![]() |
Shannon's Journal Discussion - 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 (/Thread-Shannon-s-Journal-Discussion) 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
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
|
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - XyzN - 09-22-2016 (09-22-2016, 02:53 PM)Shannon Wrote: The sniper effect is based on the concept of focusing on specific attributes that you find attractive, and according to how attractive you find them. So when you come across a woman who has a stunning body, that's what will be the basis for the auric sniping. If she's plain, but has what you consider a sexy brain, then her brain will be the basis for the auric sniping. Makes sense for me since I have a few girls I'm interested in at work. I reflect and look back on how I treat each of them so differently, but so well. I've gotten all their attention, if a little bit. I'm like an actor almost it feels like, a masterfully suave one at that! Who can adapt to any girl he admires. ![]() RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Benjamin - 09-22-2016 Quote:What are the physical applications of this, I wonder... (D type?) As for DMSI the physical application is obviously giving her the D! ![]() RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Raz - 09-22-2016 From reading the DMSI journals, especially chaosvrgn, I begin to suspect that Shannon added Ultra Success to the script of 2.4 as the surprise. Am I right? RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - ffaux - 09-22-2016 I think the surprise is aura of a celebrity. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - lokko - 09-23-2016 I remember in the past Shannon mentioned to have subs at very low volume. Now I'm seeing users doing loud ultrasonic and so on. I will be attempting trickling stream again. Should it be moderately loud? I snore fairly loud according to people, I wonder if low volume is not for me since that reason. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - eternity - 09-23-2016 (09-22-2016, 10:49 AM)Shannon Wrote:(09-22-2016, 10:08 AM)eternitys_child Wrote:(09-22-2016, 03:49 AM)Shannon Wrote: We will get there if it is within my power. Sometimes I get discouraged, but there's always the next day when I realize that regardless of my discouragement or whatever else, the job must get done and I am not aware of everything. If I have been set on this path, there must be a good reason. So I soldier on. So would you say the demand for such a sub by women is minimal? Therefore making it more suitable, specifically, for men looking to attract women? Or maybe keep it generalized in " attracting members of the gender I am attracted to" but limiting it's usability by men? I wonder if that would allow you to use script for goals that are specifically oriented for males, which would make the end product more effective. Considering the huge divide between male and female interest in the program (I don't think any women have expressed interest) it may be best to make it male specific. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-23-2016 (09-22-2016, 09:09 PM)Raz Wrote: From reading the DMSI journals, especially chaosvrgn, I begin to suspect that Shannon added Ultra Success to the script of 2.4 as the surprise. Nope. ![]() RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-23-2016 (09-22-2016, 11:24 PM)ffaux Wrote: I think the surprise is aura of a celebrity. Nope. ![]() RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-23-2016 (09-23-2016, 12:40 AM)lokko Wrote: I remember in the past Shannon mentioned to have subs at very low volume. Now I'm seeing users doing loud ultrasonic and so on. I will be attempting trickling stream again. Should it be moderately loud? I snore fairly loud according to people, I wonder if low volume is not for me since that reason. You should calibrate volume as specified in the instructions. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-23-2016 (09-23-2016, 01:23 AM)eternitys_child Wrote:(09-22-2016, 10:49 AM)Shannon Wrote:(09-22-2016, 10:08 AM)eternitys_child Wrote:(09-22-2016, 03:49 AM)Shannon Wrote: We will get there if it is within my power. Sometimes I get discouraged, but there's always the next day when I realize that regardless of my discouragement or whatever else, the job must get done and I am not aware of everything. If I have been set on this path, there must be a good reason. So I soldier on. So far, demand for this sub by women would seem to be limited, at best. This seems to be because they don't need it. In fact all but one have expressed a complete lack of interest or even fear of it (the ones who feared it were afraid of rape). After all, the offer of sex from a woman is usually enough to get her sex. But you guys keep making the mistake of thinking that by cutting out women, I could somehow make it "more suitable, specifically, for men looking to attract women". It would not. I can work in gender-unspecified ways without reducing the power and effectiveness, with the exception being references to specific sex organs, which is unnecessary in this case. You also are forgetting that this program is designed for six different markets at once. (gay, straight, bi) x (male, female). Doing it any other way would have me building more than one version, which I am not willing to do. This thing is insane enough to work with already. But also, you don't realize what you would be giving up by making it even just male specific. There are potential alternate uses which I am exploring, based on that universality. Don't worry. I know what I'm doing. We just have a very tall mountain here to conquer. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - THolt - 09-23-2016 "Beast 8 has a Minimum Time Of Singular Expression (MTOSE) of fully 20 minutes. That means that, to express the whole script at least once, it requires 20 minutes of exposure. Definitely time to re-compress. I like to keep the MTOSE down to a maximum of 5-10 minutes if possible." Shannon, Will this result in lower listening times for 6G programs if everything goes right? RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-23-2016 (09-23-2016, 04:48 AM)THolt Wrote: "Beast 8 has a Minimum Time Of Singular Expression (MTOSE) of fully 20 minutes. That means that, to express the whole script at least once, it requires 20 minutes of exposure. Definitely time to re-compress. I like to keep the MTOSE down to a maximum of 5-10 minutes if possible." I think I forgot to put this into perspective. If it were not compressed to the degree that it is, that 20 minutes would be 16 hours plus of audio. It would take more than 16 hours of listening to hear the entire script just once. That's how beastly long the damned thing is. So the fact that it's 20 minutes long and still comprehensible is amazing, but for my purposes, 20 minutes is the outer limits. I have to achieve the goals of the 6G prototype within 20 minutes, or the test fails. So to answer your question, yes. Higher compression means faster input means lower listening times. Although that by itself is not the reason why it would require lower listening times; there are two other things along with compression that I use that, taken as a whole, result in these very low listening time requirements. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - robstar - 09-23-2016 Shannon, a few months ago, I had a girl I was seeing and starting to fall for bail on me out of the blue.. I thought I was beginning to get over it to a reasonable level, until I started to run dsmi 2.4.. Now it feels like I'm experiencing the break up over and over again, all I can think about is how badly I want her back, the intensity is almost unbearable. Is this the healing modules of dsmi expressing themselves? Will this pass? I'm getting attention from girls, I even had a girl give me her number while I was busking the other day, but I don't care because all I can think about is her. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion - Shannon - 09-23-2016 (09-23-2016, 05:07 AM)robstar Wrote: Shannon, a few months ago, I had a girl I was seeing and starting to fall for bail on me out of the blue.. I thought I was beginning to get over it to a reasonable level, until I started to run dsmi 2.4.. Now it feels like I'm experiencing the break up over and over again, all I can think about is how badly I want her back, the intensity is almost unbearable. Is this the healing modules of dsmi expressing themselves? Will this pass? I'm getting attention from girls, I even had a girl give me her number while I was busking the other day, but I don't care because all I can think about is her. Yes, this is one of the effects of the healing modules. Yes, it will pass. The goal of the healing modules is to identify, seek out and neutralize anything and everything within you that represents an emotional issue that might prevent you from achieving success with the program. So you are just healing a case of one-itis you didn't know you had. This too shall pass. |