This may go against the grain here, but I prefer the way it is now.
Here’s my reasoning:
Whether we’re open about it or not, a big part of what we’re looking for with subliminals is Hope. A lot of the microquestions that people ask here on the forum could also be looked at as, ‘Hey, should I still have hope?’ (That’s definitely reductionist of me. And there are a lot of necessary questions that we ask. I’m just saying this is part of the picture.)
I feel like something like a heaviness or density ranking could also be misused to as a way to find reasons why things are not working. Basically, ‘Well, it’s no wonder that didn’t work. It was too heavy!’
But a method that doesn’t work well for me or that feels super-heavy or dense for me, might work great for you. Taking script-length as an example: If there is a 300-page script, you might actually already be pretty good with about 200 of those pages. If I’m only good with about 5 of them, then the same 300 page script is going to be much denser for me than it is for you. In that case, it would be a shame if you had chosen not to use that program just because you said ‘wow, 300 pages that seems way too long!’
I don’t want my preconceptions to be too strong before I start working on something. I don’t want to get lost in predicting the probability of success. I’d rather just have a general guideline and then find out the rest for myself through experience.
hahaha. While I was thinking about how to express this, @Lion and @pacman came in and said the same thing in much less space.
(I’ve noticed that when I’m feeling the load, my posts seem to get longer.)