Printable View
Lets face it we are getting way too many ILDs and some are utterly rediculous.
Should we put a stop to new ones for the moment, and maybe we can focus on the core Techs for once.
I am sure some Newbie's are thinking the CandyFlossILD is a real tech.(made that one up)
Yeah I kind of agree.
New rule! No more making up random ILDs. Unless you're kidding.
Naaaaa I'm waiting with "bated breath" (whatever that is) for the day when someone comes up with a XILD. But then maybe I'm just covering my own arse due to my own ludicrous inventions, the QVILD and the FFOILD - Queen Victoria Induced Lucid Dream and Fan Forced Oven Induced Lucid Dream (they work!).
Yes!
Please start soon please. Fair 'nuff?
It causes such boredom.
Different things work for different people, and if you have something different that works for you I want to know about it ;-).
Keep em coming :banana:
Well, it's become pretty much policy on DV to lock threads claiming to have new techniques like that and to point them to the research forums. I've been gone for two weeks but if I see any more, I'll lock them. I'm tried of reading that BS. Everyone takes so much inspiration from EWOLD and LaBerge, but they conveniently ignore the parts where he studied his techniques before running around and claiming that just about anything is an ILD :roll:
Oh ok, well policy is policy, you gotta do what you gotta do :).Quote:
Originally Posted by Shift
Trust me, it's not something I have to do, it is one of my favorite parts of being a DG- helping keep things clear. People running around with this nonsense just confuse things and muddle up the legitimate techniques. Instead of a "This is what works for me, personally" or "this is what I do during my WILDs" they claim to have found a new foolproof (lol) way to lucid dream. And the majority of the time it's just stupid. What's even worse is when someone just thinks it up and hasn't even had loads of success themselves. :roll: Yeesh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Son
Shift, it's funny how your posts look offending. It's probably not your intention to be offensive against other DV-users but it does look like it, I'm not the only one who shares this thought. Anyway I won't post my thought, it's useless people will critize my comment anyway that's how it goes on forums :).Quote:
Originally Posted by Shift
No I agree - it's not like majority of the users have LaBerge's expierence/age, and it seems the younger the more ridiculous the claims :lol: , the last one I read that actually had something to it was the object induced lucid dreaming, but then again its just another form of detecting FA's :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shift
No offence taken here???Quote:
Originally Posted by Control
Don't have to post for that :D. Happy?Quote:
Originally Posted by Control
Don't have to double post for that :D.Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Son
Well. I am kind of repeating myself in this post, but really. Inventing new ILDs doesnt help much. We should concentrate on understanding the process of existing induction techniques and in this sense find out, why some variations work for ones and not for others. Maybe we should identify common parts of techniques and identify what are the key factors causing some variations to be effective.
I have already done some attempts in this direction and it seems that this kind of research didnt have as much support from audience. Probably its becouse the results of this kind of research could only prove useful when concretized and put into application. Simply generalization and research itself seems not to be appealing enough.
In this place, I would like to react to often modified WILD techniques. I really cannot understand, why people just write sets of steps which should lead into lucid dream. Why dont they reason? Why dont they support their ideas? Why do they just write what to do? Why dont they consult more experienced members before posting?
We have not clear understanding about elements of dreaming and elements of lucid dreaming. Thats the area, where we should look first, if this community wants to move deeper.
If I should end this rather lengthy speech I would suggest, that we should look why some techniques dont work for some people, and not why they do work. We would be probably find much more than just telling why something works.
Lol, what about ILDILD, everytime you see ILD you do an RC :P
that way we would all get lucid everynight at the amount of ILD's we have so far ;)
Sometimes it's not so funny. If you have a problem with the way I post though, you should bring it up as long as I'm a Dream Guide, because I for one think that if the community has a problem with the way a staff member is behaving that it should be made known so that it can be changed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Control
And my position is that the 'utterly ridiculous' things that people post often are stupid, and often serve to confuse things rather than clarify them and aid in the learning of lucid dreaming- especially for those new who can't tell the difference and get overwhelmed with the zillions of repeat techniques. Instead of just "WILD while Visualizing" you get all sorts of ILDs with 20000 different ways to visualize something. Why should each be its own technique? Why not just WILD, and maybe visualize while doing it, and visualize whatever you want to? I think that there should be a list of these things, but not new techniques. And I get very tired of them, because every time I have to enforce the protocol or point out that more thought should be put into someone's idea or that something is just completely absurd, I do have to end up looking like a bad-guy no matter how nice I try to be about it. And some of the people who make them up do it simply to have an 'ILD' to their name (:roll:), and don't seem to do any research or put any coherent thought into it- hence my sometimes snippy attitude when it comes to them.
Some people do have legitimate ideas, and do seem to put a lot of thought into them. Usually I just post a very standard, neutral response directing them to the research forums, because this way I hopefully get to avoid a long drawn out argument about their post. And some people are great about it. Some aren't :( Lots of people don't like their threads being locked for any reason, but if I try to be nice and not lock a thread, then the discussion just continues regardless of the protocol.
I'm glad to see that some people do feel this way!Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Son
You know we DO have research forums. So for all of the people who randomly have these ideas, and then post threads saying "Hey, new technique!" they could just pay attention and circumvent the whole issue by posting in the research section and writing "Hey, possible new technique!" and then seeing if it's really legit or not.
:lmao:Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatperson
I just closed another one. :roll:
It really is getting out of hand, guys. Whether it looks like it or not. Shift has stated to the rest of the Staff that the DV Research Guidelines aren't looked at because they're buried in the Tutorial Section. I'm going to ask that they be copied into a sticky in the Attaining Lucidity section.
Look at the one I just closed. A prime example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shift
*cough* and the newbie guide *cough*Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowy Egypt
:peek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shift
It's coming....
I totally agree with Shift here :P
I kind of stopped going to the attaing lucidity forum, because of all the ILD's.
What's with all the abbreviations, anyway?
I mean, we have LD, DILD, WILD, VILD, DEILD, FILD, SP, RC, EWLD, DJ, DC, DG.
Seriously, we as a dream community must be the most lazy people in the world. I even started to use the character 'D' to mark dreams :P
Well, I don't even agree with FILD. I mean, wtf is FILD. But no one ever uses HIT, which is very strange to me :? I guess it doesn't get as much attention because it doesn't end in "ILD" :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by ThreeLetterSyndrom
I like hearing about what works for different people. I think it is the advantage that forums have over other kinds of websites. We can all post what works for us, and discuss it as a community. Just look at Jeff777's "tricking your body into falling asleep" tutorial. The idea that you can lie still long enough and go into SP is total BS, but has helped tons of people learn what it feels like to fall asleep. (No offence, Jeff :) ) It is helpful in its own right.
Obviously, the purely hypothetical techniques can get annoying, as can the ***OMFG100%*** threads. But I like seeing how people make up their own tricks and visualizations.
I also understand, it is pretty hard to annoy me compared to most people. I'm a pretty easygoing guy.
We should start a thread: "What works for me" lol. Unfortunately I think the discussion would just get confusing as hell. Even with quotes. If it works, and if something got good enough results, then it could be taken to the research forum. The problem isn't the ideas. The problem is these random ideas that really have no established legitimacy behind them that noobs and those who can't think critically run wild with... and then duplicates of traditional methods with excessive little additions that just boggle people.
Hmm... http://e.deviantart.com/emoticons/p/plotting.gif