Subliminal Talk
Shannon's Journal Discussion - Printable Version

+- Subliminal Talk (https://subliminal-talk.com)
+-- Forum: Men's Journals (18+ NSFW) (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals-18-NSFW)
+--- Forum: Men's Journals (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals)
+--- Thread: Shannon's Journal Discussion (/Thread-Shannon-s-Journal-Discussion)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-16-2016

(09-16-2016, 06:52 PM)dissonance Wrote: Shannon, would going above 5 loops have more powerful effects in just the healing aspect? For example 7 or 9 or 10 or even 12 loops?

If you eat 5 pounds of sugar a day instead of a few teaspoons full, is it better? If you take 10 pain pills when you need one, is that better? Does 15 sticks of butter instead of 2 per batch make a better cookie?

Too much of a good thing is no longer a good thing. Beyond 5 loops a day, most people will experience overload and the positive effects will e significantly lessened, or even lost entirely depending on how much past 5 loops you go.

In the case of programs running at this level of power especially, too much of a good thing is not a good thing.

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - ffaux - 09-17-2016

If my self-worth is contingent on getting approval from women (specifically them showing interest/attraction) will AM6 break this and make my self-worth internally validated? If so, what stage? I'm not feeling any help at all in that direction right now.

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - dissonance - 09-17-2016

(09-16-2016, 07:51 PM)Shannon Wrote:
(09-16-2016, 06:52 PM)dissonance Wrote: Shannon, would going above 5 loops have more powerful effects in just the healing aspect? For example 7 or 9 or 10 or even 12 loops?

If you eat 5 pounds of sugar a day instead of a few teaspoons full, is it better? If you take 10 pain pills when you need one, is that better? Does 15 sticks of butter instead of 2 per batch make a better cookie?

Too much of a good thing is no longer a good thing. Beyond 5 loops a day, most people will experience overload and the positive effects will e significantly lessened, or even lost entirely depending on how much past 5 loops you go.

In the case of programs running at this level of power especially, too much of a good thing is not a good thing.

Okay, got it, haha.

By the way, for the healing aspect, does the subliminal affect the body/brain physically, such as if I am a porn or masturbation addict, and I relapse, or go into a full on binge, and dopamine receptors are desensitized (which happens in all addictions), would the subliminal speed up the normalization of the dopamine receptors, and/or any hormonal, biological, or neurological imbalances that occur as a result of such addictions, or relapses/binges?

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - RTBoss - 09-17-2016

Thinking out loud here:

Originally, being a tester and buying AOSI/DMSI was one and the same.

Then, there was the revelation there would be another level of DMSI that would require another purchase. AOSI/DMSI testing did not achieve the results initially intended, so this new level (3.0) became a "free upgrade."

There are people who could have just ran EHPRA 2.0 continuously for 8+ months (or another sub) while other people helped out to test, and they (the new purchasers) get to pay base price for 3.0 - after all the "kinks" are worked out. Meanwhile, the "testers" get a "free" upgrade. Months of helping out, but at the end of the day, pay exactly the same as someone just coming on board for the final product?

Seems off to me. Either charge people more for DMSI 3.0 to reflect all the work you've put into this, or...well, give long-term testers some kind of future testing privilege unavailable to others (or some other perk).

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Frosted - 09-17-2016

3.0 will cost more because it will be in full 6g so testers effectively get a discount...

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - RTBoss - 09-17-2016

(09-17-2016, 02:49 PM)Frosted Wrote: 3.0 will cost more because it will be in full 6g so testers effectively get a discount...

Where did you see that? Please link me to the post.

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - maxx55 - 09-17-2016

(09-17-2016, 02:48 PM)RTBoss Wrote: Thinking out loud here:

Originally, being a tester and buying AOSI/DMSI was one and the same.

Then, there was the revelation there would be another level of DMSI that would require another purchase. AOSI/DMSI testing did not achieve the results initially intended, so this new level (3.0) became a "free upgrade."

There are people who could have just ran EHPRA 2.0 continuously for 8+ months (or another sub) while other people helped out to test, and they (the new purchasers) get to pay base price for 3.0 - after all the "kinks" are worked out. Meanwhile, the "testers" get a "free" upgrade. Months of helping out, but at the end of the day, pay exactly the same as someone just coming on board for the final product?

Seems off to me. Either charge people more for DMSI 3.0 to reflect all the work you've put into this, or...well, give long-term testers some kind of future testing privilege unavailable to others (or some other perk).

I know the E2 comment was totally about me :angel:

I do see your point though, but the thing is that this is something should have been made clear from the get go. If prices would increase as time went on, then that should have been stated. Shannon said that he will be increasing the price after the initial release of the final version once it's produced the results x amount of times over. I'll hold him to that and I think that's fair.

On the other side, I do see why testers could want an extra benefit from dedicating time to it. I'll be one to say that I'm appreciative that people like you, CatMan, Chaosvirgin, and everyone else are all a part of this and publicly posting your results. I sincerely appreciate that. At the same time, I know that I was testing DMSI right now, I'd see my reward as giving Shannon enough feedback and him upgrading and adding enough resistance-killing tech into it for me to achieve the goal of the program.

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Frosted - 09-17-2016

(09-17-2016, 02:52 PM)RTBoss Wrote:
(09-17-2016, 02:49 PM)Frosted Wrote: 3.0 will cost more because it will be in full 6g so testers effectively get a discount...

Where did you see that? Please link me to the post.

I don't know where it is but Shannon said that 6g will probably be around 300$.

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Andarras - 09-17-2016

Shannon, I'd love your thoughts. I'm not getting much in the way of external results from DMSI, I get the very occasional glance or prolonged look but then the same person doesn't pay a single scrap of attention after that. I stopped listening for a few days and randomly I did get a bit more attention. A drunk girl randomly stares at me then opens me. Girl on the train glancing at me a few times.

I was listening 3 loops together during the evening, then I chuck it onto a portable speaker through the night. Speaker is estimated to last for about 5 hours. Does that mean I shouldn't be listening during the day if I'm getting potentially 8 loops?

Or is there just a lot of resistance/blocks in me that the sub needs to work through? Any way of identifying if that's the case?

Cheers!

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-18-2016

5 loops, contiguous. It sounds like the healing is taking precedent. Resistance usually accompanied by a headache.

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Firas1 - 09-18-2016

(09-16-2016, 07:48 PM)Shannon Wrote: My name is Shannon, thanks. Shortening it doesn't work.

Peripheral vision is almost entirely subconsciously absorbed information, and that makes it subliminal.

Hello Shannon, I am new here and this is my first post.

I emailed this question but was told to post it in this thread.

I came across a website saying that in subliminals, the affirmations must be in the 'You' form, not 'I'. It was trying to say that it will not help you or will not be effective because the voice in the subliminal is talking about him/herself, hence the 'I' and it is not directing the statements to you. If a stranger is telling your subconscious 'I am confident' how can it be so effective? Why not 'you are confident?'

This is a good point and I am not sure if this has been brought up before.

Can you please shed some light on this?
Most subliminals out there are in I form.

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Ricardo - 09-18-2016

I think it's to do with the literal absorption of the script by the subconscious. "I am" would be seen by the subconscious as literally "I am", "I" as in "me" Perhaps Shannon can clarify.

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-18-2016

(09-17-2016, 02:48 PM)RTBoss Wrote: Thinking out loud here:

Originally, being a tester and buying AOSI/DMSI was one and the same.

Then, there was the revelation there would be another level of DMSI that would require another purchase. AOSI/DMSI testing did not achieve the results initially intended, so this new level (3.0) became a "free upgrade."

There are people who could have just ran EHPRA 2.0 continuously for 8+ months (or another sub) while other people helped out to test, and they (the new purchasers) get to pay base price for 3.0 - after all the "kinks" are worked out. Meanwhile, the "testers" get a "free" upgrade. Months of helping out, but at the end of the day, pay exactly the same as someone just coming on board for the final product?

Seems off to me. Either charge people more for DMSI 3.0 to reflect all the work you've put into this, or...well, give long-term testers some kind of future testing privilege unavailable to others (or some other perk).

I'm surprised to see you saying this.

You're getting all these different versions of the program for free after buying in, and not having to pay the increased price when I increase it. But... when I see DMSI give the desired results, I will adjust it's price accordingly.

RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-18-2016

(09-18-2016, 07:43 AM)Firas1 Wrote:
(09-16-2016, 07:48 PM)Shannon Wrote: My name is Shannon, thanks. Shortening it doesn't work.

Peripheral vision is almost entirely subconsciously absorbed information, and that makes it subliminal.

Hello Shannon, I am new here and this is my first post.

I emailed this question but was told to post it in this thread.

I came across a website saying that in subliminals, the affirmations must be in the 'You' form, not 'I'. It was trying to say that it will not help you or will not be effective because the voice in the subliminal is talking about him/herself, hence the 'I' and it is not directing the statements to you. If a stranger is telling your subconscious 'I am confident' how can it be so effective? Why not 'you are confident?'

This is a good point and I am not sure if this has been brought up before.

Can you please shed some light on this?
Most subliminals out there are in I form.

The facts according to realty, instead of simply playing telephone with everyone on the Internet assuming everything everyone on the Internet says must be true, is as follows:

"YOU" statements work only for people who accept direct control from others. It would be the equivalent of a hypnotist giving commands to achieve the trance state, instead of doing so in a subtle, passive way that allows the individual the illusion of control. These very same statements will be rejected, resisted and ignored by those who would require the indirect approach with a hypnotist.

"I" statements are much more acceptable, and universally so, because they work for both much better. They don't trigger "You can't tell me what to do!" responses from control freaks, and they work for everyone else as well.

The fact is, even if I use a male voice only, and I use an "I" statement, even female listeners will execute the statements because part of the process of cognition subconsciously appears intrinsically tied to execution. This is why I cannot get an "if/then" statement to work definitively so far, even after 24 years of doing this.

Of course the gender of preference is better, so I use both male and female voices whenever possible, or whenever it would not detract from the goal.

This information is based on more than a decade of research and experimentation, and observing what actually works. I used to use "YOU" statements in the beginning, because like everyone else, "I read it online". But the fact is, most of what is online about subliminal scripting is incorrect, again, as borne out by more than a decade of research and experimentation on my part.