Best Practices

Writing good tasking descriptions

Learn how to write effective, unbiased tasking descriptions that improve remote viewing data quality.

Why tasking quality matters

A tasking description is the instruction given to a remote viewer that defines what they should perceive and describe. The quality of the tasking directly impacts the quality of the remote viewing session.

When a tasking description contains assumptions about what exists at the target, it pollutes the viewer's perception. The viewer may perceive what the tasking suggests rather than what's actually there. This makes it impossible to distinguish genuine perception from suggestion.

Biased tasking

  • • Pollutes viewer perception
  • • Reduces data quality
  • • Invalidates the session
  • • Trains bad habits

Neutral tasking

  • • Directs attention
  • • Specifies what to describe
  • • Remains open to any outcome
  • • Uses precise, observable language

Core principles of good tasking

1. Remove all assumptions about the answer

Bad

"Describe the aliens that crashed at Roswell"

Good

"Describe the actual events that occurred in Roswell, New Mexico in July 1947. Focus on any physical objects or phenomena present, any individuals or entities involved, the sequence of actions that took place, and any materials or evidence remaining."

Why it's better

Allows for any type of event - weather balloon, aircraft, nothing unusual, or otherwise. Uses neutral language that works for any outcome.

2. Focus on observable phenomena

Bad

"What theory explains consciousness?"

Good

"Describe the fundamental mechanisms and structures that generate subjective awareness and experience. Focus on the relationship between physical systems and conscious perception, including any non-physical components."

Why it's better

Guides the viewer to describe things that can be perceived rather than abstract theories.

3. Use neutral, technical language

Bad

"Describe the horrific experiments at Dulce Base"

Good

"Describe the nature of underground facilities in the area of Dulce, New Mexico. Focus on the physical structures, occupants both human and non-human, and activities conducted."

Why it's better

Emotional language like "horrific" is assumptive and biased. Neutral language allows genuine perception.

4. Specify what to ignore

Bad

"Describe Atlantis"

Good

"Describe the geographic location of the civilization described by Plato as Atlantis. Focus on coordinates, depth, current condition of ruins, and physical evidence. Ignore modern theories and popular speculation."

Why it's better

Explicitly telling viewers to ignore speculation, theories, and cultural narratives helps them focus on direct perception.

Neutral language guide

Replace emotionally loaded or assumptive words with neutral descriptors:

AvoidUse instead
aliensoccupants, beings, entities
crashedevent that occurred, incident
supernaturalphenomena, energetic patterns
hauntedanomalous activity at the location
conspiracyevents that occurred, sequence of actions
monstercreature, biological entity
magicmechanism, process
cover-upinformation management, actions taken

Common pitfalls to avoid

Leading questions

Bad

"Describe how the government is covering up alien contact"

Problem: Assumes government involvement, alien contact occurred, and active cover-up

Good

"Describe the actual handling of information regarding non-human contact by government agencies. Focus on what information exists, how it's managed, who has access, and disclosure decisions."

Emotional language

Bad

"Describe the horrific experiments at Dulce Base"

Problem: "Horrific" is emotional and assumptive. Implies experiments definitely occurred.

Good

"Describe the nature of underground facilities in the area of Dulce, New Mexico. Focus on the physical structures, occupants, and activities conducted."

Assuming existence

Bad

"Describe where Atlantis is located"

Problem: Assumes Atlantis existed and still exists somewhere

Good

"Describe the geographic location of the civilization described by Plato as Atlantis. Describe where Atlantis actually existed if it was a real place."

Vague instructions

Bad

"Describe Roswell"

Problem: Too broad, no guidance on what aspects to focus on, no time specification

Good

"Describe the actual events that occurred in Roswell, New Mexico in July 1947. Focus on physical objects, individuals or entities involved, sequence of actions, and evidence remaining."

Tasking templates by target type

Use these templates as starting points for different types of targets:

Historical events

Describe the actual events that [occurred] at [LOCATION] on [DATE]. Focus on:
- The sequence of events
- Individuals or entities present
- Their intentions and motivations
- Physical evidence and outcomes
- Immediate aftermath

Ignore speculation. Describe the actual events.

Physical locations

Describe the actual nature of [LOCATION/STRUCTURE]. Focus on:
- Physical characteristics and construction
- Current condition and contents
- Purpose and function
- Any occupants or activities present
- Historical context if relevant

Entities and creatures

Describe the actual nature and characteristics of [ENTITY/BEING]. Focus on:
- Physical biology and appearance
- Origin and evolutionary history
- Behavior and capabilities
- Relationship to known species
- Current population and distribution

Technology and artifacts

Describe the actual nature and function of [TECHNOLOGY/ARTIFACT]. Focus on:
- Physical design and components
- Operational principles and mechanisms
- Materials and construction methods
- Purpose and intended use
- Origin and builders

Quality checklist

Before finalizing a tasking description, verify:

Contains no assumptions about what will be found
Uses neutral, technical language throughout
Specifies observable phenomena to focus on
Explicitly instructs to ignore theories/speculation
Could accommodate multiple possible outcomes
Includes temporal or spatial specificity where relevant
Avoids emotionally loaded words
Focuses on physical, observable, or perceptual elements
Does not presuppose existence of entities or events
Provides clear scope and focus areas

Special considerations for esoteric targets

Esoteric targets (unexplained phenomena, conspiracies, big questions) are the most challenging because they're surrounded by speculation, belief systems, and cultural narratives. Extra care is needed to create neutral tasking.

Challenge: Pop culture contamination

Many esoteric targets have strong pop culture associations (Area 51, Atlantis, JFK assassination).

Solution: Explicitly acknowledge and exclude popular narratives. Use phrases like "Ignore modern theories and popular speculation."

Challenge: Binary questions

Many esoteric topics are framed as yes/no questions ("Do aliens exist?" "Is there an afterlife?").

Solution: Reframe as descriptive tasks that allow for any outcome. Instead of "Are we living in a simulation?", ask "Describe the actual nature of the reality system within which human consciousness operates."

Challenge: Multiple competing theories

Targets with many theories (JFK assassination, pyramids construction) risk incorporating theory bias.

Solution: Go back to basic observation and ignore ALL theories. Use phrases like "Ignore all construction theories. Describe the actual construction process used."

Challenge: Target images introducing bias

Including images with esoteric targets can contaminate the session just as much as biased language. If a viewer sees an image of a "grey alien" before viewing a UFO target, they may perceive what the image suggested rather than what's actually there.

Solution: For esoteric targets, avoid including reference images entirely, or only show neutral images (like a map location without context). The tasking description should stand alone without visual references that could bias perception. Save any reference images for after the session is complete.

Testing your tasking

Good tasking should allow for radically different outcomes. Test by asking: "Could this tasking accommodate..."

Example: Roswell tasking test

"Describe the actual events that occurred in Roswell, New Mexico in July 1947..."

  • Weather balloon outcome? ✓ (describes actual event)
  • Alien craft outcome? ✓ (describes mechanical elements, beings)
  • Soviet experimental craft? ✓ (describes craft and occupants)
  • Nothing unusual? ✓ (describes actual mundane events)

If your tasking only makes sense with one type of outcome, it's biased.

Key takeaways

Writing good tasking descriptions is an art that balances clear direction with complete neutrality. The goal is always to point consciousness toward a target while remaining absolutely open to what might be found there.

Remove all assumptions about what exists or occurred

Use neutral, observable, technical language

Explicitly exclude theories and speculation

Focus on phenomena that can be perceived

Allow for multiple possible outcomes

Provide clear scope and focus areas

Test your tasking against the checklists

Have someone else review for bias

Remember: The investment in quality tasking pays dividends in data quality. Biased tasking produces contaminated data; neutral tasking produces genuine perception that can be analyzed and compared.

Join the community

Start your remote viewing journey today and contribute to the advancement of consciousness research!