mASF post by "Phenix"
posted on: mASF forum: Advanced Discussion, April 4, 2005On 4/25/05 1:50:00 PM, Delta Male wrote:
>I mean, I know we all tell new
>guys who ask dumb questions to
>GFTOW and RTFM, but have you
>actually read it lately?
YES.
And I periodically reread them in the background permanently.
>This was inspired by a post on
>the Boston Lair, where a
>newbie was told to RTFM after
>asking a basic question about
>a shit-test, and I realized
>that I hadn't read the manual
>myself in over two years. I
Swinggcat better for shit tests management, however :)
>Some of the basic stuff, like
>"Be the Alpha/Dominant Male"
>and "Women are looking for
>Great Sex" would be good for
>new guys to see. Also, stuff
>about using kino, not talking
>about conspiracy theories
>during fluff talk, etc would
>all be good stuff for a newbie
>to know.
I agree with you. Gold, even if after a little time on the board these could
seem almost childish :)
Thing to remember is that what counts is not what it brings to our current PU
"level" but also to newcomers who have not the same level as we, and who come
with not the same level as we did.
>But there's lots of stuff in
>TFM which is frankly, awful.
>It comes from the bad old days
>of uASF where the gurus were
>NLP weirdos who's solution to
>everything was another canned
>pattern. Lots of the stuff in
>there conceivably could work
>for some guys...but they're
>frankly really unneccesary,
>and a direct approach would
>work just as well if not
>better.
;p
>You really don't need to risk
>a ten-car pileup in order to
>meet a chick.
lol. Writer did not say to not have a look back before stopping :)
Remember that newcomers are supposed to think a little, and should rather
understand the principle than to reproduce dumbly.
> Also, there's
>lots of canned patterns in
>here.
Right, but also useful as samples (if only to learn how to generate specific
emotions).
>I can just seem some
>newbie wasting months learning
>patterns, thinking that
>they'll actually work to
>attract girls to him.
I agree with this one.
General principles and stuff for evocation and creating / leading emotional
states would be far more useful.
>ANALytically.
;D
>TFM barely makes any mention
>of the MM which is so popular
>on the board right now, not to
>mention the next generation of
>techniques to this board,
>natural game» as described by
>Woodhaven in his post in
>advanced.
Advanced is the word. Prizing is some kind of stuff that is neither talked of
in it, but remember the guide tend to be seen/used as fundamentals.
>So, in conclusion, I think
>some revision of TFM is in
>order. I think we should
>retire the current manual, and
>store it as "the old school
>player guide."
What about labelling "fundamentals" and prepairing an "advanced guide" or
"state of the art"?
> Then, we could
>have a new manual made with
>the compiled posts of
>different gurus who use
>different systems (MM, GWM,
>natural/direct).
Nonono. Compiled posts are hard to read.
Rather a HIGH USABILITY content (look a little at Jakob Nielsen stuff about
this).
Maybe through a presenation of the pros & cons, style principles and destined
public of each system.
Point is that somebody with time and will to do so should try to analyze ASF/FS
typologies and propose a model to display and organize this so that it is
efficient.
>Then, we could actually tell newbies to
>RTFM without pointed them to a
>bunch of outdated, ineffective
>SS techniques.
They are ineffective for those that don't need (and you are no more, as most
people in Advanced :) or don't practice them (even if, ok, a little cleaning
would be in order).
Idea of revision is good one however.
Even in Ijjji's reply (with all due respect and admiration ;), I see that we
all tend here to think by what _we_ need, not what someone else need. It is a
frequent mistake we all tend to make on this board.
But I'd go further into this fitting content need matter.
On this board everyone should each time ask self if what he reads real applies
to his case or not. Ok.
But for newbies for FS101, and rAFC with plethora of methods from which to
chose, even for active PUAs willing to experiment different styles, it would be
GREAT and really efficient to find the content that would best fit their
needs... just because it has been a little more properly organized and
presented.
Just imagine, each of you, how it would be great to save time, even if only 25%
of the time you spend doing archive searches that hundreds of others have done
before !
Why would not gurus or other passionate people here to work as taskforces on
archives and external stuff to present THEMATIC topics on the whole spectre of
ASF useful content ?
Why not take a little time and reflexion to calibrate content so that one is
not drown into the tremendous amount of stuff here ? (it is a general Content
Management / Knowledge Management problem, not specific to ASF :)
When I think about the hundreds of great minds here that are doing everyday
their own market in the archives and keep in mind extraordinary stuff taken
from there.. It makes me dreamy.
Don't you think that such taskforces would QUICKLY bring great, dense and
exhaustive content to work with ?
It would bring to us The State of the Art.
My bet is that everyone here would find this colossal task worth, even the most
successful PUA masters.
Phenix
"In the old days books were written by men of letters and read by the public.
Now-a-days books are written by the public and read by nobody."
Oscar Wilde, Maxims for the Use of the Overeducated
|
