myth's Belated DMSI 3.1 Journal

[SargeMaximus]

One, it's not about dangling rewards, it's about showing them you can help them achieve their goals.

I was originally going to phrase it similarly, especially given how I sell my ideas to co-workers, but "dangling rewards" seemed more appropriate to a physical sales product example.

Fair enough. It's just semantics.

Anyhow, I am intrigued by your experience, what would you say dmsi needs to be a good womanizing sub?

I'm not sure if you mean in terms of change or key points. Or what "womanizing" even means in this context. I'm actually a fan of 3.1 and have no immediate interest in 3.2, although, admittedly, I'd be happier if the NSFX/halfway stuff weren't there. I see that as far more appropriate to SM, a sub with a goal of becoming a seducer. IMHO, DMSI's goal is its complement, not its twin or its successor. I see them as separate topics that should stay separately-focused when studied, not muddled together, where opposable elements can get conflated. North and south are wonderful directions when pursued separately, but they cancel each other out if taken simultaneously.

I agree with the bold.

However, hmm...

I see DMSI as a seducer sub myself. Granted we are getting the girls to be the initiators, but we are still the seducers. Deciding which girls we want, for example.

I certainly hope DMSI isn't meant to be a passive "what happens, happens" kind of sub.

I'd also say that any suggestion for DMSI fueled by an inferiority complex or body dysmorphia probably isn't a very good idea. Unless it's to remove the inferiority complex or dysmorphia itself (without creating a prideful by-product), and even that may still belong in another sub more than in DMSI. For all that I know, OSGF and self-image scripting may take care of that with time anyhow.

I think DMSI has self-esteem modules as well as a whole host of other things aimed at the user's self-image.

And I wouldn't object to the sexual performance script correction.

Also not overly interested in the anti-sniper, since I've been rejecting people (politely) for years without needing one to amplify it or to make my rejection choices for me. I also like being able to make that decision on more than hasty first impressions, after I'm better-informed. My subconscious may be powerful and observant, but it's not omniscient. Being hyper-aware of a closed book is still being unaware of what's inside it..

I totally agree.

I've turned down women on DMSI already. It's not hard. We definitely don't need the anti-sniper.

Beyond that, I don't know enough about DMSI under the hood to offer specific suggestions, since, other than what the sales page says, I don't really know what's there and what isn't. I do think that a lot of people have various misconceptions to unlearn (myself included, probably), but I'm pretty sure that the polymorphic everythings, Roman-sounding engines, ASS/ART, OSGF, EIP, etc may have to teach us indirectly which specifics are useful before those specific concepts can be re-injected to upgrade it into something even better.

That's if I had to change anything, but, honestly, 3.1's still teaching me so much each day (often "discovering what I already know"), even so soon after restarting it again, that I'm not complaining.

Fair enough. I'm not complaining either, just trying to help make DMSI the best it can be.