10-26-2021, 09:20 PM
(10-26-2021, 06:21 PM)lano1106 Wrote:(10-26-2021, 01:53 PM)Shannon Wrote:(10-26-2021, 01:21 PM)lano1106 Wrote: AbondanceCH,
you bring good points, IMHO.
On one hand, if you are really serious about a certain goal, you won't mind investing time in reaching it.
but the long listening periods definitely limit how many programs that I can purchase at any given time...
you are on something when suggesting to rebuild popular programs to shorten their listening periods could be profitable...
time is precious...
Another option would be if new technology would allow running multiple programs at the same time...
The trio ME/DMSI/UMS could be quite something... ;-)
Don't you think it would make the most sense to achieve the primary goal of one title consistently for the majority of users before we start trying to divide 1 by 3 and get 1 as a result?
Shannon,
you are probably right...
I guess that your products are addressing many core and fundamental human desires that are naturally pursued simultaneously. The urge to mimick that with your subs is strong.
So, if it was possible to use multiple programs in a multitask mode, despite some tradeoff such as slower or weaker results, I would be interested into that...
The current programs basically already are multiple programs at a time, because they seek to achieve one primary goal by utilizing the efforts of many other goals which are all working together to achieve the primary goal. In some cases, the entire scripts of full titles has been added to the skeleton script to enable this. The difference is that as a single script, I can make everything point to, enhance and support the main goal.
Quote:I am clearly influenced by your programs... and when I use a program, there is pretty much only the program goal running in my mind for several months and I neglect other areas of life in the meantime... and this is hardly sustainable to be in that mode for a full year.
Just 2 days ago, I did entertain the idea to give DMSI program a shot when available before waiting the recommended UMS 12 months... in part because I have not been intimate for a woman for about 3 months.
My behavior is deeply influenced by my subconscious and its programming. In those last 3 months, I got few opportunities to connect with few women... I just simply didn't take action into that direction. The idea to do something to have an intimate relation simply faded away because my mind automatically focus back on the main goal which is to reach monetary success.
That is how we reach major goals like these programs are trying to achieve. Achieving Ultimate Monetary Success is a huge goal, and not only does that program have many sub-goals, it also has to be split up into different stages to enable you to handle all of it at once. I don't do that because it's fun, I do it because when you pay me, I expect to have the program you paid for actually achieve the goal for you. This is what it takes - and even programs like UMS v2 may take more than one run-through to accomplish the goal fully. If you want to achieve a huge goal like UMS, you have to be willing to put in the time, and focus on that goal until you actually achieve it.
Quote:I think that I have read similar thoughts in 2 other UMS journals (giving DMSI a shot before completing UMS)...
Of course you have. Every day that goes by, social media, video games, advertising and games all are training people more and more to expect, demand and require instant results, and have less and less perseverance towards a major goal that take s a long time and a lot of effort. Most people who are influenced by this effect get bored at the drop of a hat and they are addicted to the dopamine hit of "new and shiny", which is why some of my customers switch programs like they change clothes.
On top of that, no matter what anyone does, it's going to require time and at least some effort for you to achieve UMS. (Although I have to say, some of what I have personally seen and experienced on this program has blown my mind as to just how little effort is really needed to make huge amounts of money these days, if you do the right things. And sometimes, it takes a lot less time than it would have even just 10 years ago.
But still, most people aren't interested in putting in time and effort to achieve the goal. They want to get that dopamine hit from the next, the new, the latest and greatest.
Quote:With the exception of the OF program (I wonder why), it seems like a lot of users have a hard time following long listen periods (above 6 months). I base this impression simply by looking at the evolution of the number of journals for a certain program. It seems like there is a very high number of journals right at the release and the number is rapidly shrinking after few weeks.
See above.
Quote:If your products could pull my subconscious mind to work on few goals all at once, this is something that I wish could be possible.
There are many, many different sub-goals just in the skeleton script at this point. All of them working in concert to support and help bring about the primary goal. Your subconscious is typically doing the equivalent of 25+ different things at any given time while it is executing one of my 5.75G or later scripts, even if the program only has a single goal statement in the core script script. This is because of how much needs to be done to prevent self sabotage, overcome resistance, deal with fear, make sure that you focus properly, and so on and so forth, yada yada yada. There are many many good reasons I did not stop at 4G or even 5G, which was when we only had what would now be the scripting that directs your subconscious to the primary goal. All of these other goals and sub-goals are there because they all make it much faster, better, easier and more certain that you actually will achieve the primary goal of the program.
Quote:That being said, I am a happy and satisfied client. I don't mind much about the guaranty and voiding it as I have never requested any refund.
I am just brainstorming ideas... AbundanceCH suggested that if listening period could be shortened, that would be beneficial. I suggest a different approach which I think has been considered at some point as a 6G goal.
IMHO, those 2 suggestions are just ways to fulfill a need. The need is to pursue several goals in the same year.
Is it possible? Maybe yes, maybe no. I'm just expressing some feedback about using your products.
I am just observing that usage period recommendation is growing since I have been introduced to the company... I wonder if you have some stats about the typical user listening habit. Is the typical user thoughtfully listen for the whole recommended period or are those who do are some kind of rare birds?
I'm glad you're satisfied.
The listening period being shortened will require one or more of the following: less complex and challenging primary goals, better execution, more cooperation, better usage patterns. I can make a sub right now that wouldn't require long at all to work, but the goal would be simple and most of what you guys want is the complex, challenging goals. Stuff nobody else is even willing to try, unless they don't care if it works, like fear removal and male enhancement.
When I release NSLW, you'll see that it works quite quickly for those who use it. It has a relatively small set of script statements compared to most of the big guns type stuff and it's not making a physical change. Laser Focus and Concentration works noticeably in less than an hour, and has the potential to replace ADD medication in some cases. But nobody cares about that one, because it's not flashy and exciting.
The period of usage grows as the difficulty and complexity of the goal and the resulting program grows, and the amount of change that you must do at a deep level grows. None of this would take so long if most of that time were not being spent dealing with simple resistance for most of the time you're using the program. Sure, I'm working to overcome resistance better and faster, and that will reduce the usage times, but the end result is still going to be that you have to make changes to yourself that will still take time no matter what I do.
I would estimate that if it were not for resistance, UMS v2 would probably only require a single 5 month run-through. Most of the rest of that would be your subconscious moving chess pieces on the board behind the scenes to make everything come together.
So you see, not only are you already running the equivalent of multiple programs with each of my advanced titles, you're also asking me to work on the most difficult challenges there are. If you guys really want subs that work faster, then we have to stop focusing on incredibly difficult goals. Advancing the tech will work towards the shorter usage times as well, but the biggest issue is goals that are incredibly difficult, complex and challenging to actually achieve.
The alternative to that is, I can start making 4G subs, pumping out a million of 'em, and not caring if they actually achieve their goals. Then you can run multiple titles at once, and jump from program to program all day if that's what you want to do.
I restrict people to a single title at a time for three very good reasons: A) Because with the goal being to actually achieve the program's goals, we cannot divide the attention and resources. B) Because I am already doing many different things in the script simultaneously in order to actually and successfully achieve that one goal. C) Because the minute I say you guys can use multiple programs, the herd is going to start using so many at once together that they get no result but turbulence.
The other day I ran a test of the latest experimental on myself. I ran it for just 2 loops. It obliterated my UMS run, a whole week of it, in just those two hours. And when I started back on UMS I was loopy as hell and getting headaches and unable to work for a couple days. And that was after taking 4 days off both of them! That experimental isn't even full 5.8G yet - it's just testing the new build modifications, which by themselves will seriously increase the data input.
There is no getting around the following facts:
1. 100% divided by 2 is 50%, and 100% divided by 3 is 33.33%. Presuming there is no conflict in the scripts of two or three titles at once, you're dividing your resources, and that is inescapable, and has inescapable consequences. Less speed, less impact, less success, less achievement.
2. If you focus all of your resources on achieving one goal and the sub-goals that result in it, then you are much more likely to achieve that goal.
3. Unless and until I find some amazing way to turn off fear and or resistance much faster and more easily that what I have come up with so far, we are going to continue requiring scripts that require a lot of focus on one primary goal and many sub-goals to achieve the primary goal.
4. While this is true, running multiple advanced titles is going to cause you problems and turbulence, satisfying your impatience and killing your achievement of the goals.
So the key to enabling the POTENTIAL to run multiple subs at once is to enable me to create subs that don't have to do 25+ things before they ever get started on the primary goal, and for that we basically need to remove fear. So far my best efforts to do that even after years of work have been functional, but very, very slow.
Subliminal Audio Specialist & Administrator
The scientist has a question to find an answer for. The pseudo-scientist has an answer to find a question for. ~ "Failure is the path of least persistence." - Chinese Fortune Cookie ~ Logic left. Emotion right. But thinking, straight ahead. ~ Sperate supra omnia in valorem. (The value of trust is above all else.) ~ Meowsomeness!
The scientist has a question to find an answer for. The pseudo-scientist has an answer to find a question for. ~ "Failure is the path of least persistence." - Chinese Fortune Cookie ~ Logic left. Emotion right. But thinking, straight ahead. ~ Sperate supra omnia in valorem. (The value of trust is above all else.) ~ Meowsomeness!