Quote Originally Posted by cmind View Post
(Apologies if this is in the wrong place)

Indeed, DILD is a horrible technique, in my opinion. I've said this so many times over the years, but it's true: DILD sucks. It's a huge personal commitment to actually pull off (As is WILD if you want it daily), it rarely works (Nah, I get lucid daily through DILD), it's unreliable (See last one), and it results in lucid dreams that are prone to losing lucidity (Of course not, you are just not good enough at it, for me WILD <<<<<<<< DILD in clairity and lenght). T

In fact, if you think about it, DILD inspires a very passive attitude on the part of the dreamer: "I might have a lucid dream tonight I remember to RC in my dreams". Do we want people who are new to lucid dreaming to think that's there so much chance involved? I mean, Compare this to WILD: "I'm going to WILD tomorrow morning at 6:30am, period". No room for random chance. Either you succeed, or you did something wrong. And if you did do something wrong, you're driven to do better next time. With DILD, if it doesn't work, who the hell knows why! It might be you, it might not! (This is just so wrong, DILD isn't mere chance, it is how you are applying it that makes it work or not, just like with WILD, and for WILD you can lose lucidity while entering the dream, so there is your "chance" WILD is no holy grail, it is just the same as DILD)

So why aren't we teaching lucid dreaming from the WILD perspective? (Because it depends on what people like better, of course)
Ok, my answers are in bold. And on second thought, people already said this... ah well <.<