| fast seduction 101 promotion section |
 If you haven’t already visited the
 ASF forum or Player
Guide web board, now would be a good time to do
so… Don’t forget to this site! Fast Seduction 101
now has a 
product review section. |
With a biscuit from Burger King
4/18/01 5:32:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Ross:
>My Comment: The biggest obstacle is your thinking that you are too old.
>There are just too many older guys out there with hot young GF's in their
>20's & 30's -- it's clear that age is not that important to a lot of
women.
>When you were younger you didn't have the experience - now you have the
>experience and tell yourself you are too old.
A couple of bits of advice on the really younger ones: UNDER 23.
The keys to remember are, that, unlike their older sisters:
1. Younger women usually won't do ANY of the work. At least not with
an older guy. They will seldom, in the early stages, do ANY of the
calling. Even if they tell you they will and they mean it at the
time, they want you to believe (and they want to believe themselves)
that they can act this mature, like an older woman, but most can't.
So don't expect it, don't be disappointed when or if they don't. YOU
take the lead.
2. Younger women will flake at the drop of a hat. NEVER plan for
more than 48 hours in advance. TIMING is crucial. If you can do things
THAT day you meet them, great.
3. Once you get her alone and you make your move, close her then and
there if you can or you may well not see her again.
4. Doing too much on the phone with the really young ones (20, 21,
22) can trigger serious FIM. Either don't do too much heavy stuff on
the phone OR, if you do, make sure you close them that night.
Summary: TAKE THE LEAD. Expect to do ALL the calling, work, etc.
CLOSE as soon as possible. Get the timing down. Don't do too much on
the phone. Pick the adventurous and already highly sexual ones. Do
NOT be the "advice counselor" which young ones sometimes try to do
with us older guys. Also, when you pattern, they may not have too
many real values/goals/etc. to work with, so you have to use more
fantasizing, guided visualization, etc. Play up, in conversation,
how immature younger guys can be; they just want a steady girl so
they can then have a base of operations to go out and play and lay
lots of other girls. Older guys have been there, done that, want to
be more selective.
Hope this is "linear" enough for some of my more idiotic
critics....: ): ): )
>What is WRONG with B&W thinking? (Let's remember that
>B&W is only a metaphor ... yes or no is another way of thinking of it ...
or
>most accurately TRUTH or FALSE).
Because often, the choice offered of either/or is, in fact, a false
one. The choice can be CONJUNCTIVE instead of DISJUNCTIVE. Instead of it
having to be about mental rehearsal OR basic training, it can be
about using BOTH.
Get it? Randi offers strawmen and false choices, as do you.
Now, this isn't a list about epistemology, so lets let this go.
> A statement can always
>be simplified to a simple yes or no ... a truth or a falsehood. ALL
>KNOWLEDGE can be DIGITALLY ENCODED.
But it's a trick of rhetoric to reduce complex things to either/or
when in fact, there can be an "and".
You can be both aggressive AND sensitive with women. Not either/or.
> >Did you watch the ENTIRE seminar? When I first saw that early segment I
> >thought, "Oh crap, Ross is gonna filibuster for 16 hours! Why is he
>spending
> >so much time working on one person?" but by the end I saw that he was
able
> >to refer back to the frame theory throughout the weekend and every time
he
> >mentioned it, the more powerfully it stuck in my head... I've got a
thick
> >skull and appreciate that he harps on certain themes.
Repetition. Repetition. REPETITION. It's a powerful way of
inculcating MEMES. Mystery ought to know that if he studied memetics
instead of just mouthed some of the precepts. REPETITION using
multiple methods: displaying it in behavior. Working with someone in
front of the room. Metaphorically stating it in story form.
EXPLICITLY spelling out the principle in lecture and giving specific
examples of application.
> >And the stuff I ignored cuz I didn't think it was important, came back
to
> >BITE ME IN THE ASS later on. Sure the seminar starts off a little slow,
but
>
> >there's lots of red meat there. He opens up many loops, goes on
meaningful,
> >almost Proustian, digressions and at the end he closes the loops...
> >Criticizing 1/16th of a weekend seminar is not the way to go. It really
> >should be thought of as a hole.
Ha ha ha ha. PROUSTIAN? Thanks...I'm blushing.
>Ok, so I met this chick, we danced, I did Mystery's "Gummy Bears" game;
>I got her out to my truck, I did safety & comfort patterns. We ended up
>staying out together until 3 am, number close (only!!!)
Why didn't you move beyond comfort and safety? Desire? Urgency? Hmmmm....
>We agreed to get together 2 nights later, but when we talked, she declined
>and we talked instead.
Well, you created safety and comfort, and that is it. Were you
listening in my material when I said over and over and over that this
is not enough? Apparently we have a slow learner.....
>Monday Night (HOOPS)
>So, we're talking and I'm leading the conversation around to being
>spontaneous; I ask her if she can be/is spontaneous and ask her to describe
>that last time that she was extremely spontaneous. She describes herself
>and some girlfriends talking about a trip on Monday, and then the entire
>group calling in sick and taking the rest of the week to go out-of-state;
>I'm impressed.
Why be impressed? She lied her way out of work to go camping with
some girlfriends? That's not so useful to a seduction.
> We start talking about going camping together and she
>suggests that we go camping that night. I say ok, I'll come over and pick
>you up and we'll go! She says, "Sure." and starts to tell me directions to
>her place.
She's just playing with you. You took her seriously. There isn't
sufficient stuff here for her to justify really following through on
this.
>Ok, so I got played BIG TIME! She put up a HOOP and I jumped through
>it, like a good little doggie. It cost me pride & dignity, and I have no
>intention of calling her again. Ok, fine. So Mystery, where (maybe it's
>perfectly obvious to everyone but me), exactly, did I screw up? How could
I
>have handled her HOOP and changed it into her jumping through MY >HOOP?
1. Too eager to make it work
2. You did too little that night in her truck. You wanted more,
sensed you didn't do enough at the time, and this made you too eager
to move forward the next opportunity. Then she put you off a SECOND
time when you were supposed to get together (she declined, as you
say). This made you even MORE eager. It's almost as if you knew
after that first night you blew the chance to do all you should have
and now you are in a "come from behind and make it up" mode instead
of the right mode.
You might have had a shot when she declined that second time. What
was your response? Was it ass-kissing or did you call her on it or do
a take away of SOME kind?
>Let's just say that 1/3rd of his seminar was disappointing so far. I
>ASSUME the rest of the seminar is still in SEMINAR form, yes? I
>criticize the fact that the info is in seminar form to BEGIN WITH. A
>bunch of guys in a room for that long ain't a good thing
You can't teach people an entirely different way of THINKING by
having them imitate you in a club or do what you tell them to in a
club.
My seminars aren't aimed at giving guys a set number of rehearsed
moves, although we cover that as well, with word for word seduction
patterns.
They are primarily aimed at teaching guys a different way of
thinking, COMMUNICATING IN A WAY THAT CAPTURES AND LEADS THE IMAGINATION
(that can be used in many different contexts besides seduction) and a way to
change and control their state.
You are just teaching people rote imitation. Fine and dandy. Go
for it. I want to and DO give people more.
And for those who have some shyness issues, YOUR only answer is,
"BE A MAN! TOUGH IT OUT!" I think that is a stupid and primitive
answer, but if it is the only one you can provide, again, go for it.
>. In the same
>amount of time a person can get a hell of alot more in his head by
>working a club with a PUA coach on his wing.
You want to provide PERSONAL coaching for 40 people? How are you
going to do that, one on one? TRY IT SOMETIME!
> Information goes from
>brain to brain in a LINEAR way.
Oh it does? I think this is rank ignorance. In fact, learning takes
place in a lot of different ways. And learning is organized
UNCONSCIOUSLY, through the use of symbology. I think you have lots
to learn about modern learning theory.
What you are talking about is slavish imitation without
understanding underlying principles. Works fine if you are in the
EXACT situation you learned about. Otherwise...well...problems occur.
> MANY LOOPS and DIGRESSIONS make for a messy
>(and may I add NEEDLESSLY MESSY) meme complex transfer. Instead of trying
>to teach all these IDEALISMS of SEDUCTION, why not teach exactly what he
>DOES?
Conceptual learning, not "idealism". Teach the principles behind the
tools; what they are designed to do AND teach the tools. If you
can't "unpack" what you do and explain the concepts behind them, then
that is YOUR lack. As a practitioner and as a teacher. Not my
problem.
> There ARE after all, only so many
>scenarios, so many contingencies, so many routines to perform. This
>is not an INFINITE system. It's a CLOSED SYSTEM - FINITE
Humans aren't closed systems. Sooner or later you run into someone
where the MEMORIZED pattern doesn't work. That is why you need to
teach HOW it works.
> with a set
>amount of running variables. You learn faster by DOING than just by
>watching. 3 days of seminars ... that's a little rough on the ass, isn't
>it? Having to go at the pace of the slowest phobic?
Now here we have more dishonesty; who said anything about going at
the slowest pace? If anything, I go too fast and the 3 days isn't
enough to convey everything I have to convey.
> How bout going at your OWN pace?
One on one coaching, sure. But a room of 40 guys? How would that
work? More straw-men.
>I do not challenge this data. The MAJOR difference here is that the
>well defined laws of parabolas was already stored in memory by YEARS of
>familiarity with the laws of physics (I assume the ball players were
>not infants?).
That is preposterous! HA HA HA! Ridiculous on the face of it. Even
Randi would laugh at this. So, by your reasoning, people are
unconsciously familiar with the laws of physics? HA HA HA HA!
> Visualization cannot BEGIN until you have EXPERIENCE.
So we only imagine what we've already encountered? This is vapid and
stupid on the face of it.
>Mystery:
> >Totally true. He's arguing ala James Randi. Obviously one of his heroes.
>
>Why is arguing ala James Randi a bad thing? The man is KNOWN for his
>brilliant rationalizations. This statement of yours is a GREAT
>COMPLIMENT. I respect Randi as does anyone with a penchant for
>systematically investigating irrational claims. Do I respect RATIONAL
>people? Fuck, yeah!
Well, first and foremost, Randi commits the major logical howler of
arguing from specific instances to broad, general conclusions. His
conclusions do NOT logically follow his premises.
For example, he quite accurately points out Uri Geller
cheating/faking psi phenomena. The only scientific conclusion that
can logically be reached from this is that Geller cheated in the
tests Randi observed/designed.
Does Randi stop here? No, he uses Geller as a strawman to leap to
the conclusion that ALL "psi" phenomena MUST therefore be fraudulent,
or hallucinations, or misreading of data etc. etc. etc. He takes a
fairly obvious instance of fraud on the part of some person or
persons and concludes an entire range of phenomena is IMPOSSIBLE and
that any one with any personal experience of such things MUST be
wrong, hallucinating, etc., etc.
Same kind of bum reasoning as you, Mys.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Joseph:
>From: "intelligent woman would truly appreciate?
>Her: Oh, my god - YES! You really know your stuff don't you? :D
>And then we actually had a long conversation on how almost all the men out
>there are so selfish and don't really know what women want, etc. he he
>You have to realize that SS isn't about how to 'trick' a woman into doing
>what you want - it's really getting to know women and how they think, so
>that you in your communication may speak to her on her own level...
Yes it is about communicating, but how did she recognize, in Oslo fuckin'
Norway where the 1st language isn't even English-
I mean, was this a girl so scared of someone getting in her precious panties
that she memorized the patterns herself in defense? I mean, I am a user of
SS, and I'm not sure that I could recognize beyond the shadow of a doubt NLP
Patterns in a speech - sometimes I wonder whether a politician said it on
purpose or not...I'm just saying that it seems like to me that if a girl
recognizes, she must have friggin' bought the $200 tapes - where else can
the public hear them except on those talk shows Ross did - I mean she could
have read about SS in Playboy or one of those Mags Ross gave interviews
to....but that doesn't tell you enough to recognize patterns. Do you think
that she got it from one of those free pirate sites that post Patterns, like
Maniac High? Still seems you'd have to really study to recognize, because
there's no audio. Or do you think her and her girlfriends bought the
friggin' tapes to protect themselves?
By the way, that was a great way to deal with the situation. Did you ask her
how she knew?
Joseph Replying to Mystery
>I do not challenge this data. The MAJOR difference here is that the
>well defined laws of parabolas was already stored in memory by YEARS of
>familiarity with the laws of physics (I assume the ball players were
>not infants?). Once you play Pacman long enough, you can DREAM Pacman
>(simulate it in the mind with a fair degree of accuracy). But you can't
>simulate it accurately til you've PLAYED the game yourself. The rules
>must be internalized first. So for something as mundane as
>internalizing the rules of natural arcs on earth, such information can
>be simmed quite quickly (such basic information may even be hardwired
>into the brain by evolution). But for a complex set of rules like
>social interaction in a memetic (cultural) environment, you have to
>FAMILIARIZE yourself with the rules before you can run sims in your
>head. So Mystery is NOT wrong. All you have to do is EXPERIENCE >FIRST
and THEN you can read the books and simulate scenarios to your >heart's
content.
>BASIC TRAINING FIRST! Without that your sims are utter
>fantasies. Visualization cannot BEGIN until you have EXPERIENCE. Here
>is a way of looking at it: do you think I would invent a mental model
>WITHOUT EVER HAVING APPROACHED A WOMEN? I mean, I >COULD (look at Ray's
book
>OUTFOXING the FOXES for an example of this) but you think it will have
>anything to do with reality? In a similar way, you wouldn't expect to
>encode someone else's model of reality (SS or MM) into your skull without
>first knowing how and where the model fits in RELATION to reality would
>you? But then again, I'm just a B&W thinker.
Good point. One thing that I'm talking about though, is being able to tell
your stories and Ross's patterns without sounding like a robot or Timothy
Leary's Trancemaster. I have no problem at all talking to the finest
supermodel on the planet, because I have a devil-may-care personality, but
sometimes I find myself thinking "why should I bother" because all I do with
girls is fluff talk/try to elicit values, not supplicate, and follow the
basic rules of HTGTWYDIB (How To Get The Women You Desire Into Bed), WOMEN
by Maxim Books, Idiot's Guide to Seduction, and various stored articles and
websites- i.e. the simple seduction strategies....no NLP, MM, or SS. I
don't use the latter three because I've recorded myself repeatedly (yes,
Mystery, alone) and still don't feel like it sounds unrehearsed enough to do
in real life. Both types of stories are generally and almost always TOTALLY
PLOTLESS, which brings me to the subject of your linear/non-linear argument.
Neither MM stories or SS patterns, as far as I can tell, are linear at all!
Ross says we need to think more non-linear, and I believe he's got a point
because maybe that's my problem - I can't figure out why the hell I'd want
to tell a girl that I found bear shit in the woods - makes me feel like I'm
bragging cause I think it's cool that I can sniff shit and tell a bear's
around.......I haven't been able to figure out an excuse to tell someone
about Incredible Connections who I just met. I haven't read as much MM as
SS, I'll confess, but I'd love to find out where to learn more about it.
So, anyway, I could walk out the door right now and meet 10 beautiful girls
without thinking, but it would be mostly luck as to whether or not I hooked
up with ANY of them because I don't use these seduction devices and I only
try to close when it feels "right." So I do sit in my place alot and try to
act out the patterns in the mirror, or use them on ICQ or internet
MatchMaker services, to get the hang of it......so far I still don't feel
like I can get away with using them - even on ICQ some women say - "Sorry
but I'm really not interested in this." Some women, of course, really did
it, and I've had offers of sex/dates from chicks on the internet, but I had
offers of sex/dates from girls on the internet before SS, too...
Any comments?
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Mystery:
She put up a HOOP and I jumped through it, like a good little doggie. It
cost me pride & dignity, and I have no intention of calling her again. Ok,
fine. So Mystery, where (maybe it's perfectly obvious to everyone but me),
exactly, did I screw up? How could I have handled her HOOP and changed it
into her jumping through MY HOOP?
Well, I like the spontaneity thing for sure. So you are on your way and
planning on getting her. I would have said, "Ok, don't be fucking with
me cause I'm well on my way and it would be really shitty of you to
fuck me up when I'm almost there. Where do you live?"
That's about it. Seriously, I wouldn't have expected her NOT to follow
through (but then again, chicks SUCK sometimes.)
I have about 10 #'s on my ON THE GO list and NONE of them are panning
out. There is this one chick I got the # a week ago and called her and
left a message and no reply and last night I bumped into her and she just
bitch shield ignored me and it's bad cause she is particularly hot.
Makes me want to work on my body, if you can believe it. There was a
chick from Montreal who gave me her # for when I visit the city and it
was all good but as soon as I brought the talk to sex (I DID have IOI's,
after all) she just shut down the conversation - I think I've been
over qualifying myself lately cause I was talking with lots of people
and I think I basically conveyed too much social proof. It's like they
get weary of my sincerity if SO MANY people think I'm great. All it
takes is a person who remembers me to approach and say "this guy is
AWESOME" to overqualify me. Things are good/great til they can't talk to me
cause people beg for my attention. This shit works on 10's but on 8's
and 9's? Hell, I'd be VERY HAPPY right now with a couple 9's! Oh well,
poor me. At least ONE of these #'s has to pan out finally! If not
that particular hottie then at least another ... there is another
particular hottie on my list and it's not closing properly which is sad
cause she is HOT! I mean LTR HOT. It hurts - she is so cute! Do so many
girls dig me but not others?!!! I just don't get it...the solution is to
just KEEP GOING without looking back. Hell, I have two more #'s for only 3
hours work, not bad. I have lots of girls PENDING after all. I think
that's the only realistic solution ... don't look back. Most of the work
comes from your first
impression and then it's mostly a matter of hoping the seed you sewed
will germinate cause there ain't much you can do when you call them and
only get their machine.
>Surely some women could be closed sooner and
>you could still retain the same freedoms -- but then, I believe that
>anything along these lines is possible when you step past limiting beliefs.
I am in agreement with some women needing to take longer with. Or
rather ... it's simply takes less of my energy to WAIT rather than
FORCE. (I use FORCE loosely, RAY!)
>Ross is absolutely right, a host of other problems like prostitution, kids,
>etc.etc. You're on the inside looking out and therefore affected by the
>lifestyle.
Oh gawd, no, bro. The lifestyle simply is NOT what you paint is all. My
GF is pretty tame. I think strippers are easier to keep than say
bartenders or shooter girls.
>Doesn't your infallible logic tell you that, or are you too close
>to the problem? I was on the inside for three years and I had one hell of
>good time, but I would trade all that today for what I've reclaimed and
that
>is a normal existence with women who can FEEL real emotion and return that
>emotion with great enthusiasm.
I hear what you are saying and I guess there IS a familiarity to a
lifestyle to blind people but either way in my personal case the
lifestyle is pretty normal. She's more STUDENT that STRIPPER. It's also
in HER head - how she views herself. Actually that MAY be a good
question to ask a stripper: "How do you VIEW yourself?"
>Strippers suck in bed. Not to mention you can never turn your back on then.
Strippers DO NOT SUCK IN BED! Seriously they are some of the best lays
I've ever had! Performers, too! As for the 'don't turn your back' ...
there's some truth there. I have solved that through my "if you don't
like me, fuck off" attitude.
>It's the things you don't know that will rock your "belief system" and it's
>just a matter of time. Strippers will be strippers just like women will be
>women but the degree of separation is immense. Call me back in a year,
>dude.
My first stripper was 5 years ago. My current GF is one. I guess in a year
we will see what happens.
>I'm betting your arrogance will eventually catch up with you in this world.
>BTW, the two strippers I'm fucking right now have boyfriends/husbands that
>are as SECURE as you. I'm not telling you how to live your life, I don't
>care what you do. But don't defend the choices you've made in an attempt to
>water down a lifestyle that is as ugly as it gets.
Again, it is my opinion that having a stripper GF is GREAT! Your ego is
satiated, she has some cash to have fun, sex is GREAT, and yes, there are
the typical 'head issues' that you get with ANY girl of beauty. I guess
where you and I focus on are the difference between those strippers that
strip and go home to their BF's and those that like to party, party, party
with their stripper friends in after hours clubs. By all means keep your
girl in line but don't DETOUR around the stripper type just cause you THINK
the lifestyle MAY be bad. Strippers are fucking WORTH the trouble ... to
me. : ) Just so you know, I have fallen in love with MOST of the girls I
went with. I minimize the importance of bonding with girls in my posts and
replies but I'm about feeling connected more than getting fucked.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
GameMaster:
Cliff, I need your ass down here bad. My wing has deserted me for
this chick Melissa who he is never going to fuck and I am trying my level
best
to get rid of Natalie but she ain't getting the message. Yeah, I'm tired of
her already.
Think I pushed the wrong buttons cause apparently I am the chosen one. Most
guys would give their eye teeth, I'd give everything I own just to get rid
of her. She's making me insane. The night I got back from Mom's house she
came over with dinner at midnight although I resisted and begged her to wait
until the next day...anyway, after a three hour session she want to talk
about kids! You heard me. Apparently, through the grapevine she is planning
a September wedding (a birthday present to dad) and at least 2.5 children!
Nothing is
enough to keep me in this insane relationship. I swear, if my attention is
diverted for two minutes she starts screaming and throwing shit....crazy.
Let's see, she broke up with me again twice last nite but kept coming over
to tell me she never wanted to see me again. THEN, she just fucking walks
in the door this AM with a goddamn biscuit from Burger King like nothing
happened....that is until I told her I didn't want no fucking biscuit and I
sure as shit didn't want her! More tears and yelling and door slamming only
to return 15 minutes later to ask what time I wanted to meet her for dinner
tonite. I swear I think I'm gonna have to move to fuckin' Canada! Think I
may have gone
too far with this one. More insanity to follow.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Mr. Icerigger:
>Hey question - anyone here ever made a girl orgasm just by activating an
>anchor? What's a good anchor to plant for that? I have found an erogenous
>zone on Mary (evil sister HB) and it's great because it works every time
the
>way I touch... haha so I just need to find a good way to anchor it. I am
>thinking of a combination of voice, breathing and touch....
I haven't with an anchor, but I have by direct suggestion. I've done this
successfully with a few women - sometimes just over the phone. Basically,
once they're already aroused, I tell them that I'm going to count from 1 to
10, and at 10, they will orgasm. Then you start counting, and in-between
each count, continue to make suggestions about the building of the
intensity - water filling up behind the dam... mid level... full... the dam
is starting to crack... leak... 10 cum now - like all that water stored up
behind the dam bursting forth... etc.
Once you get that then you can go on and try for "streaming" orgasms. Tell
her you're going to count from 1-20. At 10 the first orgasm will begin.
Then from 10-20, at each count you will have an orgasm.
Also, you can ask - okay, on a scale of 1-10, how intense was the orgasm?
An 8? Okay, we're going to do it again - and this one will be a 12 in
intensity.
I've also successfully trimmed down the count. First one, 1-10. Second
one,
1-5, third, 1-3, finally 1 - just the command to cum now.
Your mileage may vary... every chick is different.
Another thing I might mention. I've been learning overt hypnosis and
practicing with my GF. I've hypnotized her twice now. Second time she went
very deep and was definitely somnambulistic. I tried planting a
post-hypnotic suggestion (we discussed this beforehand) for her to cum when
she hears me say a certain phrase. However, this didn't quite take. All
that happened (she tells me) is that hearing the phrase just made her
really,
really horny.
I talked this over with a friend on #PUA who is a master hypnotist. He
mentioned that orgasm is an extremely kinesthetic response and it's
something you need to work up to. Suggest feelings of hot, cold, small
motor functions, etc. Plus reinforcing the suggestion repeatedly. With
this information, I'm very confident that we'll be able to get the
post-hypnotic suggestion to work next time. Will keep ya'll posted.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
| cliff’s list advertisment section |
| Cliff’s Comment: For those of you who are
just reading about this for the first time, I decided a couple of emails ago to add links
to these emails. The idea would be to get enough money in to hire someone to take
over the administrative work (and also to buy things which would improve this list, such
as proper mailing list software) for this list. If you were going to buy the product
anyway, just use the link that appears below and you are helping to keep this list going
at no extra cost to anyone. NON SEDUCTION-RELATED:
RECOMMENDED:
NOT REVIEWED YET:
|
| cliff’s free plugs section |
Cliff’s Comment: The following are all
recommended but clicking on the links and buying from them doesn’t send any money back
here (it is also recommended that the sponsors of these sites consider setting this up —
from the little experience I have had since I started the commercial section a couple of
weeks ago, I think you are missing a lot of business by not doing this):
|
INFORMATION ABOUT THIS NEWSLETTER ARCHIVE:
This is an archive of a free e-mail list relating to seduction,
maintained by "Clifford". Your comments are requested, encouraged, and
greatly appreciated (note that comments from different people are separated by
IIIIIIII’s). If you know anyone who would like to be added to the list, or if you
would like to be removed from the list, send an e-mail asking to be added or removed to cli***f@cl***.com[ ? ]
and it will be done. If you would like to be added to the free joke list, just
ask. For those of you unfamiliar with the references to Speed Seduction»Â®, Clifford
highly recommends your visiting http://www.seduction.com/. For those interested in seeing
the previous e-mails that were sent out ("the archives"), they are available on
request to Clifford or, preferably, can be browsed and searched at the archive at http://www.fastseduction.com/cliff/.
By your accessing this archive, you understand that the information contained in within is an expression of opinions, and they should be used for personal entertainment purposes only. You are responsible for your own behavior, and none of anything you read herein is to be considered legal or personal advice. You also understand and agree that any products you may order as a result of your reading about them in this archive are produced and sold independently from us and that any complaints, disputes or other issues which you may have with the sponsors of these products are to be dealt with directly with said sponsors and we are not responsible in any way whatsoever for any issues which you may have with them. If you are not in agreement with any of this, please leave his site now.
DISCLAIMERS:
This newsletter and the newsletter archive in general is reproduced here
with Clifford’s permission. Visual enhancements and search features have been added
by the fastseduction.com webmaster to facilitate the reading and researching of the
content. The raw text as it appears here is exactly as it appeared in the original
e-mail newsletter. Products, services, or external web sites mentioned or linked to
in this archive does not denote endorsement of those items. The contents reprinted
here are the opinion of the original writer(s) and are not necessarily the opinion of, nor
endorsed by, the owner(s) or operator(s) of fastseduction.com. The archive
enhancements are generated automatically and there may be occasions where the visual cues
don’t correlate exactly with the textual context; most of the time, though, the
enhancements are pretty accurate. The archive is updated as regularly as possible,
whenever new newsletters are sent out.
