(I’ll leave it for @Miguel to decide whether or how to split off this discussion into it’s own topic. For 1 - I don’t know how or whether I have the ability to transfer posts; 2 - One could say he started all this 
)
No doubt because it could open up a can of worms.
Interestingly, during those 6 months or so that Richard said he was out-from-control virtually free, it was God that was operative.
The essential bit about out-from-control virtual freedom is that doer is abeyant/ beer is ascendent. Of course, Richard does not wish to associate out-from-control with anything religious or spiritual (even though his out-from-control experience was unequivocally spiritual, at least for the majority of its duration, from circa April '81 to September '81).
So in the below quote, doer does not equal ego; beer does not equal soul:
Richard (2016): Lastly, because the terms ‘doer’ and ‘beer’ are utilised in religio-spiritual/ mystico-metaphysical literature to refer to ‘ego’ and ‘soul’, respectively, it is apposite to point out here that those terms are not being used thataway when referring to the doer being abeyant, and the beer ascendant, in either a near-PCE – else IE’s and EE’s would instead be ASC’s (i.e., egoless) and thus not near-PCE’s – or when in an out-from-control virtual freedom.
Mailing List D Respondent No. 45a (Re-direct)
Whereas elsewhere, at other times, he writes that doer equals ego; beer equals soul. The spiritual connotations then with his own virtual freedom are unavoidable (and it makes sense, he was guided in large part by The Absolute).
ego = doer; beer = soul:
Richard (2012): And, just as the ego-self (aka the ‘thinker’/the ‘doer’) has to die, so as to become spiritually enlightened/mystically awakened, so too does the spirit-self (aka the ‘feeler’/the ‘beer’) in order for the flesh-and-blood body to be actually free from the human condition.
Mailing List 'D' Respondent No. 31
ego = doer
Richard (2015): Speaking from personal experience: in September 1981 when the then-resident identity inhabiting this flesh-and-blood body became awakened/ enlightened ‘he’ was immediately aware – due to its marked absence – that ‘his’ ego/ ego-self (i.e., ‘the thinker’/ ‘the doer’) had most certainly died and ‘he’ would remark to those interested how ironic it was that ‘he’ only knew for sure now (now that it had vanished completely) how there had indeed been an operant ego all the while leading up to that moment.
Mailing List 'D' Respondent No. 48
ego = doer; beer = soul
Richard (2004): However, what I was referring to – in response to your query ‘how am ‘I’ doing the experience of what is happening (as an operant)’ – is the ego-self proper (an emotional/passional-mental construct) who arises out of the soul-self (an inchoate affective ‘being’/amorphous ‘presence’ the instinctual passions automatically form themselves into) somewhere around age two as the doer of the affective experience of what is happening … as opposed to the beer of the affective experience of what is happening.
Mailing List 'AF' Respondent No. 25
and then note the tool tips pop-up next to “the beer” in the above quote. Richard provides the definition he ascribed to, at least back then:
[Dictionary Definition]: ‘beer’ (also ‘be-er’): someone who is or exists, esp. the Self-existent, God’. (Oxford Dictionary).
He – and this unknown actually free person – now wish to say that the doer is not ego and the beer is not the soul.