+- Subliminal Talk (https://subliminal-talk.com)
+-- Forum: Men's Journals (18+ NSFW) (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals-18-NSFW)
+--- Forum: Men's Journals (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals)
+--- Thread: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal (/Thread-Shannon-s-DMSI-V2-2-Journal)
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - chaosvrgn - 07-17-2016
(07-17-2016, 12:44 PM)Shannon Wrote: According to what modeling runs I have been able to do today, it takes about 15 minutes of exposure to the aura of sexual Irresistibility to really have the effects start kicking in for the person being affected. Take that as an idea, not gospel, because I need to run a lot more modeling runs before I would say that with certainty.
Can also vouch for this. Took about 20 minutes for my date to start responding -- and very strongly so, as stated in my journal.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Shannon - 07-17-2016
Alright, so more on what happened at the bar.
M was being really positive, happy, and (I thought) flirtatious, but she was being that way with others as well. I can't definitively say that I had any different treatment.
I can say that the program caused me to, on full autopilot, call her over and thank her for having a beautiful attitude that brightened my day and made it better. Which it did, and in fact, took her from "Meh" to significantly interesting and attractive to me. I find a positive, go-get-'em happy woman very attractive, even if she doesn't look great otherwise. M is not ugly by any means, but her physical features would not draw my attention normally.
The blonde at the bar was sitting to my left, and when I sat down there were two guys between myself and her. All four of us were sitting facing the bar at that time.
The guy to my immediate left departed while I was talking to the woman who came over and opened me about her son. That left me with a couple seats empty, and then the guy the blonde was with and then the blonde.
The blonde started off very pale, and within 10 minutes had turned as much as she could to face me, and he had turned to face her and start cockblocking. She appeared to have a deep sex flush all over her face, shoulders and neck. I wasn't sure if I was seeing things because of the brightness or color of the ambient light, until she got up and left, and then came back.
When she left, she stepped out into the aisle further than made sense for what she was doing, and basically seems to have intended that it be possible to show off to me (where the guy next to her could not block my view) the fact that A) she was wearing no bra, and B) the fact that she was sporting high beams, which she aimed directly at me. Very nice high beams at that. She didn't look at me during this time when she was gathering up her things, though, so I wasn't sure if that was intentional and significant. He was really trying hard to keep her attention on him, I'm guessing that's why.
She left with her hat, shades and purse, so I figured she had left for good. He stayed turned toward her seat, though, which I thought was kind of odd. In the meantime, another guy came in and sat down between me and the guy with the blonde.
About 10 minutes later, I see the blonde coming out of the nearest bathroom, and when she returns, she's got no sex flush. Her skin is back to it's original paleness, so I am positive at that point that it was indeed a sex flush, and not just the ambient lighting playing color tricks. I saw her coming out of the bathroom, so perhaps she went there to take care of her urges and wipe up? I have never seen a woman start responding and then go to the bathroom and come back out de-sex-flushed unless she did take care of herself, so it seems likely. They usually respond with signs of high tension and arousal before, and signs of low interest and tension afterward unless I continue to arouse them in whatever way I was arousing them in the first place.
What really struck me was that within another 5 minutes, she was right back to deeply sex flushed again! And try as she might to lean back or forward so she could see me (which she did several times), he blocked her mirror style. Instantly.
When I got up and left, she locked eyes with me as I walked past, turned to face me fully (90 degree turn), and leaned significantly out into the aisle as she gave me a big, obvious "come hither, I like you" smile. I smiled back casually (the program now having me in a sort of "I am the master of all I survey" level of self confidence mode), and kept going, and the split second I was even with her seat and no longer looking directly at her (still watching peripherally; good peripheral vision), she dropped the smile, stopped leaning out, and looked at him with a slightly frustrated look on her face.
Well, that about clinches it... she had to have been responding to me, sex flushed, interested, and aware that it was me she was interested in.
Not bad. Usually it's only the staff who responds. Now maybe I can start acting on the interest I get, since patrons won't be at work.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Shannon - 07-17-2016
Forgot to mention that as I was leaving, not one but two teenage hostesses decided that they had to open the door for me. Normally, they have about a 30% chance of noticing me as I walk past, and about 50% of the time that they notice me, they'll say goodbye. This is the first time I have ever had one of them say goodbye, while two more opened each of the double doors for me, and both simultaneously wished me a wonderful day. Not just a good day, but a wonderful day. And all three were smiling.
The door openers were speaking at the exact same time... I almost could not understand what they said.
Never had anything close to that happen there before.
Also forgot that when I was approaching the bar and asked if the seat I was interested in was takn, the guy who answered told me it was, but acted like he had to apologize for that and find the woman sitting there so she could move. WTH! I eventually had to point out to him that naturally I wasn't going to sit there if it was taken, but thank you for the information. Another odd response.
I'm starting to think this thing does already have a celebrity vibe, like RTBoss said.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Dubls - 07-17-2016
(07-16-2016, 06:12 PM)Shannon Wrote:(07-16-2016, 05:25 PM)Dubls Wrote:(07-14-2016, 12:35 PM)Shannon Wrote: I am currently doing one loop of DMSI.
Going to go have lunch when it's finished. I am listening to it at max volume on my phone.
When I modeled what the optimal volume was for causing the particular woman I'm going to go talk to to respond, the answer shocked me.
On my phone, there were three relevant peaks. One at 2/15; one at 11/15; and one at 15/15.
The peak at 2/15 was by far the biggest. That shocked me.
Further modeling revealed that the result of that volume would be in fact so effective that there was unacceptable risk for impregnation. So I'm using the volume that was 2nd place, where the risk is acceptable.
I will be modeling further which volumes in general are best.
What does that even mean
You're going to have to answer the same question from me, since your question does not have a specific subject to which it points.
The part about impregnation
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Shannon - 07-17-2016
(07-17-2016, 07:10 PM)Dubls Wrote:(07-16-2016, 06:12 PM)Shannon Wrote:(07-16-2016, 05:25 PM)Dubls Wrote:(07-14-2016, 12:35 PM)Shannon Wrote: I am currently doing one loop of DMSI.
Going to go have lunch when it's finished. I am listening to it at max volume on my phone.
When I modeled what the optimal volume was for causing the particular woman I'm going to go talk to to respond, the answer shocked me.
On my phone, there were three relevant peaks. One at 2/15; one at 11/15; and one at 15/15.
The peak at 2/15 was by far the biggest. That shocked me.
Further modeling revealed that the result of that volume would be in fact so effective that there was unacceptable risk for impregnation. So I'm using the volume that was 2nd place, where the risk is acceptable.
I will be modeling further which volumes in general are best.
What does that even mean
You're going to have to answer the same question from me, since your question does not have a specific subject to which it points.
The part about impregnation
It means that when you line up all the variables in the right way, you had better bring along some condoms.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - RTBoss - 07-17-2016
(07-17-2016, 07:05 PM)Shannon Wrote: Forgot to mention that as I was leaving...
I'm starting to think this thing does already have a celebrity vibe, like RTBoss said.
Now *I* remember a tidbit I left out of my dinner report. About 15 minutes before I left, a bald gentlemen (maybe my age) in a striped polo sat down with a glass of Chardonnay (he'd already grabbed a drink at the bar). He was served by my waitress, and he began asking her these extravagant questions that led into one-sided conversation about his knowledge of all-things-sushi. At first, I found I was growing annoyed, and thought, "Man, this guy's an effin' tool." But then, I started feeling some compassion for the man, because I realized he was overdoing it to make up for something. He ordered a shit-ton of stuff, and the server sounded shocked. He said he had a bunch of friends showing up soon. IMO, he was intending to impress.
She stopped by my table, we interacted, and she left. Immediately after, the man tried to develop rapport with me by making a joke involving my son. I came back with a witty response (or so I thought), but he didn't laugh. At all. He just blinked. Next thing I know, he stands to speak to the waitress, and he leaves! She looked irritated, but just in a "WTF" kinda way. Dunno what happened there, but looking back, perhaps it was significant.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Shannon - 07-17-2016
That is a little odd.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Shannon - 07-17-2016
According to the modeling runs I have done on this, it took 5-10 minutes for bartendress S, and less than 5 minutes for bartender M, to be affected enough to change their thinking. Very interesting.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Gotcha - 07-17-2016
(07-17-2016, 08:17 PM)Shannon Wrote: According to the modeling runs I have done on this, it took 5-10 minutes for bartendress S, and less than 5 minutes for bartender M, to be affected enough to change their thinking. Very [/b]
That does indeed sound odd. I mean, how could you possibly model their thinking? What data do you base your assumptions on?
Just curious...
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Shannon - 07-17-2016
(07-17-2016, 08:33 PM)Gotcha Wrote:(07-17-2016, 08:17 PM)Shannon Wrote: According to the modeling runs I have done on this, it took 5-10 minutes for bartendress S, and less than 5 minutes for bartender M, to be affected enough to change their thinking. Very [/b]
That does indeed sound odd. I mean, how could you possibly model their thinking? What data do you base your assumptions on?
Just curious...
There turn out to be a variety of ways to accurately deduce what someone's thought processes are. I can't reveal my methods or how my models work, of course, but I will say that if you understand the right things about how people and reality work, reading minds isn't quite the astounding thing it used to seem to be. As it turns out, we make our "private" thoughts known outside of us in several ways, and with the right understanding and the right set of correlative data, it's relatively obvious.
Think of it as an advanced, very accurate and extra-revealing way to read body language in this case.
We're not going on assumptions.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Benjamin - 07-17-2016
Hmm so possibly the way I was testing other than the night I did security may not have been the best way if they need time to be affected? Walking around the street or shopping centre.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Shannon - 07-17-2016
Probably not
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Shannon - 07-17-2016
Girlfriend reports that the aura makes her so sensitive that she is ticklish much more easily than normal.
RE: Shannon's DMSI V2.2 Journal - Vincent_Vega - 07-18-2016
(07-17-2016, 02:40 PM)swisston Wrote:(07-17-2016, 02:16 PM)Minititan Wrote: You wrote on another thread, that you wondered what would happen if you took the naturaliser out. Just adding in that it may be the best method for testing, I'm noticing nothing of interest and I put it down to the naturaliser hiding most of it, how can you report on changes if you don't notice them :L I'm also a lot less concerned with the sub and what it's achieving so have been struggling to get in a mindset of looking for signs of interest. I think I need the sub to literally slap me in the face with some kind of result that is undeniably caused by it, before I actually click that the sub did that. It's changed a lot since v1Same here. Low neediness. Not expecting results any time soon. Just happy too let it do its work in the background for the moment.
I feel you, guys.