Joshe

Please, do tell!

@Leo Gura what is being done to improve the quality of this community? Imagine if you had 20 great posters (you've currently got like 4). A lot of people are looking for higher quality engagement.

Not really.

I'm actually shocked by how often Emerald's articulations match my own intuitions that I myself never unpacked. Upon examination, most of what she says almost always tracks with my own intuition and understanding. Which leads me to believe she's actually pulling it out from her own intuition and lived experience, as opposed to an adopted/biased logical framework. That's the vibe I get. I think she's probably just very good at understanding her intuition. To make them legible to others necessitates linearity, logic, or a bit of intellectualizing.

Hunger

@tvaeli I have to agree with Leo. I've been involved with website design for a couple decades now, and there's something called visual design fundamentals and user interface (UI) design fundamentals. You're breaking many rules. A complex UI only works after the user has bought in and has a reason to explore it. Your homepage or landing page should be about selling the idea/making the offer clear. So I'd go back to AI with something like: - Can you take screenshots of my site and let me know what design and UI fundamentals are violated? - Can you help me get clear on the offer so we can figure out how to present this? - Can we explore information architecture? FYI, sounds/music should be very intentional with websites. You definitely don't want to have users hear viking songs when they come to your site. This isn't mere opinion.

👍

Sorry for butting in, none of my business, but can you elaborate on what specifically you want elaborated? I'm asking because it always feels like you're trying to insinuate or hint at something, but I don't know because you don't share enough of your yourself. I suspect it's to do with being paranoid of other people's intentions. For example, the other day you insinuated I was doing frame control on Natasha and you're always talking about how we don't know who the person behind the profile really is. Just a perspective of someone who's been perplexed by your online behavior. Take it or leave it. I'm guessing you'll leave it, lol. Either way, I mean no disrespect. Just trying to resolve my confusion.

@Natasha Tori Maru Thanks for explaining. That tracks with your previous reports. Yeah, I knew there was a woman in there 😝 What makes the difference is what I'm interested in. I'm sure it's nothing super exciting. Probably mostly explained by traits.

It's interesting because these are actually two archetypes that exist in the wild. Some women are receptive even if they don't plan on doing anything with you. They'll let you play your game while knowing it and they won't tell you they know it, and you should be able to tell when that's going on. Maybe they're waiting to see if you can catch on. lol I love it.

It actually would be interesting to figure out what is the difference in Natasha's perspective where she's receptive to being approached so long as it meets her standards, and the other girls who aren't interested in that approach at all. Like, try to answer this question. I have intuitions about the difference, but not sure. I suspect Natasha is a bit on the wild side a little bit. Can't unpack what exactly that means at the moment, but it has to do with spontaneity and potentially a specific flavor of openness. Almost like she actually wants it happen or welcomes it because it's an opportunity to be excited/interested in something new. Just the first few things that popped into my head. See, this inquiry is gold because if you spend the time figuring this out, you enhance your models of women and therefore can see the patterns when you're out and about and you aren't stuck with a one-size-fits-all approach. Imagine being able to get a read on both and calibrating for what you think would work on them specifically.

Maybe it slots in under "naive" but to me, the biggest selection effect problem I see is it selects for women with low discernment. Like, if you are looking for a girlfriend, you don't want her to be dimwitted or unable to see what's going on. I was with a girl like that once and it was so frustrating to have to explain the most basic of things to her. She started calling me "daddy", and not in a fun sexy way, lol.

You could see those as data points. Collect a thousand and you're probably doing well. Or just theorize from macro surface behavior, up to you.

@Monster Energy, @NewKidOnTheBlock Chill bros. This question isn't bad at all. Shows humility and willingness to learn.

My boy's got that 20-year old dick.

I find rubbing one out brings me to my senses.

Used to play it on the jukebox all the time. And this one: Always gets the house rockin

😂

Lol, you're a fuckin trip bro. You and those pet roosters.

I think if you want women to flow abundantly, it matters at any age. And Randy never "developed". So the thing isn't to develop into Randy. It's to learn to be yourself and calibrate where necessary. You may never be cooler than Randy, but you don't need to be. Of course, you don't need a social circle to get a woman. You could pick one up at the dog park. There are plenty of women out there looking for men. You just have to put yourself around them and strike up convo at some point. Dog park isn't bad actually, especially if you have a boy dog trying to hump hers, lol. Good icebreaker.

Why not just put your effort into making friends at the clubs first? and once everyone likes you, you can walk in and never have to deal with that problem? Seems a lot easier. When a dude walks into a club, the most likely reason why he's there is because he's on the prowl, and everyone knows it. So, it's not simply that talking to people makes it look like you have friends which raises your status. It's more so that it shields you from that perception that you're an asshole on the prowl and trying to manipulate people. I think this is an important concept: "Psychological reactance The core idea is that people have a baseline motivation to protect their sense of behavioral freedom. When they perceive that freedom being threatened or eliminated — even by a well-intentioned suggestion — they experience an aversive arousal state (reactance) that motivates them to restore the freedom, often by doing the opposite of what's being pushed, or by wanting the forbidden thing more. The kid-and-veggies example is textbook. "Eat your broccoli" converts broccoli from a neutral option into a compliance demand, so refusing becomes the way to reassert autonomy. Serve the broccoli without commentary and the freedom-threat never registers, so there's nothing to push against. The food itself was never really the variable. The moment a woman detects that an interaction has an agenda — that she's being worked — the frame shifts from "conversation" to "compliance attempt," and reactance fires. Her attention goes from evaluating the guy to defending her autonomy against the extraction attempt. That's a losing position regardless of how polished the technique is, because the technique itself is the freedom threat." Natural socializing removes this barrier. When 10 other people feel safe around you, that's evidence she can too.

Nah. If you're the cool guy, then you're literally the cool guy who everyone likes. You know how Leo talks about "play"? Well, that's what it's like, except in a social group. But here, the "play" isn't designed to get laid. It's for fun. And when women and entire groups of people love being around you, romantic relationships flow easily from that. So, you can be a dork, but you still have to be interesting and put yourself out there. If it doesn't come very natural, that just means you have to calibrate more. A good example of this is Dexter Morgan. Awkward mf. Not the life of the party but interesting and socializes. Has women in his inner circle. Gets mad puss.

My baby beside me at the wheel. lol But yeah, there were guys like that in my group as well and even ones that weren't particularly attractive were getting good-looking girls. The "how" was obvious: because how fun/interesting they were. As an introvert, those guys kinda gave me permission to come out of my shell and have the courage to play around be goofy, and to my surprise, it worked.