Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Printable Version +- 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 Journal Discussion Volume 3 (/Thread-Shannon-s-Journal-Discussion-Volume-3) Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
|
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 09-19-2018 (09-18-2018, 09:41 AM)Williamx25 Wrote: @Shannon Have you checked the MD5Sums? RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 09-19-2018 (09-18-2018, 06:54 PM)Hatman Wrote: This was probably already asked before, but when a sub includes the entire of scripts of other subs, does it make the combined subliminal more or less effective than the focus fire versions? First, we may not be able to get LM to play nice with UM. Aside from that... Focus Fire subs are smaller amounts of script that are focused on more heavily to really aim at a single thing. It's not necessarily more or less effective than a combined subliminal, the way I make them. It just focuses more heavily. A focus fire will have fewer targets and therefore achieve them, on average, more quickly and with less energy. DMSI, for example, has a lot of sub-goals, but only one goal. That main goal, even if it wasn't being heavily resisted as it typically is at this time, would take longer than say USLM because it has a number of sub-goals working to support the main goal, each of which requires a timeslice of processing power, and each of which requires energy, effort, attention and energy. Now starting from scratch, let's say someone who has never used either sub before (or any sub at all) decides they want to compare DMSI to USLM. DMSI may have quite a task of taking that person through identifying, dealing with, clearing and healing the things that would otherwise prevent it from achieving it's primary goal. While it achieves those sub-goals, the primary goal isn't like to be achieved. USLM, on the other hand, may have the same exact issue depending on what sort of psychological tangles the person has beneath the surface. Fear of success and/or failure may require clearing and healing also. In the end, what determines which is faster is how you use it and which one is going to require less preparation for achieving the design goals. Not necessarily how many sub-goals each has. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 09-19-2018 (09-18-2018, 10:11 PM)Greenduck Wrote: Just curious: is there a script in DMSI that prevent for exemple a friends girlfriend to make a move (If in find her attractive that will say)? That would otherwise be a great way to avoid awkward situations... No. Not even the anti-sniper will currently do that. Although I could set up the AS to do that. But first, do we really want the anti-sniper or not? Those who don't want it are convinced it is responsible for reducing the program effectiveness. The rest are convinced it saves them from all sorts of nasty situations. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Have at ye - 09-19-2018 (09-19-2018, 05:10 AM)Shannon Wrote:(09-18-2018, 10:11 PM)Greenduck Wrote: Just curious: is there a script in DMSI that prevent for exemple a friends girlfriend to make a move (If in find her attractive that will say)? That would otherwise be a great way to avoid awkward situations... I used to be a proponent of the anti-sniper, because I could see it work on ver. 3.1, but now I'm no longer - and it's not due to the fact that it would decrease the program's efficiency (it didn't). I simply believe it to be unnecessary, given all the other safeties in place. Also, when a person would have been affected by the AS heavily enough - and it's not turned on - they're only going to get the baseline anyway - and in case of any unwanted attention, I can deal with that on my own well enough (and so does anybody else, for that matter), I think. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Oversoul - 09-19-2018 (09-19-2018, 05:43 AM)Have at ye Wrote:I agree, would rather have the energy from the anti-sniper go into turning jealous people into admirers or into the long distance sniper(09-19-2018, 05:10 AM)Shannon Wrote:(09-18-2018, 10:11 PM)Greenduck Wrote: Just curious: is there a script in DMSI that prevent for exemple a friends girlfriend to make a move (If in find her attractive that will say)? That would otherwise be a great way to avoid awkward situations... RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Kol - 09-19-2018 (09-19-2018, 05:43 AM)Have at ye Wrote:(09-19-2018, 05:10 AM)Shannon Wrote:(09-18-2018, 10:11 PM)Greenduck Wrote: Just curious: is there a script in DMSI that prevent for exemple a friends girlfriend to make a move (If in find her attractive that will say)? That would otherwise be a great way to avoid awkward situations... Pretty much this. It makes life more exciting and "forces" you to be responsible yourself. Like now im feeling everyone being attracted to me. Also, the gf of a friend of mine is showing increasing IOIs, starstruck trance moments. I just dont do anything with her, because idgaf if something happens or not. It might be also one of the reasons I feel DMSI 3.2 is stronger. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - josh84 - 09-19-2018 Hi Shannon, since i was stonewalling 3.2 and did the break like you mentioned and no bloom or tid effects, do you think your progress with beast will help get past my stonewalling your subs? Is there any way i can consciously help get the subconscious to execute the script or its just a matter of our subconscious wanting to resist it so strongly nothing can be done to change it until you find ways to get past those stonewalling issues? RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Roy - 09-19-2018 (09-19-2018, 05:58 AM)Kol Wrote:(09-19-2018, 05:43 AM)Have at ye Wrote:(09-19-2018, 05:10 AM)Shannon Wrote:(09-18-2018, 10:11 PM)Greenduck Wrote: Just curious: is there a script in DMSI that prevent for exemple a friends girlfriend to make a move (If in find her attractive that will say)? That would otherwise be a great way to avoid awkward situations... Getting STDs and rape charges doesn't make life exciting.Dealing with insane women doesn't make life better.Anti sniper is for extreme cases. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Kol - 09-19-2018 Yeah, but do we really need the anti sniper for that? 3.2 doesnt have AS. And if they are for extreme cases, isnt it something that should be repulsive to begin with? I know I have rejected girls without the AS. Also, getting in tune and what male and female energy is, is of benefit. There is crazy, and there is crazy. Some girls are fun crazy, while others carry toxicity with them from the start, and carry sentiments that weed themselves out ( or should, nature wise ) think the "I dont need no man" feminist kind of women. It aint healthy. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - SargeMaximus - 09-19-2018 Yes let's keep the AS out of DMSI. I've also rejected girls (including a 14 year old). It's not difficult to do. I'm all for an AS that only fires against women who are a threat to your physical safety (including girls that would cry rape) but not to the BS "unhappiness causing" as, for me personally, that means ALL women. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - CatMan - 09-19-2018 It should probably be a focus to get DMSI to work so we actually CAN have all these phantom negative scenarios (ie. like the controversy over the fear of female relatives trying to bang you, lmao classic!) FIRST. Rather than trying to shut down and limit the program, before it even does these things in reality. I too have suspected the AS has been warped in my case to limit the program's effectiveness by labeling women as "pain" etc. It's a possibility for resistance many may have suffered. With all the problems we've had getting the program to work as it is, cutting down on the ways it can be derailed, will be a good thing. It'll be a high quality problem if the program can ever work well enough for the crushing majority to do all of that, regardless. I admit I'm not sure that will happen, but we'll see. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Broski - 09-19-2018 (09-19-2018, 04:57 AM)Shannon Wrote:I don't think there is a need to make fun of me/the situation. I am trying to be honest and open with you here and don't really appreciate that. It's not like I intentionally tried to create the situation and it hasn't exactly been pleasant. I have been doing 1 loop a day.(09-17-2018, 10:13 AM)Broski Wrote:(09-17-2018, 07:39 AM)Shannon Wrote:(09-16-2018, 10:42 AM)Broski Wrote: Hey Shannon, RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Greenduck - 09-19-2018 (09-19-2018, 08:37 AM)Broski Wrote:(09-19-2018, 04:57 AM)Shannon Wrote: So basically you have a fear based feedback loop that you have focused on yourself, for infinite replay-ability. Congrats, you're afraid of yourself.I don't think there is a need to make fun of me/the situation. I am trying to be honest and open with you here and don't really appreciate that. It's not like I intentionally tried to create the situation and it hasn't exactly been pleasant. I have been doing 1 loop a day. Dude he didn't make fun of you, he just assessed the situation, stated a fact and made it on a humorous note. It's on you that you take it as offensive. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Roy - 09-19-2018 (09-19-2018, 07:53 AM)CatMan Wrote: It should probably be a focus to get DMSI to work so we actually CAN have all these phantom negative scenarios (ie. like the controversy over the fear of female relatives trying to bang you, lmao classic!) FIRST. Rather than trying to shut down and limit the program, before it even does these things in reality. I too have suspected the AS has been warped in my case to limit the program's effectiveness by labeling women as "pain" etc. It's a possibility for resistance many may have suffered. It's possible the anti sniper is easier to blame compared to fears and other things that actually block execution. |