Thinkingness in general should not be suspected of being under anybody's control, much less the processor's, but it is probably more under the processor's control that it is under the client's control. You can do it better than the person, but that is horribly bad, and when you get this clear, you will see that you have to get the body under control and get attention under control before you aim at thinkingness.
Therefore, a condition to running Trio is this: Is the person's body under control, is the person's attention under control -- those are two conditions necessary to run Trio. To assume that power of choice is also under the person's control -- much less thinkingness -- is of course, pretty grim. It moves Trio outrageously high. So you could say that there are two versions of Trio.
Trio would be just Trio just the way it is. But there is an undercut in Trio. Trio could be a directive process, and it would be prefaced by "Get the idea of having that clock." That is highly directive, that would keep thinkingness under control in the kind of case who was having a rough time with it.
The second version: "Get the idea that it would be all right for that clock to remain as it is." That is just an indicating process.
Instead of "dispense with" or "not-know" at command three, we run into actually a brand new process. Its rationale is much higher. "Get the idea of making that clock disappear." Small objects are much easier for the person to make disappear than large ones, but you haven't told him to make it disappear. You have told him to get the idea of making it disappear. They usually interpret you literally and try like mad to make it disappear, and it usually does for a short time. This gets him to take over the automaticity of all the losses that he has experienced unwillingly. It's the universe that's been taking the things away, and an individual, just by spotting objects and getting the idea that they are going to disappear or are disappearing. Of course, then he does take over this automaticity of losses, and he becomes accustomed to it after awhile and he should come out of the woods on it.
Therefore, you have a highly directional, a highly workable set of processes, and each part of that Trio would be run relatively flat and go on to the next part. I would say you'd probably run it something on the order of, certainly not a hundred commands each. You'd try to stay in that order of magnitude, and you could just run it round and round.
1. "Notice that (indicated object) and get the idea of having it."
2. Notice that (indicated object) and get the idea of permitting it to continue."
3. "Notice that (indicated object) and get the idea of making it disappear."
Run each command until it is flat before going on to the next command (i.e., 1 would be run until flat, then command 2 would be run until flat, then command 3 would be run until flat, then return to command 1). This would be continued until all three commands no longer produced any change.