Jump to content

NLD's Hands-On Tulpa Creation Guide v2.0


EnEllDee
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 24
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well not sure if that whole terminology thing is needed here but...

 

Again, you missed the entire point about me saying the part about Faqman is in the wrong place. You reworded yourself to explain what you wanted to say about hour counts and such... But it's still under form. How the hell does hour counts and what not to do have to do with creating the form? Speaking of that section, quoting you: "and things such as hour counts (as in “X should be done by Y amount of hours”, keeping track of your progress is fine) of the worst things to do". I think you missed a word there, it makes no sense.

 

You still only mention that the wonderland is the only optional one when in fact everything in your guide is optional.

 

Looking at your personality section...

 

Do this enough and you’ll eventually get a vocal response...

 

With me assuming "this" is what's above it. Well, what's above it is the entire personality section but let's quote this part.

 

Essentially, just spend about an hour a day sitting there telling your Tulpa “You are [trait]” with all their traits over and over. This is narration, and it's a very important and easy way to work on personality. It gives your Tulpa a sense of who they are. You could also say things like "You would react in X way in Y scenario" to give them a sense of how they'd react to certain scenarios.

 

What you said after about active forcing and such probably means you mean "do this" should point towards active forcing and narration. However, the way you've written it implies like the person should be doing personality forcing until their tulpa is vocal.

 

Still barely anything on forcing and narration. I don't think slapping a terminology section up there at the start really does anything. This is supposed to be a creation guide and you're supposed to be walking a complete newbie through this, right? You're not really doing that.

 

You haven't fixed any capitalization issues. This isn't German, you're not supposed to capitalize words like tulpa.

The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And someone could easily create the tulpa without your guide/any guide at all, your point? Many bad guides on this site have been praised, but it doesn't mean they're up to the standards or even good guides. That's exactly why the guide rating team is a thing now, so we can weed the bad from the actually good.

 

Disapproved for all the reasons I've said in my posts already. Right now I don't feel the guide is up to standards and is just a basic creation guide without much meat about the important parts, nothing really new or unique has been said. Sure, hard to say anything super new or unique, but right now this guide feels like a poorly written summary of some other guides. If some parts were thought about some more and rewritten - and if there was a bit more meat about the important parts like forcing and such - it might have potential. I would much rather approve of just the form visualization tips because those might very well be the most helpful tips in this entire thing for many struggling to understand how they should tackle it. But as a creation guide it's lacking.

The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Disapproved for previous reasons and also,

A tulpa can be many things. In your section "III. What a Tulpa IS NOT" you describe what they are not, yet a tulpa could very well be one's toy or slave, if a person chose to make one for that reason. Let people decide for themselves their reasons in making a tulpa. Most or all of this section III would best be left out, there isn't a reason to tell people their imaginary creation can't interact physically either, that's rather implicit to tulpas and anything existing in and of the imagination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, well I'll just leave it up to readers to decide then. If you really are dedicated enough to make a tulpa you won't just read one guide and you especially won't just read the guides on the front page.

The original edgelord gone soft.

I have a guide, check it out here if you want:

https://pastebin.com/FEJsxNVQ

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Afraid that isn't really something we're here to rate. We're here to rate singular guides.

The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know, and that's why I disapprove of the GAT; no one group of people should be able to tell people "hey these guides are the best because we say so" since all guides are entirely subjective. I know people who are outright furious that Methos' guide wasn't approved for example, people who would swear by his guide. I also heard Fede's guide got removed from an approved state because enough people complained about that (Which I really didn't mind that much since I've even suggested people read Fede's guide as it falls into the "all guides" category, which I highly recommend not just in my guide but to whoever I speak to who's making a tulpa). The way I see it the people who created and are on the GAT and I have very different ideas about how to make a tulpa and what people should or should not do in the process, and that's fine, but I (hopefully, if this place hasn't gone full Nazi yet) still have the right to speak my beliefs about tulpa (since that's really all what tulpamancy is since there's no hard scientific proof that any theory is correct) such as what they are and what is morally sound, and I think guides should reflect what the creator believes about tulpas. I'm rather sure the difference in what we deem "acceptable" stems from the fact .info was all but useless to me when I made my first tulpa and I've spent my entire time with tulpamancy on the General threads, thus the mindsets and belief systems I decided up on or was influenced by are much different from those you were.

 

Really when it comes down to it it's a matter of opinion I feel; the guides that are put on the front page are judged subjectively by the GAT and thus any guides put on the front page are deemed subjectively superior to the others in the unapproved section. Just my take on it though, rather sure any further discussion would be best suited to a different board.

The original edgelord gone soft.

I have a guide, check it out here if you want:

https://pastebin.com/FEJsxNVQ

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone has different views and theories about tulpas. No one knows who is right, if anyone is.

 

In case you missed as you started rambling, how you see tulpas is a pretty minor thing here and not exactly what I'm criticizing here, I'm sure you understand. The only one talking about your views is Morgan and well, he's Morgan. What I'm saying is that your guide is lacking. It's general, has nothing really too good or useful in it and it isn't very well written. It's not up to standards and you refuse to change things when you're told what you should change.

 

This site is full of guides, others good, others not. Some so horrible you just wish they were never created and hope no one will ever see them. The guide approval team was voted by the people of .info, so they will be getting guides rated by the people they chose. People they think know a thing or two about tulpas and guides, so it's like the people who voted get their voice heard through us so we can offer the new people coming here many good guides to choose from. We've already picked a few for them we think might help in the form of approved guides, the unapproved guides stay and can be read just like the approved ones. They just have something lacking, which could be changed if the guide creator puts in some more effort and listened to the team.

 

Though the whole thing with Fede's guide shows that GAT can't really work when the mods can veto any decision when they want to.

The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know, and that's why I disapprove of the GAT; no one group of people should be able to tell people "hey these guides are the best because we say so" since all guides are entirely subjective.

Many the issues that you didn't fix simply aren't subjective:

 

'Tulpa' is only capitalised at the start of a sentence. That is objectively true; it's a rule of English grammar since 'tulpa' isn't a proper noun. Take a look: English loanwords from Tibetan are only capitalised when they are names, just like in normal English.

 

Your hour count section is still under 'Form'. Why? It's not specifically form, and that again is essentially an objective criticism.

 

And I'm not sure if you've changed your narration section or not but now it doesn't read anything like something I'd recognise:

[...] you need to narrate to them. Essentially, just spend about an hour a day sitting there telling your Tulpa “You are [trait]” with all their traits over and over. This is narration, and it's a very important and easy way to work on personality.

If that's your method plain and simple then that's fine. The problem is that this is not what anyone except you calls 'narration' and if you are going to use non-standard terminology (yes, there is standard terminology and this is not it) then tell people to avoid confusion. In addition, this is ridiculously short for something that you say is both necessary and very important.

 

 

I know people who are outright furious that Methos' guide wasn't approved for example, people who would swear by his guide.

This really belongs in that thread made specifically for GAT criticism but, well, it was disapproved by some people because it was full of spelling and grammar errors, and lacked detail and clarity in some areas. Those are things that the GAT looks for and can disapprove guides for. People may like the guide but if it doesn't meet the criteria then it's not going to get approved.

 

 

I also heard Fede's guide got removed from an approved state because enough people complained about that

You heard wrong.

 

 

The way I see it the people who created and are on the GAT and I have very different ideas about how to make a tulpa and what people should or should not do in the process, and that's fine, but I (hopefully, if this place hasn't gone full Nazi yet) still have the right to speak my beliefs about tulpa (since that's really all what tulpamancy is since there's no hard scientific proof that any theory is correct) such as what they are and what is morally sound, and I think guides should reflect what the creator believes about tulpas.

This doesn't have much to do with your opinions. Your guide can give whatever method based on whatever reasonable beliefs you want. The criticism to your guide stands separate from that, based on true evident factual facts about grammar, clarity, and what is and isn't necessary in the creation process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...