|
Any PUA discussion is banned from page 42 and onwards. |
On May 30 2014 01:05 Xiphos wrote:
And by the way, majority of the people on Earth are not that "smart", there are only a few men who can come together and discuss this level of "scientific" philosophy. So you can learn something that can truly change yoour life.
Wow. So much wow. I can't even begin to discribe how amazing this comment is.
So because I am engaged to a beautiful, fun, video game loving woman, does that make me the leader of this elite group of men?
|
On May 30 2014 01:37 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 01:05 Xiphos wrote:
And by the way, majority of the people on Earth are not that "smart", there are only a few men who can come together and discuss this level of "scientific" philosophy. So you can learn something that can truly change yoour life. Wow. So much wow. I can't even begin to discribe how amazing this comment is. So because I am engaged to a beautiful, fun, video game loving woman, does that make me the leader of this elite group of men?
I just assumed he was referring to the Illuminati, which makes it even easier to dismiss most of the things he says.
|
On May 30 2014 01:37 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 01:05 Xiphos wrote:
And by the way, majority of the people on Earth are not that "smart", there are only a few men who can come together and discuss this level of "scientific" philosophy. So you can learn something that can truly change yoour life. Wow. So much wow. I can't even begin to discribe how amazing this comment is. So because I am engaged to a beautiful, fun, video game loving woman, does that make me the leader of this elite group of men?
I'm married to one. When are our Illuminati jackets arriving?
|
On May 30 2014 01:37 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 01:05 Xiphos wrote:
And by the way, majority of the people on Earth are not that "smart", there are only a few men who can come together and discuss this level of "scientific" philosophy. So you can learn something that can truly change yoour life. Wow. So much wow. I can't even begin to discribe how amazing this comment is. So because I am engaged to a beautiful, fun, video game loving woman, does that make me the leader of this elite group of men?
Not only men but among the top people.
And its in one specific area of life - to know how to attract women.
People that knows those techniques and recognize the skills are indeed a very rare breed because as demonstrated in the threat, majority of the people don't exactly know that we are, fundamentally all "PUA"s.
On May 30 2014 01:41 barbsq wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 01:37 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2014 01:05 Xiphos wrote:
And by the way, majority of the people on Earth are not that "smart", there are only a few men who can come together and discuss this level of "scientific" philosophy. So you can learn something that can truly change yoour life. Wow. So much wow. I can't even begin to discribe how amazing this comment is. So because I am engaged to a beautiful, fun, video game loving woman, does that make me the leader of this elite group of men? I just assumed he was referring to the Illuminati, which makes it even easier to dismiss most of the things he says.
Well if you want to call, the attraction between men and women, to be involved in an Illuminati, then send me a jacket as well.
|
|
|
On May 30 2014 01:47 Rho_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 01:37 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2014 01:05 Xiphos wrote:
And by the way, majority of the people on Earth are not that "smart", there are only a few men who can come together and discuss this level of "scientific" philosophy. So you can learn something that can truly change yoour life. Wow. So much wow. I can't even begin to discribe how amazing this comment is. So because I am engaged to a beautiful, fun, video game loving woman, does that make me the leader of this elite group of men? I'm married to one. When are our Illuminati jackets arriving?
Fuck that, I want a robe and a staff. My girl is also a drummer in a rock band, so I'm their messiah, sent I lead them to the promised land!
|
Canada11439 Posts
majority of the people don't exactly know that we are, fundamentally all "PUA"s.
Unless your definition of PUA is radically different then mine, then that is quite some projection of your values on the whole of humanity.
But I think this thread has derailed far enough. Back on topic
*cracks whip.
|
On May 30 2014 01:51 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 01:47 Rho_ wrote:On May 30 2014 01:37 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2014 01:05 Xiphos wrote:
And by the way, majority of the people on Earth are not that "smart", there are only a few men who can come together and discuss this level of "scientific" philosophy. So you can learn something that can truly change yoour life. Wow. So much wow. I can't even begin to discribe how amazing this comment is. So because I am engaged to a beautiful, fun, video game loving woman, does that make me the leader of this elite group of men? I'm married to one. When are our Illuminati jackets arriving? Fuck that, I want a robe and a staff. My girl is also a drummer in a rock band, so I'm their messiah, sent I lead them to the promised land!
AND MY AXE!
|
On May 30 2014 01:54 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +majority of the people don't exactly know that we are, fundamentally all "PUA"s. Unless your definition of PUA is radically different then mine, then that is quite some projection of your values on the whole of humanity. But I think this thread has derailed far enough. Back on topic *cracks whip.
All right, we will keep our comic stylings I check.
Apparently CA is now trying to draft a law for a gun restraining order to allow families to remove fire arms from the possession of troubled loved ones. That seems the most sensible solution I've heard in a while.
|
On May 30 2014 01:05 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 00:45 Nyxisto wrote:
It doesn't matter if the pua stuff is science or not, point is if you go out and have a few drinks with your buddies you don't use the newest scientific conversation techniques, you just are a normal person. So why do people feel the need just because they're talking to the opposite sex to fall into some kind of armchair psychology mode, which is super awkward and obvious to every half-intelligent listener anyway? Say that you go out to meet up with a girl, you need to know what you gotta say in order to impress them. You gotta plan out a certain string of topics' general trends. And you know that you want to go to a fancy restaurant but can't afford it. So you work a bit overtime to make up for the money. She likes this type of flowers, so you gotta sometime plan ahead to go to a florist so she'll be "woo"ed by. If you are doing these things, then you are applying PUA. All of those things seems relative so-called "normal" or "innocent", the matter of the fact as humans, we all do these things subconsciously and PUA took notice of these details and found ways to expound upon them. And by the way, majority of the people on Earth are not that "smart", there are only a few men who can come together and discuss this level of "scientific" philosophy. So you can learn something that can truly change yoour life.
Oh that's funny, it sounds kinda like a french piece of theater of Molière, called "Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme". At some point, a random dude convince the main character that he is doing prose without knowing it, like he is doing some kind of advanced and modern poetry. All that to flatter his ego.
Well, guess what, the main character is a fool.
|
On May 30 2014 02:04 Cynry wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 01:05 Xiphos wrote:On May 30 2014 00:45 Nyxisto wrote:
It doesn't matter if the pua stuff is science or not, point is if you go out and have a few drinks with your buddies you don't use the newest scientific conversation techniques, you just are a normal person. So why do people feel the need just because they're talking to the opposite sex to fall into some kind of armchair psychology mode, which is super awkward and obvious to every half-intelligent listener anyway? Say that you go out to meet up with a girl, you need to know what you gotta say in order to impress them. You gotta plan out a certain string of topics' general trends. And you know that you want to go to a fancy restaurant but can't afford it. So you work a bit overtime to make up for the money. She likes this type of flowers, so you gotta sometime plan ahead to go to a florist so she'll be "woo"ed by. If you are doing these things, then you are applying PUA. All of those things seems relative so-called "normal" or "innocent", the matter of the fact as humans, we all do these things subconsciously and PUA took notice of these details and found ways to expound upon them. And by the way, majority of the people on Earth are not that "smart", there are only a few men who can come together and discuss this level of "scientific" philosophy. So you can learn something that can truly change yoour life. Oh that's funny, it sounds kinda like a french piece of theater of Molière, called "Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme". At some point, a random dude convince the main character that he is doing prose without knowing it, like he is doing some kind of advanced and modern poetry. All that to flatter his ego. Well, guess what, the main character is a fool.
Can you expound upon that? I'm really interested.
|
On May 30 2014 02:01 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 01:54 Falling wrote:majority of the people don't exactly know that we are, fundamentally all "PUA"s. Unless your definition of PUA is radically different then mine, then that is quite some projection of your values on the whole of humanity. But I think this thread has derailed far enough. Back on topic *cracks whip. All right, we will keep our comic stylings I check. Apparently CA is now trying to draft a law for a gun restraining order to allow families to remove fire arms from the possession of troubled loved ones. That seems the most sensible solution I've heard in a while.
Do you have a link with details? Do the police take care of removing the firearms? That does seem like an ok idea.
|
On May 30 2014 02:07 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 02:04 Cynry wrote:On May 30 2014 01:05 Xiphos wrote:On May 30 2014 00:45 Nyxisto wrote:
It doesn't matter if the pua stuff is science or not, point is if you go out and have a few drinks with your buddies you don't use the newest scientific conversation techniques, you just are a normal person. So why do people feel the need just because they're talking to the opposite sex to fall into some kind of armchair psychology mode, which is super awkward and obvious to every half-intelligent listener anyway? Say that you go out to meet up with a girl, you need to know what you gotta say in order to impress them. You gotta plan out a certain string of topics' general trends. And you know that you want to go to a fancy restaurant but can't afford it. So you work a bit overtime to make up for the money. She likes this type of flowers, so you gotta sometime plan ahead to go to a florist so she'll be "woo"ed by. If you are doing these things, then you are applying PUA. All of those things seems relative so-called "normal" or "innocent", the matter of the fact as humans, we all do these things subconsciously and PUA took notice of these details and found ways to expound upon them. And by the way, majority of the people on Earth are not that "smart", there are only a few men who can come together and discuss this level of "scientific" philosophy. So you can learn something that can truly change yoour life. Oh that's funny, it sounds kinda like a french piece of theater of Molière, called "Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme". At some point, a random dude convince the main character that he is doing prose without knowing it, like he is doing some kind of advanced and modern poetry. All that to flatter his ego. Well, guess what, the main character is a fool. Can you expound upon that? I'm really interested.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Le Bourgeois gentilhomme
|
Wow, I studied that a long time ago, but let me try.
All book long, the main character tries to get in "bourgeoisie", which was the class under nobles, basically rich people with their silly manners (at that time).
So all he does is try to emulate said manners, getting advice from "experts" of all kind. But in the end, all he does is making these experts a bit richer. He's getting fooled, and that was all I said 
Now, to further expand on that and PUA (can't believe I got dragged in talking about that..), I would think that the same thing is happening in some form. PUA moslty profits those who sell stuff about it.
Those who achieve "girls" (I haaaaate that way of seeing stuff but whatever) are most likely just a bit more confident than they would be without PUA techniques, and that can be the difference between actually trying and seeing you as a loser from the start.
That's just my point of view, of course, and I don't know much about PUA. Nor do I want to, I achieved a good level of confidence for my own sake, not to pick up girls.
Edit : actually, he was a bourgeois trying to become a noble. Same stuff, different class, irrelevant.
|
On May 30 2014 02:09 Rho_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 02:01 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2014 01:54 Falling wrote:majority of the people don't exactly know that we are, fundamentally all "PUA"s. Unless your definition of PUA is radically different then mine, then that is quite some projection of your values on the whole of humanity. But I think this thread has derailed far enough. Back on topic *cracks whip. All right, we will keep our comic stylings I check. Apparently CA is now trying to draft a law for a gun restraining order to allow families to remove fire arms from the possession of troubled loved ones. That seems the most sensible solution I've heard in a while. Do you have a link with details? Do the police take care of removing the firearms? That does seem like an ok idea.
It's in Cnn(on my phone, so I can't link). The basic idea is that direct family can make a request to the police that the mentally ill person is a danger and should have the fire arms removed. The police then review the request and take it before a judge if they think it is necessary. If allowed, they collect the guns. Clearly ther would need to be sufficient evidence to warrant the removal of the guns.
It addresses the saddest part of this case, which was that the family knew he was going to do something violent, but there was no system on place to the police to stop it. That is a issue that is worth debating.
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
Strictly no more PUA talk from this page onwards
|
On May 30 2014 02:09 Rho_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 02:01 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2014 01:54 Falling wrote:majority of the people don't exactly know that we are, fundamentally all "PUA"s. Unless your definition of PUA is radically different then mine, then that is quite some projection of your values on the whole of humanity. But I think this thread has derailed far enough. Back on topic *cracks whip. All right, we will keep our comic stylings I check. Apparently CA is now trying to draft a law for a gun restraining order to allow families to remove fire arms from the possession of troubled loved ones. That seems the most sensible solution I've heard in a while. Do you have a link with details? Do the police take care of removing the firearms? That does seem like an ok idea.
that actually does make a lot of sense to me as well. This way, it's not a situation of 'oh noes, big bad gov't is taking away my guns', and it also makes sense that families would be most fit to make the judgement of whether or not someone should own a gun. The biggest problem with gun laws that I've had is that general government bans simply A) don't work very well, and B) don't really address the fact that it's people killing each other, not guns killing people. I could def get behind a policy where family members and loved ones can, i guess, basically petition to have firearms removed from an individual if they feel as though the individual poses a threat. It would also makes the whole process more focused, which I like.
|
On May 30 2014 02:23 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 02:09 Rho_ wrote:On May 30 2014 02:01 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2014 01:54 Falling wrote:majority of the people don't exactly know that we are, fundamentally all "PUA"s. Unless your definition of PUA is radically different then mine, then that is quite some projection of your values on the whole of humanity. But I think this thread has derailed far enough. Back on topic *cracks whip. All right, we will keep our comic stylings I check. Apparently CA is now trying to draft a law for a gun restraining order to allow families to remove fire arms from the possession of troubled loved ones. That seems the most sensible solution I've heard in a while. Do you have a link with details? Do the police take care of removing the firearms? That does seem like an ok idea. It's in Cnn(on my phone, so I can't link). The basic idea is that direct family can make a request to the police that the mentally ill person is a danger and should have the fire arms removed. The police then review the request and take it before a judge if they think it is necessary. If allowed, they collect the guns. Clearly ther would need to be sufficient evidence to warrant the removal of the guns. It addresses the saddest part of this case, which was that the family knew he was going to do something violent, but there was no system on place to the police to stop it. That is a issue that is worth debating.
I've found the article, here:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/28/us/california-killing-spree-legislation/
I agree with you, the fact that the family knew this was coming and was powerless to stop it is awful. I cannot imagine the horror of watching this play out knowing that it was possible in advance.
|
On May 30 2014 02:26 barbsq wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 02:09 Rho_ wrote:On May 30 2014 02:01 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2014 01:54 Falling wrote:majority of the people don't exactly know that we are, fundamentally all "PUA"s. Unless your definition of PUA is radically different then mine, then that is quite some projection of your values on the whole of humanity. But I think this thread has derailed far enough. Back on topic *cracks whip. All right, we will keep our comic stylings I check. Apparently CA is now trying to draft a law for a gun restraining order to allow families to remove fire arms from the possession of troubled loved ones. That seems the most sensible solution I've heard in a while. Do you have a link with details? Do the police take care of removing the firearms? That does seem like an ok idea. that actually does make a lot of sense to me as well. This way, it's not a situation of 'oh noes, big bad gov't is taking away my guns', and it also makes sense that families would be most fit to make the judgement of whether or not someone should own a gun. The biggest problem with gun laws that I've had is that general government bans simply A) don't work very well, and B) don't really address the fact that it's people killing each other, not guns killing people. I could def get behind a policy where family members and loved ones can, i guess, basically petition to have firearms removed from an individual if they feel as though the individual poses a threat. It would also makes the whole process more focused, which I like.
Not all would be in such a position to have a caring family though.
|
On May 30 2014 02:33 gruff wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 02:26 barbsq wrote:On May 30 2014 02:09 Rho_ wrote:On May 30 2014 02:01 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2014 01:54 Falling wrote:majority of the people don't exactly know that we are, fundamentally all "PUA"s. Unless your definition of PUA is radically different then mine, then that is quite some projection of your values on the whole of humanity. But I think this thread has derailed far enough. Back on topic *cracks whip. All right, we will keep our comic stylings I check. Apparently CA is now trying to draft a law for a gun restraining order to allow families to remove fire arms from the possession of troubled loved ones. That seems the most sensible solution I've heard in a while. Do you have a link with details? Do the police take care of removing the firearms? That does seem like an ok idea. that actually does make a lot of sense to me as well. This way, it's not a situation of 'oh noes, big bad gov't is taking away my guns', and it also makes sense that families would be most fit to make the judgement of whether or not someone should own a gun. The biggest problem with gun laws that I've had is that general government bans simply A) don't work very well, and B) don't really address the fact that it's people killing each other, not guns killing people. I could def get behind a policy where family members and loved ones can, i guess, basically petition to have firearms removed from an individual if they feel as though the individual poses a threat. It would also makes the whole process more focused, which I like. Not all would be in such a position to have a caring family though.
The proposal includes intimate partners and friends too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
