ago, waaay before NLP.
>
> Trance... Do I need to say a word about this?
> Tonality... again, do i need to ?
>
> The fact is there really isnt anything new about NLP other than
> strategies, rep systems, and submodalities.

Actually I'ld personally dobut that these are new either, and thank you for
doing the metaprogram flip and finding all the similarities between 3-d mind
and NLP.

Harun

"From the bit I've seen thrown round there are also some value work AKA
dilts
in the 3-d mind? "

Nope. No value work is used...

"But <blinks> we just managed to list a bunch of similarities? "

Sure there are lots of similarities in lots of things... A bicycle has
wheels and a car has them too, but which would you use to get to your
destination? Or does that mean car has stolen from bike?

"Call it superior, call it revolutionary but not related in _ANY_ way?
"

This is because it challenges the way NLP looks at changework, thus it
is not related to NLP. The grounds that it has been built on is
different making it a different building than NLP. Its not somewhere
inside the NLP building, because NLP doesnt contain the things it talk
about.

"There, in my experience of NLP, has been a little more than just that.
Obviously your experience is different. "

What exactly is it like for you?

"Actually the quote that he put up the other day (gaining rapport with
the
internal centerline warmth rather than through matching and mirroring)
isn't
unique or unrepresented within the NLP community. "

I have the rapport videos from him. He may have wrote something about
this but I didnt watch it on the video.

"They do have
similarities, they depending on the level you look at them seem to have
a
lot of the same terminology at least. "

You are right, this is exactly about how attached a person is to any
one idea. Obviously an NLP fanatic may distort things to fit it into
NLP... The bottomline is any description is useless, and the bottom
line must be getting results. This is where I find people who practice
3DMIND superior to those kinds of guys. Because its about letting go of
one idea and trying another. Its about taking feedback from real life.

Think about this, if Richard Bandler came up with something called
3DMIND, would you try it out? Of course you would. Why? because you
believe in him. That musnt be the reason you try something out. The
reason must be to see if it will help you. This is how I found
3dmind... I didnt care about who the creator is. Because in the end
Bandler also is the worst example for a field that calls itself the
manual for the brain. And it turns out to be that Tom is a really
helpful person and a nice guy, contrary to what people say about him.
And again, I have not given him any other money than the 70$ and the
rapport cds 120 dollars. He knows me well, I know him well, anytime I
pose a question in the list he answers it. I dont believe Bandler would
do that. Maybe he does and we dont know?

And here's the last paragraph from my post that you didnt have a reply
for again;

Strategies are surely cool, but modelling Milton Erickson(another human
being with his own problems) doesnt mean NLP has come to the end in
terms of changework. It just means it has modelled a good therapist.
After all, the way the brain changes and creates problems may be (and
is) different from the way Milton and hypnosis thought about it. That
is why there are still lots of problematic people NLP hasn't been able
to solve.

Harun

Nic

What I don't understand about Cameron's postings is that he appears to
be treating NLP as a stand alone body of work, created by Bandler and
Grinder.

Yet NLP in itself is not new - all of the contents of the original NLP
was taken from other peoples' work. What Bandler et al created was a
synthesis, and not just of Satir, Perl and Erickson's work. They also
used the work of Chomsky and other linguistics experts, cognitive
psychologists including Karl Pribham and George Miller, a lot of
Korzybski's work and Gregory Bateson's.

The 'genius' of Bandler and Grinder was to create a synthesis of
important work and make it accessible to the general public. And to
challenge psychologists to move away from asking 'why' questions and
replace it with a focus on process ie - 'how' based questions.

The point I want to make is that it is extremely weird for an NLP
practitioner to seek to invalidate the 3D Mind or anything else, as
Cameron is trying to do, by pointing out that it has similarities with,
or is built upon, what has gone before. Otherwise, he invalidates NLP in
the same breath!

Cameron

"Harun" <gunerharun@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147771393.295565.254680@i39g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> "From the bit I've seen thrown round there are also some value work AKA
> dilts
> in the 3-d mind? "
>
> Nope. No value work is used...
>
> "But <blinks> we just managed to list a bunch of similarities? "
>
> Sure there are lots of similarities in lots of things... A bicycle has
> wheels and a car has them too, but which would you use to get to your
> destination? Or does that mean car has stolen from bike?

Theft isn't the issue here, at least in my mind, I tend to take the attitude
that this sort of knowledge is humanities, it is the human mind that we are
talking about. Its folks like Ritchard Bandler and Anthony Robbins who want
to trademerk it so they can own their brand name and differentate their
style in the marketplace for good sound economic reasons.

On a side issue, have you seen some of the early cars? I'ld say half bicycle
and half wagon.

> "Call it superior, call it revolutionary but not related in _ANY_ way?
> "
>
> This is because it challenges the way NLP looks at changework, thus it
> is not related to NLP.

So an armed rebel force opposing the governments army would not be an army
in any way because it opposes one? It's got soldiers uniforms weapons ranks
but because it opposes an army it has nothing to do with an army? OK.

The grounds that it has been built on is
> different making it a different building than NLP. Its not somewhere
> inside the NLP building, because NLP doesnt contain the things it talk
> about.

That's a much clear statement in my mind, yeah it has things aparently that
NLP has not. I'me observing that a NLP trainer Tom, has founded a school
that uses a hell of a lot of things that nlp uses and then claims there is
_nothing_ to do with NLP in his school. It's the nothing that I really hang
up on.

NLP doesn't own anything, I believe we both accept that, It took Bandler a
long time before his economic position and ego demanded the TM after the
name of what he does, and from what I've heard DHE is not particularly
lexically entrained to NLP.

In the face of the number of NLP'ers out there, considering the range of
different certification orginisations and a global inability of anybody to
resrtict me certifying my dog as a master trainer if I chose to I can see
how a trainer would want to differentiate their product from the main
stream.

Feathers, webbed feet, feeds from the bottom of ponds and has _nothing_ to
do with a duck?


> "There, in my experience of NLP, has been a little more than just that.
> Obviously your experience is different. "
>
> What exactly is it like for you?

If I had the elegance and accuity to summarise al of my experience of NLP
into text, even if it stretched over 100 pages I'ld be out training. As it
is I've read most of the books that I've come across in the subject (baught
almost everything that was available in the 90's at least) and gone back
along the books that have been credited as being strongly infulential. Apart
from my own training I've sat in with other trainers and borrowed corse
notes and tapes of some more.

So avoiding the exactly, what has my experience of NLP been like. I's a many
splendored thing I've seen people with incredabally different styles from
hapy Daoist monk to hard faced 60's bondage queen (emotionally) to corprate
high flyers, a couple of different flavours of new age fluffy bunny to
bordering on mass market multi level marketing. Ritchard Bandlers MORE
attitude to John Grinders "could dissapear into the folds of a napkin"

From my experience anyone who holds up NLP as being like <This> when <this>
is less than a couple of years content is not seeing much of the total
picture either through ignorance of willfull ignorance.

> "Actually the quote that he put up the other day (gaining rapport with
> the
> internal centerline warmth rather than through matching and mirroring)
> isn't
> unique or unrepresented within the NLP community. "
>
> I have the rapport videos from him. He may have wrote something about
> this but I didnt watch it on the video.

It was in the newsgroup a week or so ago, and I agre it is one of the better
rapport techniques that I have encountered in my studies of NLP. The post is
still up (depending on your news provider) Tom Vizzini "the 4 levels and 7
secrets of rapport"


> "They do have
> similarities, they depending on the level you look at them seem to have
> a lot of the same terminology at least. "
>
> You are right, this is exactly about how attached a person is to any
> one idea. Obviously an NLP fanatic may distort things to fit it into
> NLP... The bottomline is any description is useless, and the bottom
> line must be getting results. This is where I find people who practice
> 3DMIND superior to those kinds of guys. Because its about letting go of
> one idea and trying another. Its about taking feedback from real life.

Have you noticed how often those lines come up in people who support the 3-d
mind.

1) Anyone who wants to hold an opinion different to Tom's is a NLP fanatic.
2) Description is usless
3) Bottom line is results
4) Our stuff works and if you dont agree you are a moron

I'me saying and you do seem to be able to agree that there is a _LOT_ in
common between the two schools, Admittedly NLP is a rather diverse school of
thought. Tom was a NLP trainer, many of the same words are used and many of
the same techniques and yet there is this fanatical assertion that there is
_nothing_ in common.

> Think about this, if Richard Bandler came up with something called
> 3DMIND, would you try it out?

Shit no, I havent even given DHE a casual galnce yet.

> Of course you would. Why? because you
> believe in him. That musnt be the reason you try something out. The
> reason must be to see if it will help you.

Nah, you are running an internal image of me as if I was the NLP zellot that
Tom requires 3-d minders to assume anyone who does not uncritically accept
him.


This is how I found
> 3dmind... I didnt care about who the creator is. Because in the end
> Bandler also is the worst example for a field that calls itself the
> manual for the brain.

Remember Grinder? IMNSHO it's always the quiet ones you have to look out
for, they are usually getting things done while the loud brash ones are
grabbing the limelight. Heard of Whyatt Woodsmall? Dilts? the Andrases? (the
spelling of some of these are wrong).

You seem to and it's something you seem to share with a lot of the people
who discuss 3-dmind here assume that guru worship is NLP and everyone who
knows anything about NLP worships Ritchard. For me he highlights one of the
great personal risks that trainers can take on, especially as they get swept
up into their own sucess and trademark. The guy does sem to have gotten a
lot done at least in systamatising and popularising concepts that were just
not common when he started but aparetly he's payed a terrible human const
for the journey he took.

Thanks for the reversal of the mettapattern, coule we try some
denominilisation next. NLP is not equal to Bandler. He was one of the inital
pair that got the ball rolling. Everyone who has done some NLP does not
automatically become a screaming zellot (though some do and many do to some
extent). And teh mental pitfalls that people point out in others are
sometimes the ones that they are suffering from themselves.

And it turns out to be that Tom is a really
> helpful person and a nice guy, contrary to what people say about him.
> And again, I have not given him any other money than the 70$ and the
> rapport cds 120 dollars. He knows me well, I know him well, anytime I
> pose a question in the list he answers it. I dont believe Bandler would
> do that. Maybe he does and we dont know?
>
> And here's the last paragraph from my post that you didnt have a reply
> for again;
>
> Strategies are surely cool, but modelling Milton Erickson(another human
> being with his own problems) doesnt mean NLP has come to the end in
> terms of changework. It just means it has modelled a good therapist.
> After all, the way the brain changes and creates problems may be (and
> is) different from the way Milton and hypnosis thought about it. That
> is why there are still lots of problematic people NLP hasn't been able
> to solve.
>
> Harun
>

Cameron

"Nic" <nicoliver@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:e5qdnSadbo3nkPfZnZ2dnUVZ8tKdnZ2d@bt.com...
> What I don't understand about Cameron's postings is that he appears to be
> treating NLP as a stand alone body of work, created by Bandler and
> Grinder.

Nope, that's the way that I am getting straw cased. In this most recent
thread we've seen again
"not supporting 3-d mind = NLP zellot = Bandler devotee = coked up murderer
Therfore no reason to question 3-d mind"

As I've commented now and then, I do not consider myself a NLP'er I've
studied NLP, I've studied psychology, I've read many of the people you
mentioned in your post. I do get concerned in the face of groups of posters
who participate in group think and consider that they have a duty to turn up
on alt.psychology.nlp for the openly admitter reason to attack NLP and drive
away trainers.

I believe there are some trends in NLP that do need to be carefully
examined, unfortunately I see those trends being expressed more vehemently
in some of the 3-d mind posters that appear here.

Harun

I have read your reply , and excuse me for not being able to reply to
your post fully, I can't because I am very limited in terms of time
atm.

>From what I can understand in your post, I can see that you are not an
NLP zellot.

My question in this case is; Why don't u try 3dmind out ?

If you don't try it out, and you arent that attached to NLP what is the
point of all these discussions you enter? To prove that 3DMIND has
something similar to NLP or somthing taken from NLP? Honestly What will
proving that get you?

I believe 3dmind is very valuable, and gets results ...and I advise you
to try it out

Thanks for the discussion
Take care
Harun

Cameron

Sorry, I cliped a bit off the bottom of the post.


>And it turns out to be that Tom is a really
> helpful person and a nice guy, contrary to what people say about him.

Looking back at his posts 10 years ago I'me strating to see the better side
of him myself, like when he was telling someone that if they couldn't
support him without name calling, he'ld prefer to continue without their
support.

I suppose 10 years on the net will harden most everyone, prehaps he needs to
get back in touch with that earlier self.

> And here's the last paragraph from my post that you didnt have a reply
> for again;
>
> Strategies are surely cool, but modelling Milton Erickson(another human
> being with his own problems) doesnt mean NLP has come to the end in
> terms of changework. It just means it has modelled a good therapist.
> After all, the way the brain changes and creates problems may be (and
> is) different from the way Milton and hypnosis thought about it. That
> is why there are still lots of problematic people NLP hasn't been able
> to solve.

I think the day that NLP stops evolving and changing will be a poor day for
the field, From what I've been able to see it has continued evolving in the
time I've seen it. Erickson is not the only source that NLP derived things
from, and yes his model of the world, like yours mine and Tom's is not the
perfect truth of how reality is. However Milton definately got results, and
those modeling him seem to be able to get similar results at times.

As I pointed out in my post this morning, NLP didn't "steal" from one or two
people it steals from everyone, Nic put it much better in his post I think.

If someone could develop a model that helped everyone then no one would
claim their money back gaurentee. Do you know of anyone like that?

Cameron

"Harun" <gunerharun@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147817621.291229.123120@g10g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>I have read your reply , and excuse me for not being able to reply to
> your post fully, I can't because I am very limited in terms of time
> atm.

NP, I'me getting late for work myself at the moment, one of the few joys in
being self employed.

>>From what I can understand in your post, I can see that you are not an
>> NLP zellot.

Thank you.

> My question in this case is; Why don't u try 3dmind out ?
Initally because I saw Tom say "It's proven by science" said "that's cool
show me the proof" and all of a sudden was called Cammoron and had Unk
stating that he brutally fucked my grandmother.

I dont know what they are taking but I dont want any of it.

> If you don't try it out, and you arent that attached to NLP what is the
> point of all these discussions you enter?

I'me hoping to give others more space to discuss NLP on a NLP newsgroup. Unk
(monsterbrat) (Tim) used to spend a lot of time abusing people and posting
trolls like "The miners are alive pattern" Since he's been wasting his time
in pointless exchanges with me he's not done as much of that.

And yeah, I do quite respect my grandmother, Diss her and I will take some
time out over it. Good manners are not just their own reward, they are a
form of protection as well.

Similarly Tom feels quite free to insult others Cammoron Dick Bandler,
probally a habbit he picked up from Ros Jefories and possibally appropriate
in Ros's Speed Syphlis context. Personally given the level of fixed idea Tom
seems to be able to raise in the people he trains and his tendancy to
respond to disent by abuse and attempted overwhelm his current spate of
rudness and tendancy to make claims he cannot back I dont mind taking some
time out to tweak his nose.

The fact that there are some much more polite, sane and open to discussion
rather than abuse 3-d minders is weakening that resolve over time.

> Thanks for the discussion
> Take care
> Harun

thank you for you time as well.

Tom Vizzini

<MindFX> wrote in message news:q4bv52tb0c80a9fhl1rg6g4g8o80dom5gr@4ax.com...
>
>
> Funny. So why were you with a bunch of master pracs? What was the
> event or purpose of the gathering?

Uh if you read it was after 40 DAYS OF NLP TRAINING

Damn where is Joe Bloggs when you need him to check IP addresses. This post
sounds suspiciously like as digruntled NLP trainer I know of.

>
> Was it a Vizzini event? (I use the term "event" loosely)

What is you experience with our trainings?

>
> Was it a master prac training?
>
> Was it some other reason for a bunch of MPs to be in the same place at
> the same time?
>
> It's VERY unusual for "a bunch" of MPs to be in the same room at the
> same time... unless they are there for trainer's training.
>
> And, quite frankly, if they were THAT poorly trained that they were
> getting confused by trying to put together a strategy using VK and
> dissociation, then I'd question the veracity of their claim to being
> MPs.

Thats right...blame the poeple not the technology....Typical NLP trainer
reframe.

>
> Nice use of this thread to promote more Vizzini stuff, though.
> Clearly, you're another of Vizzini's sheeple. Sad, really, that.

That is NOT true. Bart was very careful about the using the 3D mind and what
he was willing to believe. The results speak for themselves. Of course NLP
trainers would prefer to shoot the messenger rather than look at the
problems wih NLP

>
> Vizzini is in denial that 3DBlind is really just an NLP strategy.
> Anyone who has seen the video knows that. And the chubby guy it is
> used on near the end of the instructional video (again, I use those
> terms loosely) seems to have got some pretty ethereal results. If I
> were him, I would wonder going forward how practical those results
> really are. I mean, your "change" to "who gives a shit" could apply to
> ANYTHING at that moment in time. The real test is in the real world.
> When he actually HAS to go to an interview or listen to someone give
> an opinion about him.

Well 3 years later the change is just fine.


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043