Anti-Shine/Unsocial A314 ?

[Jasmin]

Thanks for your feedback.

One major issue.

@Socrates

In any case when mixing putatives with A314, I hope the fixatives are at maximal levels – users have noticed that most of the putatives do not last long without strong fixatives. Some of the people who got the best results from the putatives ended up using strong fixatives to ‘extend the effects’ (like Tacitus with Monolaurin, Sandalo with Glucam P-20, and Warren who was going to try some Dipropylene Glycol).

That’s not a good meme to perpetuate. This is just bad info multiplying on itself, and it really taints the research.

Possible future pheromones, like any currently proven pheromones, all have different “staying power”. It depends on the molecule, not it being “putative” or not.

Putative does not mean short lived. Putatives doesn’t mean anything special at all. Putative simply means “not yet proven”. Nothing more, nothing less.

A putative is like a child. While it’s not yet proven, it could grow up to be anything. A winner or a loser, a hero or a villain, super-powerful or a real dud, who knows yet? You can only see it’s true nature if you don’t assume too much about it, either positive or negative.

Any human pheromones, putative or not, need proper fixatives, and proper diffusion. Most human scents are very short lasting and have poor diffusion on their own. You can smell a skunk a half mile away, but you’d be lucky to smell your buddy a half room away unless he was wearing some synthetic scents.

Everyone: To keep feedback accurate, please evaluate each molecule, putative or not, on their own merits.

No putative necessarily has anything to do with another, so avoid assuming anything about any particular molecule w/o testing. Test any and all putatives like you’ve never tested anything before. Test everything as a blank slate.

Here’s another way to help stop to this false assumption once and for all… When ordering putatives, please order with a scent/fixative package. The Neroli is a good default.

[Jasmin]

@Socrates

Jas, why BetaNol? I thought people have been using A314 + IH and A314 + CTTM to ‘death’ and the rapport benefits that BetaNol brings to A314 are very well known.

You hit the nail on the head! We’ll do that precisely because it’s proven.

Why do anything unproven, or with a low degree of success, in oil?

Sprays (especially the small To Gos) are like paper, oils are like stone. We want only things with a high degree of success in oil.

The things done to death are perfect for committing to the long lasting format of oil. We’ll keep the really experimental stuff to the liquid based MX series, in the To Go bottles. That’s the ideal format for wild eyed experiments.

BetaNol, p79 and p90 are all well worn both on the forum and in our own off-site experiments. We might not talk about p79 and p90 much on the forum ourselves, but we still have lots of internal data on each.

The information on the forum sometimes goes in the wrong direction temporarily due to social proof or inaccurate information spread by strong “sneezers”. (the idea that putatives need any more fixation than any other molecule is one such piece of false data… almost everything, aside from a very few molecules such as androstenone, need a ton of fixatives)

Our internal information is a tad more objective in the short term, and doesn’t always agree with the socialized forum view. Both sets of data are extremely valuable, especially when “sanity checked” against each other. Using both sets to determine future experiments allows us to move forward more quickly than depending exclusively on one or the other.

Traditional science would discount this forum as a useless mass of “anecdotal data”, but we don’t agree. We do agree, however, that you must be very careful about how you parse the data. You have to be very aware of how the social space influences the data in one way or another, just like you have to watch the funding source(s) and motivations of the scientists involved in an academic study. Everything has it’s biases and points of inaccuracy that taint data.

Long term and with enough participants, the forum data usually self-corrects. Short term, especially with less participants, there’s a lot of social based sway, especially when a strong thought leader is involved in any early experiment.

There’s especially a lot of social sway and repetition of the less tested molecules, like p90. Since there is such a small data set on such a molecule, some new testers read everything about the molecule first, and pre-program their results to agree with the few people who’ve gone before. That leads to a lot of lot of dirty data in the short term.

Remember, the placebo effect is strong in the social realm, and it involves both positive and negative hallucination. The larger the test group, the bigger the n, the better. Something truly popular will always have it’s dissenting voices, and nobody will ever be able to completely pre-program their results by reading all of the feedback involved with a popular mix or molecule. That’s why there’s often great information in those voices in a large crowd that say something different.

[Socrates]

@Jasmin

Thanks for your feedback.

One major issue.

That’s not a good meme to perpetuate. This is just bad info multiplying on itself, and it really taints the research.

Possible future pheromones, like any currently proven pheromones, all have different “staying power”. It depends on the molecule, not it being “putative” or not.

Putative does not mean short lived. Putatives doesn’t mean anything special at all. Putative simply means “not yet proven”. Nothing more, nothing less.

A putative is like a child. While it’s not yet proven, it could grow up to be anything. A winner or a loser, a hero or a villain, super-powerful or a real dud, who knows yet? You can only see it’s true nature if you don’t assume too much about it, either positive or negative.

Any human pheromones, putative or not, need proper fixatives, and proper diffusion. Most human scents are very short lasting and have poor diffusion on their own. You can smell a skunk a half mile away, but you’d be lucky to smell your buddy a half room away unless he was wearing some synthetic scents.

Everyone: To keep feedback accurate, please evaluate each molecule, putative or not, on their own merits.

No putative necessarily has anything to do with another, so avoid assuming anything about any particular molecule w/o testing. Test any and all putatives like you’ve never tested anything before. Test everything as a blank slate.

Here’s another way to help stop to this false assumption once and for all… When ordering putatives, please order with a scent/fixative package. The Neroli is a good default.

Yes I definitely see your points are correct. Let me know if you want to edit my post (or you want me to do it). I don’t want to be a source of misinformation.

I will be trying the Neroli scent/fixative package for every putative I think as CTTM is one of my favourites, and it might be partly because of the package.

Beta-Nol + A314 in Oil would definitely be one awesome product (and looking forward to the versions with P79 and P90 too)!!!

[bosshank]

@Jasmin

The information on the forum sometimes goes in the wrong direction temporarily due to social proof or inaccurate information spread by strong “sneezers”. (the idea that putatives need any more fixation than any other molecule is one such piece of false data… almost everything, aside from a very few molecules such as androstenone, need a ton of fixatives)

Our internal information is a tad more objective in the short term, and doesn’t always agree with the socialized forum view. Both sets of data are extremely valuable, especially when “sanity checked” against each other. Using both sets to determine future experiments allows us to move forward more quickly than depending exclusively on one or the other.

Traditional science would discount this forum as a useless mass of “anecdotal data”, but we don’t agree. We do agree, however, that you must be very careful about how you parse the data. You have to be very aware of how the social space influences the data in one way or another, just like you have to watch the funding source(s) and motivations of the scientists involved in an academic study. Everything has it’s biases and points of inaccuracy that taint data.

Long term and with enough participants, the forum data usually self-corrects. Short term, especially with less participants, there’s a lot of social based sway, especially when a strong thought leader is involved in any early experiment.

There’s especially a lot of social sway and repetition of the less tested molecules, like p90. Since there is such a small data set on such a molecule, some new testers read everything about the molecule first, and pre-program their results to agree with the few people who’ve gone before. That leads to a lot of lot of dirty data in the short term.

Remember, the placebo effect is strong in the social realm, and it involves both positive and negative hallucination. The larger the test group, the bigger the n, the better. Something truly popular will always have it’s dissenting voices, and nobody will ever be able to completely pre-program their results by reading all of the feedback involved with a popular mix or molecule. That’s why there’s often great information in those voices in a large crowd that say something different.

This is the part I have always wondered about - and have been very cautious about when reading results.

I have often found myself in an odd quandry - I, like many others here, probably put a little more faith in the posts of what you call “strong thought leaders” than new users when it comes to MXes and putatives. But at the same time everyone has an off or odd day or night so it is possible that even someone with a great deal of experience could in all good faith post something that is nonetheless inaccurate. at the same time you do not want to discount what new users post either - but it can sometimes take a while to see how reliable they are going to be.

So I see the wisdom of limiting purchases of these products to established users and posters. First, you get people who have shown they will post. Second you hopefully get people who are socially aware enough to see what is going on around them so they do provide accurate feedback.

At the same time I have also been around long enough to see the social sway of more established users like myself. When someone like MID, Steve or Tisha posts a couple threads about a certain product or mix then you can almost hear the scampering of feet as everyone shuffles in that direction. I have done that myself to much lesser degree with Instant Gentleman. I have really seen it with MXes and putatives also. Not that what they say is inaccurate, but you can literally see the sway in comments by other users.

So I can see that you would have to be very careful with your data on this forum. What I would find interesting to know is how do you parse the data - do you use a social interaction software program or something more akin to databases like Excel or Access.

I would also be very interesting to learn more about your “in house” testing. I know that Michael and Jasmin used to post a LOT more about their test runs with products. But I can see where you would not want to for fear of causing the ultimate sways. All the same it would be interesting to learn what you do for that “in house testing”.

I also read Jasmin’s chat about using Mr. Levinson to develop an “Ad Campaign” for the public release of Ammo. Very nice. I grew up with Marlboro …

[magicj76]

@Jasmin

There’s many version changes over time, beyond the diffusion/cover package. Which version is listed in the bottom of the bottle?

If you still have it, which version is listed at the bottom of the older one you had?

The Akuto version (latest received) :

version 17
batch 6

The EO version (the first one), I’ve got to find the bottle, as I’ve kept it for some possible big event, but I’ve hidden it so well that I can’t find it back and I don’t remember. I ordered it in September 2007.

[monesmadedoit]

As to the thread title, 3 drops A314 plus TAK 15 mcg may do it.

[Gegogi]

Five year old thread resurrection and just in time for Halloween! Classic A314 with a strong chaser of androstenone product (NPA or Edge) is authoritative with a nasty edge, helpful for clearing the room of subordinates as they scurry off to fulfill their duties. You’ll eat lunch alone when thus dosed.

[AlboGuy18]

@magicj76

Whereas many users buy Instant Shine, Instant Opennes and Instant Honesty, does anyone know if there’s a pheromone that would make people more quiet ?

A sort of Anti-Shine that would be useful for teachers whose students are too chatty and not disciplined ?
I don’t know if it’s due to a natural over-production of social pheromones or anything else but it would be useful.

Something different from the Akuto A314, as that one works well for business and seems to make me less approachable, the problem is that it gives a higher status but that other people (than managers) don’t accept and then react negatively, which didn’t occur with the EO version.

A putative that would result in “Instant Military” ?

Thanks,

MagicJ

P102 seems to have that effect on people, though I’d advise you personally do not wear it as it will affect you as well. IT will calm things down to the point of absolute silence and makes focusing a lot easier

[leon333]

@Gegogi

Five year old thread resurrection and just in time for Halloween! Classic A314 with a strong chaser of androstenone product (NPA or Edge) is authoritative with a nasty edge, helpful for clearing the room of subordinates as they scurry off to fulfill their duties. You’ll eat lunch alone when thus dosed.

yup! A314+NPA is the “moses parting the red sea” mix.extremely dominant and scary.peep become nervous lil kittens and get out of your way fast!!! and you eat lunch alone