• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Subliminal Compliance (a.k.a. Psychological Manipulation)

Jim.

Let me be perfectly clear. After you've read my editted post, please go on.

You did not plant any "bait". You are not proving any point. You are pretended, almost wishing, that you were a little more mysterious than you really are.

What you are:
1. In need of a psychiatrist.
2. In need of another year 5 spelling course.
3. Incapable of cognitive activities.

What you are not:
1. Cool.
2. "The Worlds Most Controversial Mystery Artist", for two reasons. Numero Uno: The phrase on your site is a further progeny of your distinct lack of grammar/speelling ability. "Worlds" needs to have an apostrophe between the 'd' and the 's'. Numero Due: No matter whether "Worlds" has an apostrophe or not, you aren't anywhere near the world's most controversial mystery artist.
3. Spooky or mysterious in any way shape or form.
4. Someone who has planted "bait" for me to unwillingly take, so stop pretending it was your intention. It was not.
5. Cool.

Go away.

Alex.

I.d.I.O-T

I agree you are correct Alex.

You had a choice to walk away and not be controlled.
Because you did not it throws your entire rant into question.

Ya feel better now?

I know I do because you do.

-J im

H.O.A-X

PS. THis post is just for fun.
 
I agree you are correct Alex.

You had a choice to walk away and not be controlled.
Because you did not it throws your entire rant into question.

Ya feel better now?

I know I do because you do.

-J im

H.O.A-X

PS. THis post is just for fun.

Well geez, you just get smarter by the second!

I was not controlled you fool. You did not control me. Get over yourself.

And by the way, I totally controlled you into writing that PM, therefore I win, and there is nothing you can say to disprove it other than a complete lack of evidence (or brain, in your case).

Alex.
 
Last edited:
Well... This thread has been derailed beyond the point of usefulness.

I really don't understand why so many people who claim to be skeptics have a) fallen for such obvious manipulation tactics, and b) can't wake up and smell the coffee even when someone is holding the mug under their noses for them.

Every time you talk about Jim, that's one more point in his corner (yes, I've just sacrificed one). Every time you insult him, its two points for him. And every time you respond to his posts with flaming... Yet another couple points.

The spelling mistakes are a misdirection to inflame your "you can't possibly be what you say you are because otherwise you could spell" response. Same with the grammatical errors. The fun little signature? Again, something to make you go "oh this guy is so woo he can't possibly be taken seriously."

It's working quite well even in this thread amongst a group of so-called skeptics. So well, in fact, that I'm deeply saddened and almost ashamed to consider myself a skeptic.

Jim, I offer you a reluctant bow. Seems you've won this one.
 
Well... This thread has been derailed beyond the point of usefulness.

I really don't understand why so many people who claim to be skeptics have a) fallen for such obvious manipulation tactics, and b) can't wake up and smell the coffee even when someone is holding the mug under their noses for them.

Every time you talk about Jim, that's one more point in his corner (yes, I've just sacrificed one). Every time you insult him, its two points for him. And every time you respond to his posts with flaming... Yet another couple points.

The spelling mistakes are a misdirection to inflame your "you can't possibly be what you say you are because otherwise you could spell" response. Same with the grammatical errors. The fun little signature? Again, something to make you go "oh this guy is so woo he can't possibly be taken seriously."

It's working quite well even in this thread amongst a group of so-called skeptics. So well, in fact, that I'm deeply saddened and almost ashamed to consider myself a skeptic.

Jim, I offer you a reluctant bow. Seems you've won this one.

Agree - It's been pretty transparent trolling. The guy is a performer and the paranormal claims are all part of the act.
 
Last edited:
To SkeptiChick:

Please don't tell me you're giving in to him. Just please don't.

If anyone is being manipulated, it's you.

So well, in fact, that I'm deeply saddened and almost ashamed to consider myself a skeptic.

As a result of the minority of murderers among us, are you ashamed and deeply saddened to be human?

I couldn't agree with you more on one thing. Jim knows how to aggravate people. He's nothing more than an attention seeker. I'd rather give him ten ton of negative attention, rather than an ounce of positive attention; which is his Holy Grail. So please, do not bow, agree, submit or indulge in any form of praise to this man, he doesn't deserve it. I have a lot of respect for you.

Trolling? Nah, just avidly seeking attention. He wants to be noticed. He's like those Showbiz people who haven't got anywhere, so they seek positive recognition anywhere they can. The internet is great.

Alex.
 
Last edited:
Neither this:
"you can't possibly be what you say you are because otherwise you could spell"

Nor this:
"oh this guy is so woo he can't possibly be taken seriously."

...has crossed my mind.

The bad spelling is not something that's used in this thread alone. Since he came here he's flooded us with a lack of decent grammar and spelling. Hell, it's not just us! Go check his posts on the Magic Cafe or whatever it's called. He does the same there.

His bad spelling and grammar is only due to a lack of thought, it's not manipulation, at all. It's sub-conscious and not a way of "winning" at all. So please, don't bow to him again.

You're dead right about one thing though, and that's the fact that I've (almost foolish) given up time talking to this man. He's lost in his own self praising delusions.

Alex.
 
Last edited:
I couldn't agree with you more on one thing. Jim knows how to aggravate people. He's nothing more than an attention seeker. I'd rather give him ten ton of negative attention, rather than an ounce of positive attention; which is his Holy Grail. So please, do not bow, agree, submit or indulge in any form of praise to this man, he doesn't deserve it. I have a lot of respect for you.

Trolling? Nah, just avidly seeking attention. He wants to be noticed. He's like those Showbiz people who haven't got anywhere, so they seek positive recognition anywhere they can. The internet is great.

Alex.


Do you mean to say trolling and attention seeking are mutually exclusive? I would have thought this was a motive for trolling? From what I have seen he is equally happy with the negative attention. He's probably having a right laugh when you give him a serve. Some people love getting a rise out of people – isn't it a bit of an Aussie tradition to draw a reaction from those taking things too seriously. If this has been a promotion tactic he has been successful – I had never heard of him before reading about him here.

He may not have gotten very far in the ranks of celebrity but it still must be a buzz to get on stage and get a reaction from people as has done.
 
Every time you talk about Jim, that's one more point in his corner (yes, I've just sacrificed one). Every time you insult him, its two points for him. And every time you respond to his posts with flaming... Yet another couple points.

Maybe he's trying to save up enough points to get the toaster, and we're helping him out ('cuz we're nice).

Linda
 
I disagree. I think it's a great case-study of the subject matter. It's only natural that people would feel angry.

I agree.

Allot of deletion & distortion going on.;)

I am really surprised that a good number of those posting
appear not to understand the tools and techniques at play.

Possibly it might help to point out that the tools are layered.

For instance the spelling and grammar tool accomplishes several things.
It is something I came up with years ago when working with a stroke victim.

It is based upon Ericson hypnosis, personality profiling and interactive theater/performance art.

The intentional misquote of Twain is also part of the same tool set.
(It accomplishes three things).


Best Wishes,

Jim
 
I agree.

Allot of deletion & distortion going on.;)

I am really surprised that a good number of those posting
appear not to understand the tools and techniques at play.

Possibly it might help to point out that the tools are layered.

For instance the spelling and grammar tool accomplishes several things.
It is something I came up with years ago when working with a stroke victim.
They hadn't seen your act I hope?

It is based upon Ericson hypnosis, personality profiling and interactive theater/performance art.

The intentional misquote of Twain is also part of the same tool set.
(It accomplishes three things).


Best Wishes,

Jim

Yes it shows you're a troll.So spelling mistakes are part of a theatrical act? Oh that explains it! Ok thne form now on I shall create my own perfromance art :rolleyes:

True it's nearest you'll ever get to having a theatre performance.

You aren't as smart as you think.Criss Angel ruined your integrity(what little you had)in one sentence.Haven't seen you on TV since?

Where is my writ? You asked for real names.I gave it to you.Again you cannot man up when it's neeed.

As I posted in another thread IF all the spelling mistakes etc are part of some experiment,it's pretty sad.
But I suppose Criss has a career,is a mutli millionaire,whereas you Jim have what exactly? Playing childish games instead of real debate(of which you are inacapable of).That's success right there! :D
 
There is no shame in not being able to throw woo in a bar. I can't either. We can go out someday and throw the NLP out as much as we can stand the rejection at a drinking site. I'd like to try a hypnosis set but I need someone experienced to give me a bit of advice.

Sorry to respond so late with this, but I was kind of busy this weekend.

Now, of course, NLP and hypnosis will not work in a bar, if it seems to work, that's only because the person doing it has more confidence in her/him self and that will shine through. Confidence is usually more desirable in a person than no confidence. But, in the end, a "subject" will make the final choice of how to react to NLP or hypnosis.

And that's the point I'm trying to make. For example, my girlfriend drops into a trace when I touch her because she wants to (I am her boyfriend, I didn't get her to be my girlfriend through hypnosis, I did it the old-fashioned way :) ) and expects it to happen. Same thing when I do a show: the audience pays to sit and allow me to manipulate them. They put me in a very powerful position, but, truth be known, they can take that power away by just not wanting the show to go well.

I know NLP has other "tricks" to make people do your bidding, but all those things fall flat if the subject simply doesn't want to do what you are trying to get them to do. Desire and belief go a long way in aiding psychological manipulation.

To go a little further with this whole manipulation thing, it seems to me that basically we all do it. Even the very young. From a child who cries to his parents to buy him a G.I. Joe with the Kung-Fu grip to a person using her/his sexiness to get you to buy this shaver instead of that one, we all do it. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. It might work on some people, it might not on others.

Let me give you another example of this: advertising. How well does it really work? I mean, it's an advertiser's job to get you to buy their product. Their job is to manipulate you to like their product more than any other product in out there. If psychological manipulation, i.e. NLP and hypnosis, work as some people give it credit for, then we'd all own every brand of every product out there.

In fact, all this "manipulation" can really do is influnece. It cannot make you do anything. The truth is, the final decision to have some kind of psychological manipulation to work on you is you. Period. You can choose not to listen, or to jump right in. The final choice, no matter how many tricks that are played on you, is yours.

That being said, there is one trick that seems to lower your ability to remember you have that choice: confusion. By my experience and observation, confusion is the only thing that seems to help psychological manipulation. You confuse someone enough they'll be more open to agreeing with you or following orders, etc. It's not fool proof, and if you use it you have to be on your toes, but it's power comes from the idea of catching someone off guard. Hypnotists and NLP'ers use it a lot. Derren Brown illustrates that in a lot of his work.

I say this because confusion (which includes misdirection) is the main weapon used by magicians and con men. :)

However, even with that, the final choice, the final descion is always and always will be yours.
 
Last edited:
I agree.

Allot of deletion & distortion going on.;)

I am really surprised that a good number of those posting
appear not to understand the tools and techniques at play.

Possibly it might help to point out that the tools are layered.

For instance the spelling and grammar tool accomplishes several things.
It is something I came up with years ago when working with a stroke victim.

It is based upon Ericson hypnosis, personality profiling and interactive theater/performance art.

The intentional misquote of Twain is also part of the same tool set.
(It accomplishes three things).


Best Wishes,

Jim

You still think that it's manipulation? Honestly, you truly need help.

This is sad. Honestly sad. Never would I have expected to meet a middle-aged man who thinks he can use spelling and grammar mistakes to assist personality profiling.

You must have had a bad childhood.

Alex.
 
Some people love getting a rise out of people – isn't it a bit of an Aussie tradition to draw a reaction from those taking things too seriously.

We also run around jumping on crocodiles and comparing the sizes of our knives.

Sorry to disappoint, but it isn't something that really happens all that much. No more than it would in any other place on Earth. The image of a "laid-back" Australian, IMO, is accurate, but with what you've described, I dunno.

Sorry to respond so late with this, but I was kind of busy this weekend.

Now, of course, NLP and hypnosis will not work in a bar, if it seems to work, that's only because the person doing it has more confidence in her/him self and that will shine through. Confidence is usually more desirable in a person than no confidence. But, in the end, a "subject" will make the final choice of how to react to NLP or hypnosis.

And that's the point I'm trying to make. For example, my girlfriend drops into a trace when I touch her because she wants to (I am her boyfriend, I didn't get her to be my girlfriend through hypnosis, I did it the old-fashioned way :) ) and expects it to happen. Same thing when I do a show: the audience pays to sit and allow me to manipulate them. They put me in a very powerful position, but, truth be known, they can take that power away by just not wanting the show to go well.

I know NLP has other "tricks" to make people do your bidding, but all those things fall flat if the subject simply doesn't want to do what you are trying to get them to do. Desire and belief go a long way in aiding psychological manipulation.

To go a little further with this whole manipulation thing, it seems to me that basically we all do it. Even the very young. From a child who cries to his parents to buy him a G.I. Joe with the Kung-Fu grip to a person using her/his sexiness to get you to buy this shaver instead of that one, we all do it. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. It might work on some people, it might not on others.

Let me give you another example of this: advertising. How well does it really work? I mean, it's an advertiser's job to get you to buy their product. Their job is to manipulate you to like their product more than any other product in out there. If psychological manipulation, i.e. NLP and hypnosis, work as some people give it credit for, then we'd all own every brand of every product out there.

In fact, all this "manipulation" can really do is influnece. It cannot make you do anything. The truth is, the final decision to have some kind of psychological manipulation to work on you is you. Period. You can choose not to listen, or to jump right in. The final choice, no matter how many tricks that are played on you, is yours.

That being said, there is one trick that seems to lower your ability to remember you have that choice: confusion. By my experience and observation, confusion is the only thing that seems to help psychological manipulation. You confuse someone enough they'll be more open to agreeing with you or following orders, etc. It's not fool proof, and if you use it you have to be on your toes, but it's power comes from the idea of catching someone off guard. Hypnotists and NLP'ers use it a lot. Derren Brown illustrates that in a lot of his work.

I say this because confusion (which includes misdirection) is the main weapon used by magicians and con men. :)

However, even with that, the final choice, the final descion is always and always will be yours.

It's interesting, I read in an e-book by Bob Cassidy called "The Real Work of Stage Hypnosis".

It wrote: "Hypnosis can be induced in rigorous exercise".

Alex.
 
You still think that it's manipulation? Honestly, you truly need help.

This is sad. Honestly sad. Never would I have expected to meet a middle-aged man who thinks he can use spelling and grammar mistakes to assist personality profiling.

You must have had a bad childhood.

Alex.

Alex, thanks for your continued assistance and for providing a compelling example of DaSkeptics observation.

Have a good one.

J im

H.O.A-X
 
Alex, thanks for your continued assistance and for providing a compelling example of DaSkeptics observation.

Have a good one.

J im

H.O.A-X

Arthwollipot has perfectly stated my opinion on this oh so AMAZING act, Jim! You're an amazing manipulator of the mind. I am under your full control.

:rolleyes:

Like talking to a brick.

Alex.
 
BTW, this is the only reaction I have. What Jim is doing is retconning - retroactively claiming that he did or said certain things for certain purposes, when at the time he had no such purpose in mind. Jim says something, Alex replies, then Jim says "I totally manipulated you into saying that." It's a pretty ordinary tool, and not very clever.
 
Thankyou.

Precisely my point all along.

If anyone is being "manipulated" here, it's those who seriously believe that he can do what he is pretending he can do.

Alex.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom