According to the 13 October 2000 revision of HCOB 30 Nov. 78 – CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE, an Auditor can utilize up to ten different buttons in order to get a read:
If a question does not read and does not F/N, you can put in the buttons Suppress and Invalidate, asking:
“On the question __________ has anything been suppressed?”
“On the question __________ has anything been invalidated?”
Other buttons can be checked as well (Careful Of, Nearly Found Out, Failed to Reveal, Not-Ised, Anxious About, Protest, Abandoned, and Misunderstood) to get a Confessional question reading.
Together, these ten buttons are all referred to as “left-hand buttons” in the Golden Age of Tech “Buttons Drill.”
The definition of “left-hand buttons” comes from a St. Special Briefing Course lecture given on 10 January 1963 entitled How to Audit, in which LRH states:
Because it’s a left-hand button, you know, Suppressed, Careful of, Nearly Found Out – Failed to Reveal comes under that heading too. Those are all left-hand, suppressive buttons. They do not cause a thing to read, they prevent things from reading. All other buttons cause things to read unnecessarily.
Based on this definition it makes sense why one would use left-hand buttons to further explore something that wasn’t reading. However, it does not make sense that all ten of the buttons given above should be utilized as stated in the following paragraph from HCOB 30 Nov. 78RB:
If Suppress or Invalidate or one of the other buttons reads, it means the read has transferred exactly from the Confessional question to the button. (Ref: HCOB 1 Aug 68, THE LAWS OF LISTING & NULLING.) Take up the Confessional question.
If you take a look at the actual reference that this was taken from, you will notice that it does not specifically mention any “other” buttons besides Suppressed and Invalidated:
On an item that is suppressed or invalidated the read will transfer exactly from the item to the button and when the button is gotten in the item will again read.
Indeed, even the original HCOB 30 Nov. 78 which was written by LRH gave no mention of any other buttons being used.
[NOTE: HCOB 30 Nov. 78RB and all previous revisions were not written by LRH. They were “assisted by” LRH Technical Research and Compilations (RTRC). However, there are no indications as to why any of the revisions were made or what LRH briefings or written instructions where utilized to make them.]
So, are there any references either written or spoken by LRH that would substantiate using all of these buttons in this fashion?
Consider how LRH defined “Right-hand Buttons” compared to “Left-hand Buttons” in a lecture given on 2 October 1962, entitled 3GA Listing Lines by Tiger Buttons:
The active buttons that produces a read that looks like the goal read are the buttons of the right: And the buttons of the right are: Invalidate, Suggest, and Mistake.
And the buttons of the left are Suppress, Careful of, and Failed to Reveal. Now these are the buttons of the left, but they take a goal out of a read totally.
And the buttons of the right put a false read on the goal when there is none or steal the read of the goal. Got that?
The read actually disappears over here on the buttons of the left and a read can be made to appear with the buttons of the right.
The main thing to take away from this is that the difference between a left-hand or right-hand button is whether it prevents a read or produces a false read. It is also important to note that Suppress and Invalidate are not both considered left-hand buttons. In fact, they are two completely separate phenomena as discussed earlier in the same lecture:
Items, when they’re over-listed feel invalidated; so, the pc becomes very doubtful and everything becomes unreal.
Because the sensation of invalidation occurs when a line is made to flow too long in one direction.
Now on the other side of the picture – you keep the pc from giving you the items he has, then you put him on a whole string of missed withholds.
Now, what happens to the pc? The pc suppresses. He’s being made to suppress. He suppresses the auditor, he suppresses the list, he suppresses everything, and so on, stacks himself up on a bunch of missed withholds, with all the consequences of missed withholds, because each item, then that he didn’t give you becomes a missed withhold.
Therefore, it would not be safe to assume that the ten buttons given above would all function in the exact same way. The problem is that utilizing all of the buttons in the fashion mentioned above opens the door to taking up questions that may not in fact be charged. [See “Use of Buttons“] It could also make it possible for bypassed charge to be missed, such as with Protest or Misunderstood. [See “Misunderstood Button“]
A key datum that is missing here is the correct method of how to “put in a button” which is defined in the original LRH reference, HCOB 30 Nov. 78 – CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE:
Put in the button (simply get what the pc has to say and acknowledge), then take up the question.
If an Auditor always applied this datum when “putting in” buttons, especially when trying further explore an unreading question, it would not matter what button was used. That’s because the Auditor would get a chance to clean that button itself and find out what it was actually reading on before taking up the question. This would also do a better job of keeping the pc’s rudiments in, which would make it more likely that the question would read (or F/N) in the first place.