mASF post by "breakbeat"
posted on: mASF forum: General Discussion newsgroup, February 2, 2003whoa. this was NOT my intent. call me immature in my communication
skills you're probably right... i pissed off mystery and style with
the 'is style beta' post as well and with the same reasoning... i
reasoned that with mystery/style so far beyond being accused of being
'beta' since they have a certain 'alphaness-guru' status here (well
the terms alpha and beta are a bit controvertial but the point is the
same to me).
likewise, i considered you so far beyond being accused of
commercialism it was okay to make jokes like this... lesson learned,
jokes are better not placed alongside serious ACCUSATIONS like the
ones i delivered.
>I was going to come back with some snappy remarks because I really think your
>post is SILLY, but will instead just give it to you straight.
>
>First, your lecture:
>
>People who want to pay money for a product or service have the FREE WILL to
>decide to do so or not, just as those who provide such products or services
are
>free to charge whatever they want. My only complaint, ever, with anyone ever
>charging for something in this genre is if it's almost completely useless
(i.e.
>RG's Seduction Library site/books) or is a rip-off of some sort (Tony charging
>access to his "Lay Guide" which contains a truck load of content from people
>who never gave him permission to do so). Other than that, it's all opinion.
>If I think something is valuable, I'll talk about it. If it costs money, so
>what? Am I going to hide a potentially useful resource from people just
>because it's commercial? And, in the same token, I don't continue breaking my
>back on this site to be a "free advertising" vessel for those commercial
>products simply because I choose to talk about them or point people to them.
>If they offer some kind of financial reciprocation for such exposure, I'll
take
>advantage of it. BUT that does not equate to having that exposure in exchange
>for compensation (as I do still talk about commercial products regardless of
>compensation potential). If that weren't the case, you wouldn't see half the
>products I list on the site in some sections. Also, if I was swayed by
>financial matters in any way, you wouldn't be reading my recent concerns
>regarding MM WS and such.
yes... i see how my including you among the list implied
fastseduction.com and your material as 'future commercial products'.
that was not my intent.
>You have NEVER met anyone more objective than me. This is a GUARANTEE. Don't
>even test me on this.
>Maybe it's hard for you to believe, but I can't be easily bought. Your
>argument comes from an idealistic vision, yet you can't even accept the
>near-ideal I've set up for this site. You are rejecting the very thing which,
>tell me I'm wrong, has changed your life for the better (MUCH better). If
>things weren't the way they were, this site would not be in existence and you
>would be where you were 12 months ago.
i can see that fastseduction.com comes as close as anyhow possible to
free transfer of information, and i have benefited greatly from this
free service and owe it and the person who provides it, you! since
slowly i am coming to a position where i can help others i take the
opportunity. whatever i can give back to the group i do, and whatever
i don't give to the group, i don't know how, or don't know it would be
helpful, or don't have the recources yet.
>My take on your decision to lodge this long-winded rant is that you got a bit
>disgruntled that I removed a recent post of yours, the reason I posted a
recent
>"warning" here.
maybe it influenced me subconsciously in a way i am not aware of. i
can say that the style many commercial seduction products are
advertised has been disturbing me for quite a while, and also it has
been very disturbing to me to see many posts had an air of dogma,
tabooization of questioning the content of commercial products.
> I'm not interested in being liable for your idealistic
>beliefs, and I certainly don't appreciate when such liabilities undercut (GOOD
>commercial) resources which I want people to know about. It hurts those
>people's incentive to create more useful stuff, and it puts me in a bad spot.
i can see your reasoning and also arguments both for and against
copyrights... and i know about how being too idealistic can be
harmful, and that my particular beliefs i hold right now on copyrights
go completely against the way the whole western world thinks. i am
very uncertain on what would be effective in regard of withholding
information lest for profit or offering information for free.
>Frankly, after all I've done around here and, in specific ways, that I've
>helped you (not asking for anything in return), I find the way you added me
>your rant offensive, even if it was in jest.
i regret that i offended you. please let me say this.
i am very grateful that fastseduction.com exists, and i owe it
greatly. aligning you, the person who keeps fastseduction.com alive,
within a list of people who i am irritated about for the very reason
that from what i see they have a disturbing effect on what is going on
in fastseduction.com, is totally unreasonable, so unreasonable in fact
that i ASSUMED out of lack of better knowing that it would be clear
that you don't belong there. maybe you can think of yourself as never
having been mentioned.
>Now, to the straight dope:
>
>I've never charged, don't charge, and never will charge access to this web
>site. HOWEVER, I do reserve the right in the future to be FAIRLY compensated
>if I choose to create something outside of this site and use it as a support
>mechanism for the site.
my comment about 'paying more than the server' was out of line.
> ...
>How about the ever-growing cost of this site? The cost to keep this site
>doesn't remain static. The costs continue to increase. So, rather than
charge
>access (which I will never do), I need to find ever-increasing ways to support
>things. It's either that or FS101 goes away.
>
>If you want a clue about the traffic growth, just install the Alexa toolbar:
>
>http://download.alexa.com/?amzn_id=fastseduction101
>
>And those stats barely include ANY search engine traffic or traffic from other
>sites linking to FS101. Why? Because I have not yet once submitted the site
>to any search engines or actively pursued other people to link to the site. I
>could EASILY do that if my intent was to solely drive traffic for the purposes
>of generating revenue. But the traffic grows at a phenomenal rate even
without
>that, so what happens when one day the links start escalating and the load
>simply becomes too expensive and time-consuming? Either I have to find a way
>to support myself for all the hours and costs or FS101 goes away. 2 choices -
>that's it. You have a rant against that? Go live life for a while without
the
>support of others. Understand what 100% independence and responsibility truly
>mean, what the words "self-reliance" and "autonomous" really mean. THEN come
>back and give me your opinion on all this. Before then, you have no place
>dictate anything to me.
it was out of line. and i will positively find out what self-reliance
and autonomous mean.
>What happens when the time requirements to keep things up, & running, &
>constantly improved takes me 40 or more hours per week? I should donate my
>life? To YOU? What do I owe YOU?
>
>GROW UP. Adults are capable of making their own decisions.
i'm doing the best i can to grow up, jay. and fastseduction.com is
playing a major role.
f.m. breakbeat
---
snuff the canned stuff
|
