Subliminal Talk

(04-09-2021, 11:00 AM)lano1106 Wrote: [ -> ]What I am curious about is how many stages UMSv2 will have...

So am I.  1? 3? 3+1? 4? 6+1?  It's a mystery right now.  Just like Spongebob's seahorse Mystery.

Shannon, I have been getting massive TDI from UMS2. I am currently using AOL.

I would prefer a single stage,not because it's more affordable no. Because I feel I want all of the script at one time. But you know better ofc

Based on the new FRM and new tech level compared to the first version, it might be viable to have it as a single stage. Only thing I can see that could be an issue is subconscious boredom if a person is trying to run it for long.

Just my experience - i find single stage sets easier to stick to.

imo, it doesn't matter it is a 4 stage or 6 stage as long as it reachs its goals resonable much more than its predecessor

I accept that the multi-stage allows a logical build-up and how generally that's preferable. At least until this point in tech, a pivot away from that convention may be reality now, I concede. Seems to be a large increase in Quirples!!!

However, looking at how previous multi-stages have been used, a single stage will probably be the most realistic option. At least it removes the whole "I choose to wing it/I know better than Shannon about how to best use the sub/Disregard the instructions, skip ahead in stages, then complain it doesn't work and want a refund" scenarios.

Single stage will force the user down a single avenue. At least then, you can standardise and control their experience much more effectively.

That's my view, Shannon. I wonder what this other surprise thing you spoke of is. My money is on DMSI, lol!

(04-09-2021, 11:23 AM)Shannon Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-09-2021, 11:00 AM)lano1106 Wrote: [ -> ]What I am curious about is how many stages UMSv2 will have...

So am I.  1? 3? 3+1? 4? 6+1?  It's a mystery right now.  Just like Spongebob's seahorse Mystery.

Trust the models 

(04-10-2021, 10:45 AM)CatMan Wrote: [ -> ]I accept that the multi-stage allows a logical build-up and how generally that's preferable. At least until this point in tech, a pivot away from that convention may be reality now, I concede. Seems to be a large increase in Quirples!!!

However, looking at how previous multi-stages have been used, a single stage will probably be the most realistic option. At least it removes the whole "I choose to wing it/I know better than Shannon about how to best use the sub/Disregard the instructions, skip ahead in stages, then complain it doesn't work and want a refund" scenarios.

Single stage will force the user down a single avenue. At least then, you can standardise and control their experience much more effectively.

That's my view, Shannon. I wonder what this other surprise thing you spoke of is. My money is on DMSI, lol!

You will have to tell me how much money you bet, because you would lose it in this case.  ; Please say you bet several million dollars US! lol

@Shannon, I'd vote for a single stage. But I am biased since it will be the the easiest one to afford and it will be a day one purchase for me. And I am sure money is big factor for people, especially in developing countries where the dollar's value is sky high. UMS, for many people, can be a gateway to future subs. Multi-states subs.

But that aside, subliminal boredom can be a thing and multi-stages are perhaps the best way to avoid it. But both OF V1 in the past, and now OF2 has shown no sign of boredom and I've been running them for a year now. (Will update my journal soon) 

Ideally, I'd love to run a single stage and have the option to "graduate" to a multi-stage but that's wishful thinking, and probably not the best for business as well. Anyhow, if models do support a single stage, then I'd love to see it happen and give it an honest run.

Right now, as money is very tight for me I'd say: I prefer single stage.

Listening to the comments about boredom it may make better sense to have a multi stage. All told, I'm sure your models and your intuition will make the best decision.

Also - as Keith is not here to state his case, and I'm sure you're reading this Keith...

On Keith's behalf I say YIpeekayay - lets get this show on the road

All told, I would much prefer to make it a single stage program and get on with other things. But, the multi-stage option gives is prevention of boredom, which some people have issues with on single stage programs, and it also helps work the user through somethings before exposing them to others. A more "build the foundation first" approach, which is generally a better approach to things this complex and which trigger this much fear.

Some of the issue we had with v1 is that it's trying to do everything at once, and some of these things are better used in steps, instead of all at once. One thing leads to the other better than doing both at a time. Some of it was boredom. Some of it was resistance. I think we'll be doing much better with fear and resistance this time around, but I don't see any way out with the other two. The only way to do them is a multi stage set.

Interesting that the models are showing such a close race between 1 and 3+1. So far they are both strongly showing merit, and relatively balancing out. I'll have to start modeling what happens for 1, 3+1 or if I release it for both. It wouldn't be a lot of difference between a single stage and stage 4, although there would be differences. Maybe both is the best option. Will add that to the options I am running through the models. In the end, we want what works best... because that is what's going to be most worth spending the money on.

I get the feeling the way this has been dragging on forever and it has been so difficult to get anything accomplished that someone or something does not want me to make this.

In my opinion if the models give an advantage for 1 stage, taking into account that is cheaper all are benefits for the users. For IML maybe its better 3+1, but I dont think the difference would be so big as 1 to 4, because more will buy it. 

In other hand, i feel like the multistage programs tends to force more the user to change with up and downs, morr aggressively, at least it what I feel, maybe this is not on the script, but for what i have experienced and what I have read in the forum its what i think. This can cause users to give up or have a bad memories from the program. 

The boring can be solved by stopping after 3 months or whatever the models say for a couple of weeks. And in my experience, the subliminals after a time, could be better to run it again in the future, because now it's not a new information or a new experience and its like a reactivation with less resistance a tiredness and the subconscious could feel like less forced them. Of course could not be always for everyone like this, but for me it has sense.

And like always, when a program really works well for many people it could become viral and a revolution. And more if its about money, all here becoming rich and IML much more. Of course as well a program like dmsi working really well and evidently would be the same. In that moment who would not pay 2.000 dollars knowing that he would become rich in less than one or 2 years knowing persons more o less directly that have done it after using that program. Once arrived any price would be cheap.

I want to say as well that MLS is pretty better now than the other. After like 3 weeks I don't feel as nervous as I felt with 5.5. Is more subtle, more slowly but more easier to carry on, and it feels better with the time. We are almost there i think.

one stage or 4 stage doesn't differ much on money,

if UMSv2 doesn't work intended because of it is 1 stage(subconscious boring, too much loading in less time etc) soo;
1. Shannon's efforts will be wasted
2. You will not be satisfited with what you get from UMS 2

it would be a better way to decide models or Shannons himself

(04-10-2021, 03:29 PM)tolgaocal80 Wrote: [ -> ]one stage or 4 stage doesn't differ much on money,

if UMSv2 doesn't work intended because of it is 1 stage(subconscious boring, too much loading in less time etc) soo;
1. Shannon's efforts will be wasted
2. You will not be satisfited with what you get from UMS 2

it would be a better way to decide models or Shannons himself

The models give an advantage to 1 stage, the powerful models would take into account the boreness, anyway the models, Shannon you or me are not perfect. I do think that if the models were so good we would be rich and we would be sleeping with any woman we want whenever we want. So if it really works I dont mind and I think anyone would to be  13 stage or 25 stages and paying 2.000 dollars. We are talking about possibilities and the future and what we think.

The models say better 1 stage and its cheaper, withthis information seems to be the better option by now.

I could tell you the opposite as well, if a multistage doesn't work, the efforts would be a much waste of time for iml and money for users and nobody will be satisfied, but we don't know which one will be better, and at the end if it works, anybody would care if its 1 or 15 stages.

So if we think that none of them works as well as it should would be better for all to be a single stage and if it works nobody would care if its 1 or 5, it will a great success anyway for every one.