• Welcome to Subliminal Talk!
  • The best in subliminal audio
Hello There, Guest! Login Register


Poll: What would you like to see built while I work on DMSI 3.3.2?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Upgrade FRM to 4.9 only.
19.44%
7 19.44%
Upgrade FRM to 4.9 and skeleton script.
5.56%
2 5.56%
Upgrade FRM to 4.9, upgrade skeleton script and limit targets for snipers.
8.33%
3 8.33%
Full upgrade: everything you've got.
66.67%
24 66.67%
Total 36 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Title: Vote for what you prefer done concerning DMSI v3.3.3
Thread Modes
#1
I have the following possible paths I can take on building DMSI 3.3.3.  

1. I can upgrade the FRM to 4.9 and build.  This will have the benefits of being a much quicker time to publication, since that means all I have to do is build from where the script is now.  It will also show me exactly what DMSI can do without fear holding us back, and exactly needs to be improved for reasons other than the FRM.
2. I can upgrade the FRM and the skeleton script and then build.  This will take me about the same amount of time as option #1, but will give me less specific data on what 3.4 needs to improve on 3.3.3.
3. I can upgrade FRM, skeleton script and limit the number of targets for the auric field.  This will take a day or two longer, but will have the benefit of focusing the snipers and retaining more energy for each person affected.  It will degrade my understanding of exactly what needs to be adjusted, but not by a lot.
4. I can do a full upgrade, and go as far as possible.  This will likely require 3-5 weeks to finish the script.  It will be my best guess as to what needs to be upgraded and improved other than the FRM, but would provide you with the biggest possible upgrade.

I am not going to guarantee that whatever the votes favor will be the path I end up taking, but I would like to take your wishes into account in my decision making process for this.

So please specify what you prefer and explain why below.
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!
 
Reply
#2
Even though I would like UMS to come out soon, I still think you should upgrade DMSI fully.
It might bring you closer to 6G and I think that if DMSI has a huge upgrade and it works for more people it will be worth it as a lot of people have been waiting years for a working DMSI.
And who knows, maybe you come up with something in those few weeks that will benefit all Subliminals hugely in the future.
as that was also a function of DMSI, to be able to upgrade tech and progress to 6G

Just my opinion!

Cheers!

Griffin
 
Reply
#3
Full upgrade. It's better to have the best version even if it takes more time. Anything that can give more results is better considering the time between new versions.
 
Reply
#4
(06-30-2020, 12:28 PM)Griffin Wrote: Even though I would like UMS to come out soon, I still think you should upgrade DMSI fully.
It might bring you closer to 6G.

I agree with Griffin.

Also, I've made an 8-month commitment to listen to Overcoming Fear 5.75g
INTP-A
Poll: http://goo.gl/JwTd1W

When you imagine something vividly... your subconscious will bring it into reality.
 
Reply
#5
(06-30-2020, 12:28 PM)Griffin Wrote: It might bring you closer to 6G and I think that if DMSI has a huge upgrade and it works for more people it will be worth it as a lot of people have been waiting years for a working DMSI.

+1

@Shannon I prefer you go all out for every DMSI updates so you can get to the final product faster and move on to more dollar-generating products. Giving free-updates is great, but business-wise too much of your energies are spent for DMSI.

Cheers.
 
Reply
#6
I vote for "whatever brings you the most success in the long term".
If you just upgrade the FRM, then everybody can test and find out how it is working while you build LTU6 or UMS2 as 6-stager and after you finished one or both of them and then come back to finish DMSI as final version before 6G would be nice. If you expect that it would take too much time and won't be the final version then put in the advancements that make the users the most happy.

The idea with less snipers is interesting. Well, as I see it, if people are successful with getting laid then more snipers is better but if they are not getting laid then less snipers and more powerful ones seems necessary.

I'm not sure if there is already a module in for it, but:
Users who are experienced with women will read their signals of attraction (that is women taking the first step) and can answer that step. Users who are not experienced with women might see the attraction from women (taking the first step) and wait for the women to take the first step (not recognising that the first step is already done by the woman).
So that module should make the users aware of what is happening and make the user "seek the challenge" or "take responsibility" or whatever you want to call it. Make the users go out and socialize, talk with women, flirt with them. Not waiting at home listening to DMSI and hoping for women to knock down the frontdoor barely dressed with naughty intentions...
Bring the users to the arena/dancefloor/meetingground and let them spend as much time there as necessary so to speak.
 
Reply
#7
(07-01-2020, 01:16 AM)AriGold Wrote: I vote for "whatever brings you the most success in the long term".
If you just upgrade the FRM, then everybody can test and find out how it is working while you build LTU6 or UMS2 as 6-stager and after you finished one or both of them and then come back to finish DMSI as final version before 6G would be nice. If you expect that it would take too much time and won't be the final version then put in the advancements that make the users the most happy.

What I was thinking was along those lines... I could build option 1 or 2 in a couple days, or option 3 in a few days.  That could be released and people using it to show me what just improving the FRM does, so I know how much the FRM 4.9 achieves the desired goals and what is not being corrected by it.  It could be used while I do the other stuff, and then we could come back to it later and armed with that knowledge, make a better upgrade.  But I see the other side of the argument also.

Quote:The idea with less snipers is interesting. Well, as I see it, if people are successful with getting laid then more snipers is better but if they are not getting laid then less snipers and more powerful ones seems necessary.

I am planning to limit the number of people who can be sniped at any one time so as to make each sniper have more energy and hopefully thus become more effective.  Not sure what the number is yet.



Quote:I'm not sure if there is already a module in for it, but:
Users who are experienced with women will read their signals of attraction (that is women taking the first step) and can answer that step. Users who are not experienced with women might see the attraction from women (taking the first step) and wait for the women to take the first step (not recognising that the first step is already done by the woman).
So that module should make the users aware of what is happening and make the user "seek the challenge" or "take responsibility" or whatever you want to call it. Make the users go out and socialize, talk with women, flirt with them. Not waiting at home listening to DMSI and hoping for women to knock down the frontdoor barely dressed with naughty intentions...
Bring the users to the arena/dancefloor/meetingground and let them spend as much time there as necessary so to speak.

I don't want women (or anyone affected) to "just take the first step".  I want them to make it happen.  That is why having the user go talk to the affected and flirt is not being pursued.  It's just having one side go after the other again.  What I'm aiming for is getting the affected to go after the user, even if the user does nothing to actuate it other than execute - of course, limited by the willingness of the user to participate, and the willingness of the other party to act regarding any pre-existing relationship.

I want the user to have to do NOTHING special, NOTHING out of the ordinary, NOTHING to try to get the affected to make sex happen.  Just respond to the affected approaching and trying to get to sex.
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!
 
Reply
#8
Quote: "I want the user to have to do NOTHING special, NOTHING out of the ordinary, NOTHING to try to get the affected to make sex happen. Just respond to the affected approaching and trying to get to sex."

On the one hand yes, on the other hand no. Somebody who already gets laid does not have to do something different. Somebody who does not get laid has to change something in his life (depends for every person), otherwise he is expecting a different result for doing the same thing. So in the second group they should be more open to go with the flow so to speak. Maybe a person gets affected by them and wants to initiate something but the person of the second group gives the whole time "no" as a non verbal answer because that person does not know how to say yes or is scared to signal yes. You know what I mean?

I always think of the example of the movie "yes man" (I know, it's a Hollywood movie but it carries some truth in it). A person who hides from life and from joy and from people won't successfully execute DMSI.
Now we could argue that FRM4.9 takes the reason or the fears away and then that person can move on with live as he or she dreams because no fear is holding them back and they can start to learn to say yes.

BTT: I think just putting in the new FRM would be very interesting and people already have something new to play and to execute. If it is not far enough yet it's ok, because you will learn a lot building LTU6 and UMS2. So I vote for option 1 if it does not slow you down.
 
Reply
#9
(07-01-2020, 01:16 AM)AriGold Wrote: I vote for "whatever brings you the most success in the long term".
If you just upgrade the FRM, then everybody can test and find out how it is working while you build LTU6 or UMS2 as 6-stager and after you finished one or both of them and then come back to finish DMSI as final version before 6G would be nice. If you expect that it would take too much time and won't be the final version then put in the advancements that make the users the most happy.
(07-01-2020, 05:59 AM)Shannon Wrote: What I was thinking was along those lines... I could build option 1 or 2 in a couple days, or option 3 in a few days.  That could be released and people using it to show me what just improving the FRM does, so I know how much the FRM 4.9 achieves the desired goals and what is not being corrected by it.  It could be used while I do the other stuff, and then we could come back to it later and armed with that knowledge, make a better upgrade.  But I see the other side of the argument also.

I agree with the other side of the argument.
However, you need real-world feedback, and putting out an option with FRM 4.9 will give you the knowledge you need to make a better upgrade!!
INTP-A
Poll: http://goo.gl/JwTd1W

When you imagine something vividly... your subconscious will bring it into reality.
 
Reply
#10
(07-01-2020, 07:34 AM)4Kingdoms Wrote:
(07-01-2020, 01:16 AM)AriGold Wrote: I vote for "whatever brings you the most success in the long term".
If you just upgrade the FRM, then everybody can test and find out how it is working while you build LTU6 or UMS2 as 6-stager and after you finished one or both of them and then come back to finish DMSI as final version before 6G would be nice. If you expect that it would take too much time and won't be the final version then put in the advancements that make the users the most happy.
(07-01-2020, 05:59 AM)Shannon Wrote: What I was thinking was along those lines... I could build option 1 or 2 in a couple days, or option 3 in a few days.  That could be released and people using it to show me what just improving the FRM does, so I know how much the FRM 4.9 achieves the desired goals and what is not being corrected by it.  It could be used while I do the other stuff, and then we could come back to it later and armed with that knowledge, make a better upgrade.  But I see the other side of the argument also.

I agree with the other side of the argument.
However, you need real-world feedback, and putting out an option with FRM 4.9 will give you the knowledge you need to make a better upgrade!!

Agree with @4Kingdoms and @AriGold  Personally, any of the above options is fine because I'm seeing first hand the effectiveness of the new FRM and I believe that it's presence will provide a much needed boost to DMSI. We already know that fear is one of if not THE main obstacle between most people executing DMSI and seeing how much of a difference FRM makes would allow for future upgrades to be more fine tuned. 

Here's an issue I foresee with FRM, regardless of what option Shannon goes with. OF 5.75G is meant for 8 months of use because its trying to eradicate ALL fears whereas FRM 4.9 as part of DMSI is going to be tuned to overcome fears that effect DMSI execution. In addition, Shannon has stated (and he can correct me if I miss quote him) that one of his goals for DMSI-Final is for people to get results within about 1-3 months of usage. DMSI traditionally pre-FRM4.9 took a good bit of time before things started to heat up (assuming you even executed) and FRM4.9 (once again, according to Shannon) isn't necessarily geared towards speedy removal of fear and is more so geared towards overall success when it comes to fear removal.

 So my question for Shannon would be this:  How long would DMSI+FRM4.9 product be examined by yourself while its out in the wild before you say "ok I've seen enough and I've got the data I need for a future upgrade?" 

I'm down with whatever at this point. I'm just glad we're seeing some sort of progress via 6G. Yeye

 
Reply
#11
Full upgrade in every way, shape and form.

As you say, you make a sub with the best potency and effectiveness possible at the time of it's creation. That's doubly important for DMSI, that with respect...sees a new release extremely rarely so we need all we can get at the time. Also, we need the best product humanely possible at the time to have the finest platform on which to judge where things will be at. That provides the highest vantage point of what needs to be changed. Releasing an inferior version, won't accurately show the full progress of things since 3.3.2.

Keep the snipers and everything else at max power, let's not start gimping things down before the sub starts working for the majority. We can worry about high quality problems like "too many girls" or whatever afterwards.

All the best.
 
Reply
#12
My vote goes for option #3, it will be interesting to see how the snipers react with this new modification and provide data if this is the right direction we should pursue.
 
Reply
#13
(07-01-2020, 03:01 PM)CatMan Wrote: Full upgrade in every way, shape and form.

As you say, you make a sub with the best potency and effectiveness possible at the time of it's creation. That's doubly important for DMSI, that with respect...sees a new release extremely rarely so we need all we can get at the time. Also, we need the best product humanely possible at the time to have the finest platform on which to judge where things will be at. That provides the highest vantage point of what needs to be changed. Releasing an inferior version, won't accurately show the full progress of things since 3.3.2.

Keep the snipers and everything else at max power, let's not start gimping things down before the sub starts working for the majority. We can worry about high quality problems like "too many girls" or whatever afterwards.

All the best.

The questions is what is the goal for the next version:
- should it bring more transparency for Shannon to develop 6G
- should it bring more joy to the users without the transparency

Also if option 1 was done, how long until the next Version of DMSI will be done? I imagine option 1 could be done in July 2020, LTU6 and UMS2 within 3-4 months time span (Aug, Sept, Oct, Nov) and before end of 2020 the upgrade of DMSI according to the things that were learned through LTU6 and UMS2? Or build DMSI in between them?

The problem with option 1-3 is the uncertainty of if and when option 4 will be realised after that within 2020.
I still vote for option 1 but I have to admit I'm not going to use DMSI for quite some time, so I want it for the general development of 6G. If I was planning to use DMSI then I would like to know when the next big upgrade of DMSI will happen (3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months - what is the plan).

So I'm less emotionally invested in that topic than others but I want to point out that this is important to a lot of users and maybe also the future success of IML. If DMSI hits big with the next upgrade, users will be more invested and write on the forum which will lead to more sales.
 
Reply
#14
Is there any chance that it comes with DRS or without NDRS and compatible with using DRS at the same time? Thanks in advance.
 
Reply
  


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  DMSI 3.3.2 discussion panel Voytek 37 3,641 06-26-2020, 01:37 AM
Last Post: samba99
  DMSI dead? Mr Confidence 2 323 05-23-2020, 04:35 PM
Last Post: Benjamin
  Vote here for next program build suggestions. Shannon 72 11,056 12-04-2019, 07:28 PM
Last Post: ncbeareatingman
  DMSI & becoming funny Raykon 1 556 12-02-2019, 06:45 AM
Last Post: Shannon
  WM2 SM3 DMSI story sharing JackOfHearts 9 1,003 11-29-2019, 01:15 PM
Last Post: Have at ye
  DMSI Yous 11 1,123 11-27-2019, 02:53 PM
Last Post: Shannon

Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)