(05-24-2016, 08:24 PM)ncbeareatingman Wrote: yeah Catman...E2 is outstanding, in just two days...its both kicked my ass and served me well... riding the wave and doing my best as the future achieved goals PULL me forward to it and I go to meet it as well... yes Im already seeing some of this on E2 amoung several other outstanding things as well... more laughter,joy,depth ,spirit info-atunement...going within more yet more extrovertedly myself as well. very cool sometimes very trippy and over all outta F*****king site technology!

(05-24-2016, 08:19 PM)CatMan Wrote: Shannon, LOVE the news about BIATBWS and AOS being combined in 5.5G. Absolutely insane news, I'm so excited for this you have no idea!!! Buying this combo program 5.5G opening day, no lie at all. I was confused as to why you would build in 5G for it, you've always seemed to want to build things in the best way possible at the time of construction. I figured it was a time issue, but I'm glad you are doing it in 5.5G now, this should REALLY change many lives! This is an amazing surprise, I was wishing they'd be combined in a mini SM3 in 5.5G! VERY exciting! Awesome program...simply awesome.

Also, the thought that now you'd have a 5.5G template to create further works in, also fantastic for everyone to hear. From what you said, it seems it will have more tech/power than EHPRA 2.0. Being that it will be built out from some unknown custom program that Andrew has had made for him. That program, whatever it is, sounds like it is even more beastly than EHPRA 2.0. Very interesting, more power and increasing gentleness alongside is good, onward and upward, I guess that's progress. It's amazing, it just seems like weeks ago, OF5G was the beast of IML, now that's been eclipsed by EHPRA 2.0, it seems that program's reign will be short-lived. Looking forward to the 6G backport goodness in this program...maybe even more ones than EHPRA 2.0 had, makes sense as you're gaining more and more knowledge about how to implement stuff as time goes on. Honestly, this program will change lives, man. Wow, you are outdoing yourself constantly. I greatly respect that.

I'm also not too comfortable with that "gender neutral" thing, not a fan of awkward, undesirable situations popping up. That's why I liked SM3's strong signal of heterosexuality bulletpoint, because earlier versions of that apparently had issues with gay men going after listeners. If you say it's fine, then okay we have to accept that, maybe you've learned new tricks to implement it since then I guess...

Overall, a very positive update. Not just for this new BIATBWS+AOS 5.5G, but for the new 5.5G template itself, allowing you a platform to develop future 5.5G programs! Wonderful. Absolutely wonderful!

(05-24-2016, 05:53 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-24-2016, 05:45 PM)apollolux Wrote: I'm also not a fan of AOS+BIABWS 5.5G being "gender neutral" since that might dilute its efficacy over something more direct.

Yeah, because you aren't smart enough to know the difference, right? lol

Let's see how hard this really is.

Gender specific version:

Quote:I now make myself irresistibly attractive sexually to beautiful women.

Gender neutral version:

Quote:I now make myself irresistibly attractive sexually to beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to.

They mean and say exactly the same thing, except that doing a gender specific version takes 2-3 times more time. Gender neutral works for any gender and any sexual preference in just one program.

Oh ye of little faith. Or in this case, common sense. When are you guys going to figure out that yes, I actually do know what I'm doing?

(05-24-2016, 08:46 PM)apollolux Wrote:

(05-24-2016, 05:53 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-24-2016, 05:45 PM)apollolux Wrote: I'm also not a fan of AOS+BIABWS 5.5G being "gender neutral" since that might dilute its efficacy over something more direct.

Yeah, because you aren't smart enough to know the difference, right? lol

Let's see how hard this really is.

Gender specific version:

Quote:I now make myself irresistibly attractive sexually to beautiful women.

Gender neutral version:

Quote:I now make myself irresistibly attractive sexually to beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to.

They mean and say exactly the same thing, except that doing a gender specific version takes 2-3 times more time. Gender neutral works for any gender and any sexual preference in just one program.

Oh ye of little faith. Or in this case, common sense. When are you guys going to figure out that yes, I actually do know what I'm doing?

My concern isn't over your knowledge or skill set, it's about processing. I know that you insist the subconscious mind can process a much larger and denser amount of data than the conscious mind can, and I know that consciously "beautiful women" can be equivalent to "beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to," but "women" is objectively simpler to understand (i.e. takes less energy and effort to process successfully) than "people of the gender I am sexually attracted to," takes less time to input which allows the space that would have been occupied by the longer statement to be instead occupied with other script, and there's less likelihood of the qualifiers after "people" being ignored or downplayed by a potentially lazy subconscious.

Also, with another processing analogy, "beautiful women" may result in one set of neural pathways firing to associate the prompt with the mind's recollection of beautiful women, while "beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to" may take more time and/or effort to process because it may process in parts, drilling down like the more general "beautiful people" first then having to expend effort (however significant or insignificant) to filter to those "of the gender I am sexually attracted to," potentially processing that in parts like "of the gender I am" (which is male in this example) then having to process "sexually attracted to" and expend more effort linking the two clauses together to make the proper filter.

I'm not trying to belittle your efforts, Shannon, I'm simply looking to present an alternative argument for simpler, more overt and obvious wording based on the fact that it's not quite conclusive how the subconscious definitively and undisputedly processes data, though you without question seem to have come the closest of anyone I've encountered so far to finding out that answer. Also, I would think the trade off of writing a shorter script that would only need a Find & Replace All to change "women" to "men" would be more beneficial than writing a longer script that is gender neutral.

(05-24-2016, 09:06 PM)Darkness Wrote:

(05-24-2016, 08:46 PM)apollolux Wrote:

(05-24-2016, 05:53 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-24-2016, 05:45 PM)apollolux Wrote: I'm also not a fan of AOS+BIABWS 5.5G being "gender neutral" since that might dilute its efficacy over something more direct.

Yeah, because you aren't smart enough to know the difference, right? lol

Let's see how hard this really is.

Gender specific version:

Quote:I now make myself irresistibly attractive sexually to beautiful women.

Gender neutral version:

Quote:I now make myself irresistibly attractive sexually to beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to.

They mean and say exactly the same thing, except that doing a gender specific version takes 2-3 times more time. Gender neutral works for any gender and any sexual preference in just one program.

Oh ye of little faith. Or in this case, common sense. When are you guys going to figure out that yes, I actually do know what I'm doing?

My concern isn't over your knowledge or skill set, it's about processing. I know that you insist the subconscious mind can process a much larger and denser amount of data than the conscious mind can, and I know that consciously "beautiful women" can be equivalent to "beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to," but "women" is objectively simpler to understand (i.e. takes less energy and effort to process successfully) than "people of the gender I am sexually attracted to," takes less time to input which allows the space that would have been occupied by the longer statement to be instead occupied with other script, and there's less likelihood of the qualifiers after "people" being ignored or downplayed by a potentially lazy subconscious.

Also, with another processing analogy, "beautiful women" may result in one set of neural pathways firing to associate the prompt with the mind's recollection of beautiful women, while "beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to" may take more time and/or effort to process because it may process in parts, drilling down like the more general "beautiful people" first then having to expend effort (however significant or insignificant) to filter to those "of the gender I am sexually attracted to," potentially processing that in parts like "of the gender I am" (which is male in this example) then having to process "sexually attracted to" and expend more effort linking the two clauses together to make the proper filter.

I'm not trying to belittle your efforts, Shannon, I'm simply looking to present an alternative argument for simpler, more overt and obvious wording based on the fact that it's not quite conclusive how the subconscious definitively and undisputedly processes data, though you without question seem to have come the closest of anyone I've encountered so far to finding out that answer. Also, I would think the trade off of writing a shorter script that would only need a Find & Replace All to change "women" to "men" would be more beneficial than writing a longer script that is gender neutral.

I agree

Is there a way to make the new AOS just focus on the goal of sexiness. With the Biatbw for all genders to use it, have the suggestion be : becoming irresistibly attractive sexually . Nothing else please.

(05-24-2016, 06:03 PM)dweller94 Wrote:

(05-24-2016, 05:48 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-24-2016, 04:49 PM)dweller94 Wrote: holy hell!

Shannon will the manifestation part of the script include something similar or along the lines of this:

"The beautiful women I attract now effortlessly approach me and act on their interest and attraction in obvious, aggressive and direct ways."

That was in BIATBW but wasn't included in the BIATBWS's script last time I checked, just thought I'd mention this.

Mebbe. We shall see. I'm working on the OE section right now. Haven't gotten that far.

Awesome, truly appreciate your work!

Reason behind me mentioning this is during my BIATBW 4G run for like two weeks after 1 week I got very strong/direct responses in a short space of time and I'm certain it was that piece of the script working its magic.

I was wondering, how will this program deal with resistance e.g. shame/guilt/fear. I'm guessing it will be less of a problem/issue when in comparison to a program that contains much more goals like the larger 5G Subs. Would you say due to this containing fewer goals it won't require a module to address shame/guilt/fear based resistance?

(05-24-2016, 07:06 PM)chaosvrgn Wrote: Shannon's making my life pretty freakin' hard right now. I was SO set on E2 for six months after I finished this run of AM6 (currently in Stage 4)... Now, here he is working on even more awesome products and stuff. Must stay strong, must make the purchase I know I NEED rather than what sounds fun...

Quote:My concern isn't over your knowledge or skill set, it's about processing. I know that you insist the subconscious mind can process a much larger and denser amount of data than the conscious mind can, and I know that consciously "beautiful women" can be equivalent to "beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to," but "women" is objectively simpler to understand (i.e. takes less energy and effort to process successfully) than "people of the gender I am sexually attracted to," takes less time to input which allows the space that would have been occupied by the longer statement to be instead occupied with other script, and there's less likelihood of the qualifiers after "people" being ignored or downplayed by a potentially lazy subconscious.

Quote:Also, with another processing analogy, "beautiful women" may result in one set of neural pathways firing to associate the prompt with the mind's recollection of beautiful women, while "beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to" may take more time and/or effort to process because it may process in parts, drilling down like the more general "beautiful people" first then having to expend effort (however significant or insignificant) to filter to those "of the gender I am sexually attracted to," potentially processing that in parts like "of the gender I am" (which is male in this example) then having to process "sexually attracted to" and expend more effort linking the two clauses together to make the proper filter.

Quote:I'm not trying to belittle your efforts, Shannon, I'm simply looking to present an alternative argument for simpler, more overt and obvious wording based on the fact that it's not quite conclusive how the subconscious definitively and undisputedly processes data, though you without question seem to have come the closest of anyone I've encountered so far to finding out that answer. Also, I would think the trade off of writing a shorter script that would only need a Find & Replace All to change "women" to "men" would be more beneficial than writing a longer script that is gender neutral.