Here is some good news for you. Recently I completed surveys on pcs establishing the general workability of processes. From there I found there was a simple way of establishing what should be run on a given pc.

The entire test is by tone arm action. The table follows:

Considerable tone arm action during rudiments — do CCHs.

No tone arm action during rudiments and no decent tone arm action on prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross — do CCHs.

Considerable tone arm action during havingness processes — do CCHs. Minimal tone arm action during 3D Criss Cross — do CCHs.

Minimal tone arm action during prepchecking — do CCHs.

Good tone arm action during listing in 3D Criss Cross — do 3D Criss Cross. Good tone arm action during prepchecking — do prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross.

There is a phenomenon known as the “Drift Down” which is not actual tone arm action. The pc starts in on prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross with the tone arm high, and as listing goes on the arm gradually drifts down and lingers on and on at the lower read. This is not really tone arm action. The pc is just drifting toward the read of an item. In this the tone arm does not go up or down, back and forth. It just drifts slowly and evenly down over the first half hour period of listing and stays there.

Similarly, there is the “Drift Up” of the tone arm during prepchecking or listing. The constantly rising needle gradually raises the tone arm up to a high read which finally just stays there. This “Drift Up” is not actually tone arm motion. It is just the pc’s refusal to confront.

By “considerable”, “good” or “adequate” tone arm action, we mean about three-quarters of a division change in twenty minutes of auditing. Judgement has to be used in establishing this action, as for many minutes a tone arm may hang up even on an easy case before it begins to move again.

By minimal tone arm action we mean a quarter of a division change in twenty minutes of auditing, or less.

The secret is this. When the tone arm moves it is because mass is changing. When a pc is being the mass and no other mass or thing he cannot view it, as there is nothing there to view the mass but the mass. Thus we get cases that cannot as-is. These cases are just being the one valence or the mass or the somatic without being or seeing anything else.

The pc can be a mass or a valence however and still view another mass or valence. When the pc can do this we get reaction between two masses and therefore tone arm change. Also a pc who is being himself and is capable of viewing a mass will get tone arm change.

It requires two locations to get a tone arm change — the location of the pc and the location of the mass. If two such points of reference do not exist the pc cannot view anything outside of what he is being, and thus there is no as-isness of mass. When the pc is what the pc needs to have audited and cannot view it, then we get no as-ising and therefore no change of mass, since it is a one point situation as opposed to a two point situation.

When we have a pc who is being a mass and cannot see anything or be anything but that mass, then we get no tone arm action on any subjective process. Everything we ask the pc to think we get little or no action on the tone arm because there is no shift of mass — and there is no change of case either and won’t be. But when we have this same pc looking at the auditor we do get the viewing of an outside mass and so we do get tone arm action. Hence when rudiments produce tone arm action it is obvious that the pc gets his change by viewing things in the room and the CCHs are indicated. When this same pc does not get tone arm motion on a thinkingness process, that clinches the matter for the CCHs.

Also, in doing the CCHs, we have to take a somatic or a twitch or any pc reaction as an origin by the pc and call the pc’s attention to it by asking him quietly about it. This makes the pc view it and when the pc does the pc gets exterior to it and so the mass changes. Thus two way comm of this type is vital to the pc’s progress and lack of it multiplies the time in processing tremendously.

Any Director of Processing must follow these rules in studying daily case reports. By looking over the pc’s tone arm action, providing the auditor has recorded it frequently in prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross, the Director of Processing can tell at once what progress is being made.

It goes further than that. You just mustn’t run a pc on prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross where the pc is getting minimal tone arm action session after session. Only the CCHs can be run. Do not let an auditor audit 3D Criss Cross if the auditor takes two weeks to find an item routinely. And don’t let a pc be run on prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross unless good tone arm action routinely results. To do otherwise than follow these indications is to flagrantly waste auditing.

The only exception to this is that every pc must be regularly checked out for missed withholds. Only if this is done will the pc stay in session or be happy about his auditing.

This will greatly lessen your worries as an auditor and as one supervising other auditing. Use it.