Hello, Dr. Grinder. 1.  You wrote, "Do you get the impression that we may be the only two people curious about what you proposed?" JPG's proposal is interesting to me.  Practicing the New Code appeals to me.  And I'd like to know more about the games.  And I worry that Ms. Bostic St. Clair and you won't offer New Code seminars in 2004 and later. 2. You wrote, "1.  (JPG)'2.1 In 6 step reframing the positive intention is obviously available (and sometimes only) at the unconscious level. Driving longer tee shot is a conscious goal.' (Dr. Grinder) The positive intention is always available unconsciously and sometimes it is available at the conscious level. The apparent contradiction disappears under the impact of congruency: that is, when the conscious and unconscious agree on a specific goal - e.g. driving longer tee shots." So a golfer has an unconscious positive intention behind playing golf in some way.  That must be true, if all behaviors have position intentions behind them.  When playing golf, a golfer can know in advance that other behaviors satisfy the positive intention of a particular golfing activity behavior.  3.  You wrote, "The know-nothing state does, indeed, collapse when confronted with a specific context and the high performance state adapts itself to the requirements implicit within it." To evaluate what you wrote, I remembered a time when I felt "in the zone".  I believe the interpretation I evaluated.  The interpretation was: "You are in the know-nothing state when you're not consciously considering the behaviors you might perform while you are in a high-performance state.  Once you are in the target context, you perform whatever particular behaviors while in a high-performance state." This is teleological information about the states a person readies using the New Code games.  I can imagine you saying quote 4 and then imagine me feeling comfortable that the high-performance state will work even if my Step 2 context halucination differs from my target context.  But I don't know how a high-performance state adapts itself to a target context, because I don't know what demonstrates my high-performance states adapting. So I wonder if the whole-body kinesthetics of a high-performance state remain available to a person whose target context requires the person to improvise behaviors.  Maybe a compelling motivation to achieve a particular result in the target context remains during target events.  Maybe a desire to participate in the target context remains while the person performs arbitrary behaviors during target events. Maybe a desire to participate in the target context remains while the person intends to achieve arbitrary results during the target event. Maybe particular beliefs about the target context or the person in it remain while the person performs behaviors in the target context. 4.  On page 239 of "Whispering In The Wind", Ms. Bostic St. Clair and you wrote, "The responsibility for the selection of the desired state, the resources to be applied to the challenge, the specific new behavior that will replace the behavior to be changed are all reassigned to the unconscious, thereby correcting some of the design flaws in the classic code." Once I learn New Code games, should I expect the unexpected from my unconscious during events of my target context type?  -nj