(10-17-2016, 03:43 PM)Benjamin Wrote: [ -> ]The others aren't bad, but the entitlement complex isn't such a good idea. There is already enough entitlement bs from girls already without trying to add to it.
You misunderstand me. I meant she should feel entitled to have sex with you(the user of dmsi providing ur attracted to her offcourse).
You ever see when celebs are in clubs all these women think they got some magical pu$$y and think they can just have sex with celebs. They have huge egos and entitlement to make them think a rich celeb would want them. So I would like them to feel the same way about a dmsi user!
I still don't think entitlement is what we want. I'd much rather have them take it as a blow to their ego and value as women if they somehow can't get sex with the user. On the flip side, providing sex for the user should validate her temporarily.
(10-18-2016, 10:06 AM)SargeMaximus Wrote: [ -> ]I still don't think entitlement is what we want. I'd much rather have them take it as a blow to their ego and value as women if they somehow can't get sex with the user. On the flip side, providing sex for the user should validate her temporarily.
thats a good idea. Good thinking!
Also shannon could put something like sex with the user being an addiction to her and she will do everything to get sex with they user. But to user can stop her addiction after hes bored of her.
(10-18-2016, 10:26 AM)posh Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2016, 10:06 AM)SargeMaximus Wrote: [ -> ]I still don't think entitlement is what we want. I'd much rather have them take it as a blow to their ego and value as women if they somehow can't get sex with the user. On the flip side, providing sex for the user should validate her temporarily.
thats a good idea. Good thinking!
Also shannon could put something like sex with the user being an addiction to her and she will do everything to get sex with they user. But to user can stop her addiction after hes bored of her.
haha
(10-18-2016, 10:26 AM)posh Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2016, 10:06 AM)SargeMaximus Wrote: [ -> ]I still don't think entitlement is what we want. I'd much rather have them take it as a blow to their ego and value as women if they somehow can't get sex with the user. On the flip side, providing sex for the user should validate her temporarily.
thats a good idea. Good thinking!
Also shannon could put something like sex with the user being an addiction to her and she will do everything to get sex with they user. But to user can stop her addiction after hes bored of her.
Shannon's reply:
I checked the models. They say that it would result in the program being too effective. It'd be much too dangerous!
DMSI users' reply:
That's what we've been waiting for!!
Lol, jk.
But seriously Shannon. If you did make a "Too Dangerous" version of DMSI for super limited testing, I'd do it! I'd be totally willing to test it! I'd sign a waiver if I had to. And I'd even tell some of my friends!
(10-18-2016, 03:03 PM)maxx55 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2016, 10:26 AM)posh Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2016, 10:06 AM)SargeMaximus Wrote: [ -> ]I still don't think entitlement is what we want. I'd much rather have them take it as a blow to their ego and value as women if they somehow can't get sex with the user. On the flip side, providing sex for the user should validate her temporarily.
thats a good idea. Good thinking!
Also shannon could put something like sex with the user being an addiction to her and she will do everything to get sex with they user. But to user can stop her addiction after hes bored of her.
Shannon's reply:
I checked the models. They say that it would result in the program being too effective. It'd be dangerous!
DMSI users' reply:
That's what we've been waiting for!!
Lol, jk.
But seriously Shannon. If you did make a "Too Dangerous" version of DMSI of super limited testing, I'd do it! I'd be totally willing to test it! I'd sign a waiver if I had to. And I'd even tell some of my friends!
Realistically if it's so powerful that it is borderline dangerous then he won't even build it. It would clash with his own ethics and universal laws, that he understands, will likely backfire. Just speculation from somethings I vaguely remember Shannon saying.
(10-18-2016, 03:03 PM)maxx55 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2016, 10:26 AM)posh Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2016, 10:06 AM)SargeMaximus Wrote: [ -> ]I still don't think entitlement is what we want. I'd much rather have them take it as a blow to their ego and value as women if they somehow can't get sex with the user. On the flip side, providing sex for the user should validate her temporarily.
thats a good idea. Good thinking!
Also shannon could put something like sex with the user being an addiction to her and she will do everything to get sex with they user. But to user can stop her addiction after hes bored of her.
Shannon's reply:
I checked the models. They say that it would result in the program being too effective. It'd be much too dangerous!
DMSI users' reply:
That's what we've been waiting for!!
Lol, jk.
But seriously Shannon. If you did make a "Too Dangerous" version of DMSI for super limited testing, I'd do it! I'd be totally willing to test it! I'd sign a waiver if I had to. And I'd even tell some of my friends!
Why do people assume that massive success = danger?
Interesting.
Why do people assume that danger = massive success?
(10-18-2016, 03:08 PM)SargeMaximus Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2016, 03:03 PM)maxx55 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2016, 10:26 AM)posh Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2016, 10:06 AM)SargeMaximus Wrote: [ -> ]I still don't think entitlement is what we want. I'd much rather have them take it as a blow to their ego and value as women if they somehow can't get sex with the user. On the flip side, providing sex for the user should validate her temporarily.
thats a good idea. Good thinking!
Also shannon could put something like sex with the user being an addiction to her and she will do everything to get sex with they user. But to user can stop her addiction after hes bored of her.
Shannon's reply:
I checked the models. They say that it would result in the program being too effective. It'd be much too dangerous!
DMSI users' reply:
That's what we've been waiting for!!
Lol, jk.
But seriously Shannon. If you did make a "Too Dangerous" version of DMSI for super limited testing, I'd do it! I'd be totally willing to test it! I'd sign a waiver if I had to. And I'd even tell some of my friends!
Why do people assume that massive success = danger?
Interesting.
I think it's the other way around. Some think the sub needs to be dangerous to be successful, which isn't the case. That's why Shannon's doing what he's doing. If it can be done, he'll get it done (safely).
EDIT: Typed this out over an hour ago and apparently forgot to post, lol.
I think OAA is already in 2.5!
Freerad98 wrote in his journal that he is not used to being this bold and asked for a woman's number. Duke.Togo has an "itchy" feeling when he sees a hot woman.
Shannon you can use your phone connection on hotspot so you will have a connection on your computer (you can do that with wifi or usb cable). I do that all the time there, I wouldn't be able to post that often otherwise.
Decided to use DMSI 2.5 tonight for three loops before going out, to see how it would interact with MIR2.
Tip: Don't do that. I am seriously paying for it.
That said... my waitress tonight (was with a male friend and my GF) was so ridiculous with coming onto me, repeatedly, in front of them both, that my friend was cracking up and my girlfriend was fuming mad at her.
Had I been alone, I'm relatively sure I could have achieved the goals of the program. She was definitely trying to, regardless. I have never in my life seen a waitress try so hard to communicate that she wanted to have sex with me while she was serving me. And if it was just me "imagining things", they (friend and GF) wouldn't have been reacting that way. Her interest and over the top responses were plain as day.
Had to pick my jaw up off the floor a few times.