🧠 How it works
The advisor follows the v3 three-layer concentric structure:
· Inner layer (3 engines): Warmth (emotional compound interest) / Education (cognitive subversion) / Confront (truth reveal) — parallel, not exclusive
· Middle layer (8-ruler calibrator): 4 original rulers (ratchet / labor / incentive / meaning) + 4 new rulers (truth / wisdom / sober / choice)
· Outer layer (ecosystem): 7-genre differential methods + 5-category works classification + 3 move-to-tears mechanisms
When you describe a creative problem, it:
1️⃣ Applies 3 engines to identify "which engine should drive this"
2️⃣ Uses 8 rulers to locate "which is failing"
3️⃣ Uses 6 decision trees (genre red flags) to spot the specific scene
4️⃣ Suggests a possible repair path
✅ When it helps
· Script / novel "doesn't move people" — find the root cause
· Short video / film structure feels scattered — clarify "warmth vs education vs confront" main line
· Identify "pseudo-move" (disaster / reversal / one-liner / childhood / perfect sacrifice)
· Distinguish "value-resonance" vs "dilemma-resonance" (the latter is v3's core)
· Understand "3 layers of real-feel" (physical / structural / emotional) — most works die at layer 3
⛔ When NOT to use it
· Pure technical questions: how to use editing software, which music tool — find a specific tool tutorial
· Looking for ready answers: v3 is a diagnostic framework, not "how to write a viral hit"
· Emotional venting: after being scolded by clients / mocked by viewers — try Mental Listener, not here
· Replace professional craft: literature / film / theater have their own training systems; v3 is one diagnostic lens
⚠️ Risks & disclaimer
Built on the v3 art framework, with these boundaries:
· Framework scope: v3 is a structural diagnostic lens, not a replacement for literary / cinematic / theatrical training
· Value tilt: v3 admits its own "anti-chicken-soup / anti-cry-bait / anti-perfect-sacrifice" presupposition — not neutral
· Genre limits: v3 mainly covers the "warmth + truth" spectrum; pure experimental / abstract / sensory works need recalibration
· Dynamic failure: audience aesthetics change; v3's diagnostic conclusions may become outdated over time
👉 Not literary / cinematic / theatrical advice. Combine with your domain experience for all creative decisions.
📝 3 Sample Conversations
Example 1 (short drama):
👤 "I made a 30-second family short drama, 10K views but only 12% completion rate. Why?"
🎨 "3-mechanism check: ① Attract (10s) — did you open with "when I was young…" backstory? That's short-drama red flag #1. ② Move (90s) — 30 seconds makes it hard to fit any of the 5 mechanisms (A unspoken love / B missed time / C silent sacrifice / D unexpected tenderness / E misunderstood love). For 30s, use the 3-segment structure: catch(0-3s) → warm-up(3-15s) → present(15-30s) → leave-blank. Try to fit 1 of the 5 mechanisms in 30s."
Example 2 (novel):
👤 "I wrote an 80,000-word novel. The protagonist is a middle-aged mom. The editor says "too flat, no conflict" — but I want exactly that "being found" feeling. What do I do?"
🎨 "This is v3's core distinction — value-resonance vs dilemma-resonance. Value-resonance: the work outputs a "correct value", audience feels "yes, exactly"; dilemma-resonance: honestly presents an un-summarizable struggle, audience feels "oh my god, this is me". What you want is the warmth engine's "being found" — this requires ratchet + precision + meaning. Try this: don't "solve" the protagonist's dilemma, show how she "lives on with confusion". Manchester by the Sea is the anti-warm classic example — nothing gets resolved, but you feel "I get your struggle"."
Example 3 (film):
👤 "I wrote a script with classic three-act structure (beginning-conflict-end), but my mentor says "no soul" — where did I go wrong?"
🎨 "You may have lost the Education Engine vs Confront Engine. Structure correct ≠ soul present. Three-act is the "form" — v3 asks: ① Truth-ruler: did you show the power structure? Is the cost truthful? Is there a gray zone? ② Sober-ruler: is your success/failure narrative and attitude toward power helping the audience self-deceive or see clearly? ③ Choice-ruler: does the ending make the audience "bigger" (more options) or "smaller" (only one option)? Try adding "an unsolvable detail" — Ming Dynasty 1566 opens all 3 rulers but never picks a side, the audience leaves feeling "my cognition expanded"."
🎯 8 维校准器速查
· Original 4 (around Warmth): Ratchet (4 types: gentle / destructive / dissolving / refusing) / Labor (6 dimensions) / Incentive (3 mechanisms) / Meaning (3 meanings: being-seen / choosable / rejectable)
· New 4 (around Education+Confront): Truth (power structure / cost / complexity) / Wisdom (cognitive density) / Sober (don't help audience self-deceive) / Choice (don't decide for audience)
· Conflict mediation: Truth vs Ratchet → truth first but "stinging-ratchet"; Wisdom vs Choice → wisdom first, no picking sides
🔒 Privacy
· No login required
· Only saved: IP, art topic tag, message count (for service improvement)
· Not saved: your profile, work content, name
· Chat history lives only in your browser localStorage (clearing browser = clearing history)