Worried about TRN's

RV Protocol

GO VIEW! @TKR's dojo

Project Home Page

RV webForum (here!)

Email: @Yahoo|@Google

Help make it possible for everyone!

TKR is Funded by:
PJ of Dojo Psi

Simple Session

CS Labs
Ingo Swann
Joe McMoneagle

Baylands Nature Preserve
Pete's Harbor Restaurant
Lucid Dream Example
Radio Listening Post
Test-Bed Trials
Video ABC Put to the Test

P.I.A.

Greg K's ARV Trials

RV Roast (alt)

RV Library

[PJ]

Hi Pat,

Just fyi, for years I have been openly outspoken against practices like masking (which I see as completely unethical), and since 1997, wholly focused on clean legit science protocol. TKR and its staff have always been about a clear clean tasking and viewing process since we began in 2003. You will not find any programmer, any website, any group of people running it, who are more obsessive about clean legit RV protocol than at TKR frankly. So if you can't have any "good faith" element going on here of all places, you're just doomed.

The task numbers generated in the dojo are unique to every task, for every individual, and when they are assigned you, only you see them. It is that way for every kind of tasking available there. It's as private as it can get. The number/string is computer-random.  I do not happen to believe that task# is relevant to tasker intent but some do. It is in great part for those people who believe task#s genuinely affect session work, that our system was designed as it is.

If you have adopted some belief systems related to task numbers, that is your right, some people do have them. Psi is based on intent so one can make just about anything true just by focusing that way, which creates a whole lot of confusion at every level, since rather like quantum particle experiments it means the observers themselves are affecting outcome (particularly the 'dominant intent').

If the ability to modify a task or influence a session were based on the task number, it would be vastly easier to do when making them all the same as you request. Anybody could request a TKR mission task, not bother doing a session (not everybody shares their viewing but anybody can get a task#), and then they'd have the task# everybody else is using to work with. The way it is now, the task# given you is private. So if your logic is what you explain with the task numbers, then your thinking is the opposite of logical with how those should be approached.

*

Now. To support your paranoia just so you know I am not dismissing you out of hand...

Unlike practice which is not predictable in timing or participation and varies with every request, Mission tasks are public, and the tasker intent is singular for all. And it's known they are going to be public. Sometimes, it's even "suspected" who the viewers will be. So if 'remote influence' of the Mission, or anybody doing it, or people expected to do it, were the plan, then that effort wouldn't need a task number anyway.

If RI (via intentionally distorted tasker-intent in masking; or via alleged  hijacking against a known-existing target/intent or any involved viewers; or via alleged retro-tasking by looking at sessions after feedback) is your concern, then never mind the TRN -- anybody wanting to try influence already has what they need.

If viewers believe they're open to this kind of thing (even unconsciously) they likely would be, as viewing is fundamentally about  psychology. This is probably why the best viewers tend to be rather unusually independent personalities.

If you are concerned that somewhere, some time, someone is attempting to influence your sessions, I respect your right to worry about that, maybe it's true, I honestly don't know. I can say you don't have to worry about the tasker themselves (TKR staff) or the system integrity. But what other people in the field might do of course, we can't control.

Personally I think for people into the RI concept, the TKR weekly thing would be a pretty ideal opportunity for experiment. So if you believe there are people who want to pursue that, you might as well assume we are a likely focus.

On the other hand, I also think viewers should just see that as a challenge. Add the intent to ignore any such thing to your starting intent, prayer, or whatever you do, and allow yourself to believe that inside your own mind, you are sovereign.

After all, people messing with intent and feedback is a constant issue for RV -- in science (skeptics running the show), in media (too many problems to list from start to finish), even in applications, even in individual practice groups or individual work, with tasker intent and feedback issues often unintentional (I think I have run into a long list of learning the hard way on that over the years myself, with task sources and feedback), so one may as well learn to hold intent strongly enough to cut through anything and anybody else that might exist to try and distract/distort you, as part of developing RV skill.

I suppose you could just see it like a sport. For example, one not only has to have the speed or aim to win a race or sink a basketball, they also have to deal with others trying to cut them off, steal their ball, or crowd them out. Learning to deal with that is just part of developing skill in those areas. So maybe RV has its own version of this, who knows. In any sport, "psyching out your competitors" is a solid part of it, it's just probably easier to do with a lot of people in RV since they don't have a solid belief system related to their innate psi.

If this is still really a concern for you, I recommend you just don't do public viewing of this type, since by its nature all "planned and public" work would be in this situation.

*

As for the system: I do the programming here in my free time, so the question is, will I change it for your request? No. I don't even have time to do a whole ton of other stuff on the list that IS important and way behind for upgrade.  When I do have some block of time, I'll be doing that stuff.

If you don't want to play anymore as a result, ok. I'm sure the locals and staff will miss you, because everyone loves participation. I'm sorry you got an error message when you went for feedback, and if you send me that error message (that is the bug picture on the page that says there is an error...) I can try to figure out what sparked it.

If you would like some task numbers that everyone can see up front, that are always the same for every viewer, feel welcome to use other target sources. We link to any free sources we know about, partly so our members have as many options as possible, and partly so efforts and projects in the field get some recognition here.

I recommend Daz's site "Target Monkey" in the left links column, he has some very good targets in there, I use it on occasion.

Best regards,
PJ

[Loraine]

There is no good reason to say Pat is paranoid, even if I'm the only person agreeing with him lol. Neither is it correct to infer his ideas are any less important than any one elses. Until RV theory stacks up correctly, all our guesses about which working assumptions to make in our set ups are equally valid.

With best intent
Loraine

[Glenda]

I have been to several remote viewing sites, for what it is worth, my two cents.  I pop on now a little less, life is getting busier, but this one still always seems the most fair.  If you really remote view, they don't kick you out for not having taken their classes.  That really did happen to me once on a big site.  I was there for about four hours and it hurt my feelings.  Protocol is a big deal.  I'm pretty sensitive in ways, and this site feels friendly to people.  That is from my perspective as a nobody really.

[Glenda]

I feel pretty sensitive, and this site seems fair to me.  We all have theories.  I enjoy the discussion.

[PatMcDonald]

Thanks for the indepth reply PJ.

I will continue to monitor future target sessions and mission feedback and to make it plain WHY I'm not just disappearing in a huff...

... is because I favour experimentation and objective consideration. DojoPsi might have a very viable, reliable and solid system here.

However, at moment it remains unproven either way whether the system is more or less accurate or just plain different.

So, give it a few tries and see what's generated.

The reason WHY I'm very concerned is the level of computer database skullduggery that has been inflicted on me over the years. So much so that I don't even have a home internet connection and insist that all my research is conducted offline to prevent manipulation at least at the network/average hacker level. So it's not you, or other Dojopsi people that I'm really worried about.

[RedCairo]

Howdy,

It's all good, I'm not offended, do what you will.

I wouldn't have taken the time to answer the way I did, if I didn't consider everyone's perspective important, fwiw.

(Humor: go to a few other RV places online, and suggest that their intents, ethics, and systems, may be challenged and are doubted, and then compare the response with what y'all got here. ;-))

In fairness, if a person "thinks someone is out to mess with them" in some nefarious way, I do think it qualifies as paranoia. So that was not a diss of any kind, I have some humor about it anyway. I recognize that such things just may also happen to be true once in awhile! (I'm not sure, is it not paranoia then? Or is still paranoia, simply 'justified'? haha.)

As an aside, I've gone on ad-nauseum on this forum in the past about the details of how things work, anybody can search for that. But in a nutshell it's pretty simple:

1. Tasker creates task. (A database record with info, intent, feedback.) In database, task maybe says it's in the 'people' category.

2. Viewer requests tasks, and say their settings include the 'people' category. Database grabs all source-tasking records relevant to their settings, and then does a random selection from the list of record #s for just one.

3. The selected record number is copied (cloned) into a new record. This record is updated with the task date, and with the ID of the viewer, and the original record it came from. The system does a random-generation of a task# (depending on viewer settings, either alphanum or 4-4), and updates the new task record with it. Then it shows the task number etc. to the viewer.

4. Either then or later, the viewer can add a session if they wish. All task records still "open" with their ID, will list in the entry form so they can choose one. They upload their stuff.

5. Then they click 'get feedback' and it shows them all the record info.

It works this way for practice, for missions, and for tandem. (Which I've finished returning to the dojo but have to wait till I can finish the new session entry form to plug it in.)

Viewers also have the option to go from #3 to #5 and not upload any session info. You can see the statistics on how many tasks are requested vs. sessions entered on the stats page which I think is linked from the home page.

Er, I think, somewhere. I did the most recent home page really fast and the galleries revision fast and tandem and was in the middle of the studios, when work -- speaking of things to be paranoid about LOL, for me it's work! -- dragged my butt back into the cult of "working nearly every waking hour." Hoping to get free to a halfway normal schedule before much longer.

**

Re: 'the system': It is pretty simple in programming, mostly because I'm not a techie. I'm just a jack of all trades sort who on good days can do passably well at figuring stuff out in almost any skill area. Not great at anything, except the occasional truly awesome screwup or bad decision. It came about mostly because I'm a Virgo x4 that tends to like doing things that are 'constructive'.

So... I liked viewing. I didn't have anybody to practice with in person, nor did many viewers I knew online. Most the stuff online was ... er, not my style, let's just say. Me and a bunch of other viewers wanted something better for us and the whole online field. Something for grass-roots efforts, individual viewer development, clean science-based RV protocol. Something that would be serious and yet fun, open to everyone, as accepting of new folks as established viewers, and that would really hold true to RV protocol and not sacrifice it for marketing, ego, laziness or other things. So we got together and founded TKR. Opened a forum and eventually I got around to working on stuff I planned as 'practice tools' for viewing.

I had no idea what the hell I was doing in a way, since at that point it hadn't been done anywhere else, not the way I wanted to do it. So I just had to wing it... I've updated stuff a ton since we began. But the basics of how tasking works for practice (and later we got missions) haven't really changed at all.

We did used to have this other 'type' of practice, in the first 6 months we were open, which was designed for one method school in the field that had this powerful belief system that task numbers were critical and that the tasker had to see the same task number as all the viewers, so they could go 'bind the target to the task number in the matrix' and so on. But they didn't want to play, and it was a bunch of work to set up (since it required they be able to task their own people in our system it was a whole interface for that too), and then try to keep up with various interface updates. So eventually I just closed that.

I might add that I built the tasking stuff this way on purpose, but it was what the field wanted and needed, not what I wanted. If I had my way, all tasking would be precognitive. People who complain would be told "get over it." But I'm doing the work for a free altruistic project managed by a bunch of other viewers who just hate it when I act like a bonehead in public, so I do what supports the field's viewers at large, not just my approach.

When I view, most the time I task myself on "the target which I will assign to this session." Task numbers are useless trivia in my view, but of course everybody has their own beliefs, mine are no better than anyone else's. I don't even track things by task numbers in my viewing. I usually track them by lab books. So, book 12, the 18th target in that book, the 2nd session on that target, is PJRV-12.18.2.

But most people aren't so casual about 'time'. So I made the system first get a task, make a custom version just for that viewer, attach a unique task number to it, and then display it to them privately. Given the belief systems most viewers online appeared to have at that point in time, that was just what they needed to feel comfortable with it. Another belief system of a method school in the field was that viewers would 'overlap' if the task# was the same, hence they all had to be unique. As I recall, trying to come up with something that made a whole field of paradigms feel ok about it at once was not easy. ;-)

**

Re: "it remains unproven either way whether the system is more or less accurate or just plain different."

Personally, I don't credit or blame 'the system' (mine or anyone's) for anybody's viewing. If there is a clean target, tasking, and feedback, that's all that's needed. All authority for viewing I give to the viewer.

Since I know nothing odd is happening on my side, if you don't succeed on a mission, I don't think you can blame it on "the system."

As I noted in my previous message, I'm not saying there isn't any possible issue going on with public pre-planned group-target stuff. There might be. But that isn't anything to do with me, the project, or the system. That would be to do with the situation of public-group-preplanned-tasking. And the onlookers I suppose, but I can't reach into the brain of every possible onlooker to see what their intent is, at least not until I have purchased module 472B of The Only RV Method That Works, Version IV. 

Re: trust: I've communicated in such volume online for 15 years now, it'd be tough to say that me, or TKR for that matter, are any kind of unknown for intent. The archives are here for anybody, even the fights and so on. In my observation, reading people's conversation does pretty well at giving me a feel for them. Not sure if that is intuitive or just simple observation. But there's plenty of mine around if the "intent" of the software is in question; I'm the only one making it, so although it's part of the larger project, I'm the only one that could be blamed.

Best,
PJ

[sonny5085]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aB_lljnqkDw


Wish so badly you would use this system !!

We would all be super Dupppeerrrrr Big time Viewers !! Elite of the elite !

Please ...get that system..I ll pay for the collars !

[PatMcDonald]

If you have adopted some belief systems related to task numbers, that is your right, some people do have them...

I'm going to have to answer the points raised very slowly. First, my "belief system" about the numbers is based on a) observed research done by scientists under controlled conditions. Also on b) Viewer sessions submitted by people to me.

a) There is some truth to your statement that viewer and tasker intent creates the connection between viewer and the viewed. Whichever system was tested to guide the viewer, all reached similar levels of  connectedness. What seems to cause the differences between one viewers session data and another's is the life experiences and viewing experience of the viewer, assuming the same training task is shared between viewers and feedback is not given to one before all have viewed. Indeed that was the very way that masking the true target was identified, as documented in the book "Psychic Warrior" (another viewer was "accidently" handed somebody else's feedback and realised that the tasking was not the same as their feedback).

b) However, if a viewer writes down the WRONG tag and tries to view, the results are garbage data. How do you explain that if ONLY viewer and tasker intent are responsible? Even stranger, if they then write down the CORRECT tag, the information starts to match. If the tag had no value, then that would not occur except by chance. It is a statiscallly very unlikely event. The same happens if a different target is placed in the target envlope or the actual target valu is changed as the session happens. This is scientifcally validated FACT. RV is "anamalous cognition within a double blind PROTOCOL." And the dojopsi system violates that protocol. Therefore, missions performed at the the dojo cannot expect to achieve "potentially best" results.

Which doesn't matter so long as the viewers and other participants are having harmless fun. BUT;-

If the ability to modify a task or influence a session were based on the task number, it would be vastly easier to do when making them all the same as you request. Anybody could request a TKR mission task, not bother doing a session (not everybody shares their viewing but anybody can get a task#), and then they'd have the task# everybody else is using to work with. The way it is now, the task# given you is private. So if your logic is what you explain with the task numbers, then your thinking is the opposite of logical with how those should be approached.

For ONE mission where the viewers where not allowed to compare sessions that would be true. However, with "one tag for all" if viewers are collectively going to nothing like the feedback, it becomes pretty obvious after a few projects that the problem is not with the viewers but with the task setup.

Your system, on the other hand, does not have have the favcility of "verifiability in the long term". If a viewer has a problem, hey, it's not a secret ARV test it's just a "viewer glitch". Well, this viewer isn't going to play in a group match without some safeguard of knowing that nobody else changed the target package or tampered with the tag. That is what the protocol is for. That is what makes RV RV and not just plain old "psychic functioning".

I'll answer the other divergebt points once I have researched the actual documents that back up my position.

[LD]

...as documented in the book "Psychic Warrior"...

lol Sorry man, you lost me with that statement. I wouldn't count on that book for uh, historic or scientific documentation as it were....

[LD]

Since most of this thread has nothing to do with the original topic of the Superconducting Disk dojo mission target, I've split the thread into two and now the subject has it's own spot on a more appropriate board.

Original Mission thread it was split from can be found here.

Thanks,
LD

Username:
Password: