The List Question, "What valence (identity) would be safe" is based on tech theory and is used for Pre OTs with high OT sections that do not change non-optimum behaviour.

A Case Supervisor cannot do a decent job of C/S when he is presented with lousy admin such as – no Auditor Report Forms, not handling Gr Form reads as they occur, not writing in F/Ns, not making a ring around the item found, not indicating where a list was extended. Also illegible writing, failure to go over a report when done and make obscure words plain in print is a No Report and gets liability.

It is also (rarely) used on a lower grade case who is "detached" which is to say chronically out of valence to the point of no case gain.

When you run into a snag you can’t handle, don’t start inventing tech and doing something else other than the C/S instructions.

It is very dynamite – be exact in listing it.

End off the session and send it to the Case Supervisor.

It is, I am told, the wild fashion in Quals and HGCs around the world that if one hits a snag, the auditor rushes out and asks the D of P who gives him an unusual solution without even looking at a folder. If I catch or hear of anyone doing that, it’s the Deep 6*deep six: throw overboard (World Book Dictionary) .

The correct action and the only correct action is to end the session and get folder and session paper to a Case Supervisor, who

(1) does not see the pc and

(2) does not talk to the auditor.

Case Super is folder only. Then there’s a chance of standard tech.