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 - XyzN - 09-22-2016

(09-22-2016, 02:53 PM)Shannon Wrote: The sniper effect is based on the concept of focusing on specific attributes that you find attractive, and according to how attractive you find them. So when you come across a woman who has a stunning body, that's what will be the basis for the auric sniping. If she's plain, but has what you consider a sexy brain, then her brain will be the basis for the auric sniping.

Makes sense for me since I have a few girls I'm interested in at work. I reflect and look back on how I treat each of them so differently, but so well. I've gotten all their attention, if a little bit.

I'm like an actor almost it feels like, a masterfully suave one at that! Who can adapt to any girl he admires. Smile


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Benjamin - 09-22-2016

Quote:What are the physical applications of this, I wonder... (D type?)

As for DMSI the physical application is obviously giving her the D! Cool


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Raz - 09-22-2016

From reading the DMSI journals, especially chaosvrgn, I begin to suspect that Shannon added Ultra Success to the script of 2.4 as the surprise.

Am I right?


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - ffaux - 09-22-2016

I think the surprise is aura of a celebrity.


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - lokko - 09-23-2016

I remember in the past Shannon mentioned to have subs at very low volume. Now I'm seeing users doing loud ultrasonic and so on. I will be attempting trickling stream again. Should it be moderately loud? I snore fairly loud according to people, I wonder if low volume is not for me since that reason.


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - eternity - 09-23-2016

(09-22-2016, 10:49 AM)Shannon Wrote:
(09-22-2016, 10:08 AM)eternitys_child Wrote:
(09-22-2016, 03:49 AM)Shannon Wrote: We will get there if it is within my power. Sometimes I get discouraged, but there's always the next day when I realize that regardless of my discouragement or whatever else, the job must get done and I am not aware of everything. If I have been set on this path, there must be a good reason. So I soldier on.

Well you shattered the ceilings of what was considered humanly possible, and continue to do so all the time. You're surely more than halfway "there" when it comes to dmsi.

And perhaps you'll uncover something as you finish GPR / MHS / MIR that will be useful for dmsi / 6g. Perhaps journals from the physical healing subs will provide you with crucial data you didn't know you needed. Just thinking out loud here...

Either way, have you ever gotten females to test any of the newer versions? If the sub works for them, you can safely say that you achieved the goal, but there's a missing element the gents are having trouble with, and the ladies' success will indicate something. So more versatile testing might also be useful there.

I have had very limited opportunity to have female testers for DMSI. Only my girlfriend and one other. The other tested a couple times back in 2.1/2.2 only. GF consistently reports that DMSI is a very effective aphrodisiac whenever I expose her, but I am more than a little reluctant to expose her because of what it's designed to do. She definitely becomes more sexually aroused, interested, aggressive and initiates more after exposure, which is interesting given how highly sexual and initiatory she is to begin with. But, I don't want to give the advice to use DMSI as an aphrodisiac yet because I am not done determining what the safety effects are. Have to go slowly and carefully with that.

So would you say the demand for such a sub by women is minimal? Therefore making it more suitable, specifically, for men looking to attract women? Or maybe keep it generalized in " attracting members of the gender I am attracted to" but limiting it's usability by men?

I wonder if that would allow you to use script for goals that are specifically oriented for males, which would make the end product more effective. Considering the huge divide between male and female interest in the program (I don't think any women have expressed interest) it may be best to make it male specific.


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-23-2016

(09-22-2016, 09:09 PM)Raz Wrote: From reading the DMSI journals, especially chaosvrgn, I begin to suspect that Shannon added Ultra Success to the script of 2.4 as the surprise.

Am I right?

Nope. Smile


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-23-2016

(09-22-2016, 11:24 PM)ffaux Wrote: I think the surprise is aura of a celebrity.

Nope. Smile


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-23-2016

(09-23-2016, 12:40 AM)lokko Wrote: I remember in the past Shannon mentioned to have subs at very low volume. Now I'm seeing users doing loud ultrasonic and so on. I will be attempting trickling stream again. Should it be moderately loud? I snore fairly loud according to people, I wonder if low volume is not for me since that reason.

You should calibrate volume as specified in the instructions.


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-23-2016

(09-23-2016, 01:23 AM)eternitys_child Wrote:
(09-22-2016, 10:49 AM)Shannon Wrote:
(09-22-2016, 10:08 AM)eternitys_child Wrote:
(09-22-2016, 03:49 AM)Shannon Wrote: We will get there if it is within my power. Sometimes I get discouraged, but there's always the next day when I realize that regardless of my discouragement or whatever else, the job must get done and I am not aware of everything. If I have been set on this path, there must be a good reason. So I soldier on.

Well you shattered the ceilings of what was considered humanly possible, and continue to do so all the time. You're surely more than halfway "there" when it comes to dmsi.

And perhaps you'll uncover something as you finish GPR / MHS / MIR that will be useful for dmsi / 6g. Perhaps journals from the physical healing subs will provide you with crucial data you didn't know you needed. Just thinking out loud here...

Either way, have you ever gotten females to test any of the newer versions? If the sub works for them, you can safely say that you achieved the goal, but there's a missing element the gents are having trouble with, and the ladies' success will indicate something. So more versatile testing might also be useful there.

I have had very limited opportunity to have female testers for DMSI. Only my girlfriend and one other. The other tested a couple times back in 2.1/2.2 only. GF consistently reports that DMSI is a very effective aphrodisiac whenever I expose her, but I am more than a little reluctant to expose her because of what it's designed to do. She definitely becomes more sexually aroused, interested, aggressive and initiates more after exposure, which is interesting given how highly sexual and initiatory she is to begin with. But, I don't want to give the advice to use DMSI as an aphrodisiac yet because I am not done determining what the safety effects are. Have to go slowly and carefully with that.

So would you say the demand for such a sub by women is minimal? Therefore making it more suitable, specifically, for men looking to attract women? Or maybe keep it generalized in " attracting members of the gender I am attracted to" but limiting it's usability by men?

I wonder if that would allow you to use script for goals that are specifically oriented for males, which would make the end product more effective. Considering the huge divide between male and female interest in the program (I don't think any women have expressed interest) it may be best to make it male specific.

So far, demand for this sub by women would seem to be limited, at best. This seems to be because they don't need it. In fact all but one have expressed a complete lack of interest or even fear of it (the ones who feared it were afraid of rape). After all, the offer of sex from a woman is usually enough to get her sex.

But you guys keep making the mistake of thinking that by cutting out women, I could somehow make it "more suitable, specifically, for men looking to attract women". It would not. I can work in gender-unspecified ways without reducing the power and effectiveness, with the exception being references to specific sex organs, which is unnecessary in this case.

You also are forgetting that this program is designed for six different markets at once. (gay, straight, bi) x (male, female). Doing it any other way would have me building more than one version, which I am not willing to do. This thing is insane enough to work with already.

But also, you don't realize what you would be giving up by making it even just male specific. There are potential alternate uses which I am exploring, based on that universality.

Don't worry. I know what I'm doing. We just have a very tall mountain here to conquer.


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - THolt - 09-23-2016

"Beast 8 has a Minimum Time Of Singular Expression (MTOSE) of fully 20 minutes. That means that, to express the whole script at least once, it requires 20 minutes of exposure. Definitely time to re-compress. I like to keep the MTOSE down to a maximum of 5-10 minutes if possible."

Shannon,
Will this result in lower listening times for 6G programs if everything goes right?


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-23-2016

(09-23-2016, 04:48 AM)THolt Wrote: "Beast 8 has a Minimum Time Of Singular Expression (MTOSE) of fully 20 minutes. That means that, to express the whole script at least once, it requires 20 minutes of exposure. Definitely time to re-compress. I like to keep the MTOSE down to a maximum of 5-10 minutes if possible."

Shannon,
Will this result in lower listening times for 6G programs if everything goes right?

I think I forgot to put this into perspective.

If it were not compressed to the degree that it is, that 20 minutes would be 16 hours plus of audio. It would take more than 16 hours of listening to hear the entire script just once. That's how beastly long the damned thing is.

So the fact that it's 20 minutes long and still comprehensible is amazing, but for my purposes, 20 minutes is the outer limits. I have to achieve the goals of the 6G prototype within 20 minutes, or the test fails.

So to answer your question, yes. Higher compression means faster input means lower listening times. Although that by itself is not the reason why it would require lower listening times; there are two other things along with compression that I use that, taken as a whole, result in these very low listening time requirements.


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - robstar - 09-23-2016

Shannon, a few months ago, I had a girl I was seeing and starting to fall for bail on me out of the blue.. I thought I was beginning to get over it to a reasonable level, until I started to run dsmi 2.4.. Now it feels like I'm experiencing the break up over and over again, all I can think about is how badly I want her back, the intensity is almost unbearable. Is this the healing modules of dsmi expressing themselves? Will this pass? I'm getting attention from girls, I even had a girl give me her number while I was busking the other day, but I don't care because all I can think about is her.


RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-23-2016

(09-23-2016, 05:07 AM)robstar Wrote: Shannon, a few months ago, I had a girl I was seeing and starting to fall for bail on me out of the blue.. I thought I was beginning to get over it to a reasonable level, until I started to run dsmi 2.4.. Now it feels like I'm experiencing the break up over and over again, all I can think about is how badly I want her back, the intensity is almost unbearable. Is this the healing modules of dsmi expressing themselves? Will this pass? I'm getting attention from girls, I even had a girl give me her number while I was busking the other day, but I don't care because all I can think about is her.

Yes, this is one of the effects of the healing modules. Yes, it will pass. The goal of the healing modules is to identify, seek out and neutralize anything and everything within you that represents an emotional issue that might prevent you from achieving success with the program. So you are just healing a case of one-itis you didn't know you had. This too shall pass.