Drck And Zac Are Very Blunt. We Are Just Boot Camps Compared to Real World

[trashKENNUT]

Richard,

nd you, Zac, I'm not understanding why you're pissed off or angry so if you can properly explain that I'll happily put my two-cents in.

Finally. You listen. I want people to listen. Thank you. I don't want people to dismiss easily this people you all call "bitter". They are not bitter. Not all of them are all out bitter.

They are just not.

My concern is when people are not teached on fundamentals. Chase done an amazing excellent job on body language fundamentals. But my concern is people do not teach 'law of the jungle' fundamentals, what is basically i link onto the post, the conversation with me and Chase.

I hate when people dismiss others just like that like they are retarded. I get that You guys can't help everyone but if we don't teach 'law of the jungle' fundamentals in dating (to put it in a way), then how can you blame people and dismiss people that they are idiots? They don't know. They just don't know.

Which makes us no different from liberals or the right wing conservatives.

damn it my political language starts appearing.

Zac

 

[Richard]

Zac,

And what do you consider to be "Law of the Jungle" fundamentals?

What is it that guys aren't being taught?

 

[Richard]

Drck,

Again, you're concerning yourself with something that is pretty trivial to me, and it's something I consider to be pretty trivial in general. All you're doing is taking on a narrow-minded stance which is set up in a way that justifies being narrow-minded; that's a person living in a bubble trying to convince everybody else that they also need to live in a bubble. "Red Pill" has set itself in such a way that anybody who disagrees is immediately cast as "Still being plugged in" or "Not knowing the truth, yet" and, historically, any platform that adopted that stance was full of shit or turned into a cult. I can take your same argument and use it against you, it's frivolous.

On top of that, I like how you're only taking one point I've made and arguing against it, only. If you want to have this debate and keep it going then refute all the points I'm making, not just the ones you feel you can compete with.

Also, you're taking statistics and using them as absolute proof without understanding variables that affect that statistic or the statistic is so broad that it doesn't mean anything. In other words, the statistics you're throwing around, and the sources you're citing don't reflect anything accurately. It's like saying "Half of all marriages end in divorce" or "Data shows that New York was ranked #1 in traffic-related deaths (966) this year, and thus, is the most dangerous state to drive in" or "China emits more greenhouse gases annually than any other country making them the most responsible for fucking us over" or "50% of men over 40 have Erectile Dysfunction" or "80% of dentists recommend Colgate."

 

[Drck]

"you're concerning yourself with something that is pretty trivial to me, and it's something I consider to be pretty trivial in general"

...perhaps you should be concerned about these things especially if you want to be therapist... Those are serious things, yet you claim that they are trivial... Just because some guys get bitter through Red Pill doesn't mean that all guys are bitter, nor that all Red Pill is just some made up nonsense.... There is lots of truth in Red Pill, and the truth is rather not pleasant because it shows our society under different light than one is used to... Red Pill is many times based on experiences of guys who've been around longer than GC, guys who've been in different relationships...

Pointing out important things that influence lives of many guys is not living in the bubble, I quite disagree with your statement. It's the opposite, it is broadening knowledge and understanding of environment and people we live with... knowledge is important, seeing the same thing from different points of view is important, understanding human (in those case female's) behavior is also very important...

You are choosing to see the world through pink glasses, yet saying I am the one who is narrow minded... check your logic, that just doesn't make sense... I can't obviously make anyone see things they don't want to see, but that doesn't mean the reality is not there... Nobody is talking about Colgate or traffic deaths in NY, rather I presented links to sites that are pointing out problems I mentioned in various comments, e.g. Obesity, raising number of single moms, lower testosterone levels in in today's young generation of guys and so forth...

--------------

Added: You know me, I like analogies... The same way car is not just 4 wheels and motor that somehow runs on gas when you press the pedal to the metal, but rather hundreds of other parts and years of engineering, the same way girls are not just cute, sexy and silly creatures that love sex... We are talking about quite complex human behavior, whether it is one individual person or the whole society... I'm simply pointing out the complexity, the many faces of the same cute creatures we call girls... Knowing more (about cars, girls or other) doesn't really make me in anyway bitter, that is incorrect conclusion...

 

[Richard]

Just agree to disagree, Drck.

I'm more concerned about how everybody can feel meaning in their lives so, if somebody came to me for therapy I would only care about these external forces if they were relevant to helping the client grow. The reason I don't care too much about this is because I think everybody is responsible for their own happiness and meaning so, even if the status of men has diminished or women are more empowered, etc. it's up to every individual to overcome that.

People are too concerned with making life easy and painless and I think that's the most unproductive way to live. So, I see the world through anything but rose-colored glasses because I see so many people wasting their potential and opting to just survive.

So, it's not like I'm unaware of what you're saying or trying to explain, I just don't care all that much about it because I feel that bigger issues exist in the world and I focus my attention on those issues. I certainly can't fault you (even though my bias wants to) for thinking or believing anything. Sorry for any animosity that came across but we just don't see eye to eye on things.

-Richard

 

[trashKENNUT]

Richard,

Numbers Not according to superiority. Every fundamental is important.

Rule 1: Control How You Perceive Your Attention To Another Person/Elaborate An Idea or the mentality is:
"How Do I know That You not Bullshitting me with this post?"

Like now, I need to be skeptical as to why you ask me to elaborate this post. How do i know that you not bullshitting me with this post? This is the secret weapon. Shoutout To Chase, THANK YOU CHASE. When he said that the serial naturals have no empathy, I confirm this is one of the mentalities or how most naturals operate.

Rule 2: Why Should I Trust You?/People Lie All The Time

This is an interesting conversation between me and Drck.

https://boards.girlschase.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15522&p=77759&hilit=bullshitting#p77759

Rule 3: Everything is IDEAS.

https://boards.girlschase.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15562

Rule 4: Principle/Fundamentals vs Technical Issue

Fundamentals and Technical stuff often mix though it is way different. To make this easier, read the full conversation between me and Drck here.

https://boards.girlschase.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15522&p=77759&hilit=bullshitting#p77759

Rule 6: There are 5 Realities When You Interact With One Person But There's only 1 REALITY.

Given an example: Zac is talking to Richard. Here are the 5 Realities.

1)Zac's Thought Process (the real person/human)
2)Zac's Projects a Reality (Delusion/what Zac thinks but not who he is)
3)Richards's Thought Process (the real person/human)
4)Richard's Projects a Reality (Delusion/what Richard thinks but not who he is)
5)Reality (Tangible reality)

Scary eh?

Because Zac, which is me, i am putting a character, but you don't know where i am coming from. and then there's Richard, you. You putting a show or projects a question, but there's you as a human and i don't know your intentions of asking this qns..

Then there's the absolute, reality. Tangible Reality. It's just a name but to distinct it from other 4 realities, or to be precise, 2 delusions and 2 thought processes/human.

Here is the secrets of naturals. You can literally bomb this with people. It's a nuke, a real nuke.

Zac

 

[trashKENNUT]

See...

seee?

Rule 1 happens. You didn't respond. Obviously you can be busy and what have you but that's the whole ppl need to understand.

Love it. You just did this whether intention or not. I just won the WWE CHAMPIONSHIP.

Zac

 

[Ezio]

Hello, guys!

I always follow Drck's and Richard's posts very closely because I think there is a lot you can benefit from them.

From what I can understand, I see that a part of the debate is going on about the general atmosphere in the world regarding some issues with women's behaviour. I see that Drck is concerned about how that is and could be affecting us negatively and it is important to be dealt with, while Richard is saying this concern might be too trivial to be concerned with because one can function and succeed despite this, also being able to not carry the negative feelings attached to it and see it in a different light. In my opinion, maybe both of you are right - maybe you don't need to agree to disagree at all. I am talking about the basic points you are trying to make, I am not commenting on everything you have said.

How come you might both be right?

Well, lately, I am realizing the "truth" about the bubbles Richard mentioned. The bubbles represent the realities. Therefore, there can be more than one reality. Some are more common than others, some more dominating. This is why the rich cannot understand the poor and the happy, the sad one. They live in different realities. So, each seems to have their own reality, with some having more similiar realities with some others, but there is also a global reality which has the potential to affect everybody. Imagine the world running out of water, or a big fire catching every corner of the earth in 3 minutes. That is a shared global reality. Seconds before it, you can decide to shut down your mind and escape in meditation or something like that, but I doubt that 99(.99)% of people would be able to do that, facing such a horror event. This is an extreme example but that was to illustrate the intensity of a dominating reality. Relationship dynamic and power war realities(radical feminism, weak men "syndrome" etc..) might not have such high intensity but they still have the ability to affect a lot of people, but since their intensity is not extreme, we can still escape it and live in a desired reality of our own. Lately, I think that is possible. However, it does not mean anybody can. Some can just have mental, emotional, resource deficiencies and sometimes there is so little or nothing at all that can be done.

Thus, we can decide to approach this problem both ways(Drck's way and Richard's way) or by mixing both. We can get bitter and frustrated and get ourselves invested emotionally and actively towards trying to change this global reality(let's take women behaving radically as an example), or we can stay back, do some engineering as to find ways to benefit from this reality without getting affected by it - seeing girls as silly and cute, thereby creating a reality of our own which consists but is not affected by the global reality because you don't recognize it. But still, there is no guarantee you will never be affected at some point, the guarantee might be 99% but never 100%. Also, there are more people affected than there are not. Empathy, insecurity and also pride kick in here. You might feel bad about the weak men out there or you will not agree with the thing that women are ruling when biologically they don't want to and they are unhappy because they are doing so. Or you just wanna include a goal in life as to make some sense out of the nihilistic nature of life and you just wanna recognize the radical feminism and do something about it. This way, we come to the third alternative approach, by mixing both, which means that you have a reality of your own that you feel peaceful and content within, but you also wanna do something about the less lucky people out there(or whatever the motive is), so since you cannot help each one individually, you decide to join the movement as a whole.

This is my opinion on that.

I think Drck is talking from the "mixed reality" perspective, while Richard is talking from the "independent personal reality" perspective. You might argue which is better than other to live with, but you can't underrate the existence of each.

Respectfully,

-Ezio.

 

[Richard]

Nah Zac,

I didn't reply because what you said still doesn't make coherent sense to me. If you want to take another crack at trying to explain things then go ahead but, as of right now, anything I respond with would just be based in what I can guess you're trying to say.

I'd rather just keep on pursuing things the way I've consistently outlined in my comments on this thread because that's how I think and neither you nor Drck has made a significant enough argument to get me to change my way of thinking. I'm a very open-minded person when you can make a coherent case for something because even if I disagree with something I see no benefit in immediately casting it aside.

But, yeah, feel free to try and explain things a little more coherently or just drop the subject.

-Richard

EDIT: I'll also add one caveat because you seem to be doing the same thing I said Red Pill does; Essentially, you're saying "This is Reality" and I'm saying "No, it's not," and your argument against that is "Well, that's because you just don't know" and when I finally stop responding you say "See, he didn't respond. That's proof that he doesn't know, and thus, my reality is correct."

 

[Drck]

Ezio: How come you might both be right?

Very good analysis. I don't have much time so I'm just going to use analogy as above. We live in quite complex world, and are also correct when you say there are many realities. As a matter of fact, each of us may live in our own reality (check quantum mechanics!), meaning that we can hav totally different perceptions or opininions yes we all can be correct.

Take a car like above. All you can do to a to sit in it ad drive, you don have to worry about its color, how it operates, not even whether you drive the right direction because all you want is to get to particular destination.

Now Richard comes with his pink glasses (sorry Richard ) and tells you that you have to take certain streets, you have to follow certain rules on the street and you have to ignore all those drivers that crashed. He says don't worry about them, it's too negative, worry about your own destination. He also tells you that you should be driving too loaded BluE Mercedes in order to get where you want, that you should always wear polished shoes while driving, and you should also put pink glasses on so you can see happyworld around you...

Is he correct? Of course, there is nothing wrong being a driver like this. You can sip soda and keep driving like this all day long

But there are another cars, another roads, another streets, another rules... You may for example discover that the car is not just a simple, cute and sexy vehicle, but rather a complex machine that many engineers worked on for decades now... You may discover the mechanics, how the motor runs, that the motor does actually have some moving parts inside, that there is some thing called transmission and alternator, and perhaps complex electronics.... You may discover that there are different brands of cars, each might be little bit different, each might serve different purpose. While you discover that Mercedes's is really a good car, you may also see that there are BMW's, Infinity, Lexus, ... one pick up trucks, suv's, and you may discover that there are also another vehicles, such as motorcycles that will tell you to destination even faster...

So you discover all these things - does it make you happier driver? Or are other driver bitter bitter drivers because of that? You may know more but it may not make you any happier, nor bitter - you can still drive the same way, the same car as before...

You also discover that some drivers crashed... some of them were drunk, others didn't follow rules, and another ones followed all the rules but still get into accidents anyway... others drive only on sunny sundays, yet they crashed anyway...

Does this discovery also make you bitter? It may, depends no on your personality, but imo it just gives you more understanding of the road conditions you are on, and thus more careful.

The pink glasses are described here because once you remove them the world will appear sort of grayish, because your eyes are not used to see world that is not pink.... But that's only temporal, after some time you will realize that the world is just the world, there are many different colors in it... The World is there no matter which colored glasses you chose to put on, if any at all....

 

[The Tool]

DRCK your analogy of Richard seeing the world through "pink glasses" and you seeing it through "truth" is ignorant.

You assume that you are floating in a boat of right and everyone else is drowning in a sea of wrong.

You assume that Richard and everyone else only sees women as cute, silly, and sexy instead of seeing them with all of their complexities. You are wrong.

Women and men both have the ability to screw each other over. Some actually are out there just to screw someone for the fun of it. But most of the time, what happens to you is due to the actions you took. I.E consequences. Some consequences can be good, some consequences can be bad. What consequence one receives is usually up to the thought process of the person reacting.

But here is where i need to reiterate. Your actions directly affect someone elses reactions.

The world isnt necessarily out to fuck you. It is just that you took actions to "get fucked".

I can just as easily twist this on you. Once you see the world for what it really is. And take off your "cynical" glasses. You will be able to see the complexities, wonder, and splendor that is the world, instead of through your narrow view.

 

[Drck]

The Tool: DRCK your analogy of Richard seeing the world through "pink glasses" and you seeing it through "truth" is ignorant.

I of course don't agree at all. I've been reading comments on GC since 2012 or so. I've already mentioned that GC is a great source of information, articles are well written and insightful and so on. The audience here is rather younger guys, I've seen comments anywhere from high school, through college, 20's... There were some 30-40's but not so many....

When you look around the internet you will discover other sites... see e.g. No-maam blog... there are plenty of articles written way before GC, some go perhaps even before year 2000.... when you read through these you will find many similarities in PUA, seduction or even GC itself. Look up for example providers vs lovers, these expressions (or knowledge) have been here way before GC even started...

With that being said, you can read lots of red pill articles, the red pill simply saturates through these blogs...

You can find other blogs, ROK, Heartiste, .... and see that GC is far away from being the originator of seduction knowledge, how it many times appears ... in other words, most of the stuff on GC was already described before GC start publishing articles, most of the stuff is actually (what it appears to me) based on Red Pill... Don't believe me, check it out yourself...

The material we are talking about is written by guys who've been in the field many years, guys who are (logically) older than the chase crew here, guys who even have much more experience ... and guys who also focus more on little bit different age group than we can find here...

So that's reality, at least the way I see it... it can be easily verified by anyone, all it takes is couple of clicks...

 

[Drck]

Richard & The Tool:

See, perhaps you guys are still somewhere deep inside believing that women or girls will make you somehow happy... Therefore if you don't see women in real light it makes you think that you as a guy should somehow get bitter... and that is true, many guys who really realize that women won't make them happy got bitter, they chose e.g. MGTOW, life without women...

However, once you get that past point, once you realize that women can never really make you happy, the bitterness goes away... you simply find different source of happiness, and just see women "on the side", so to speak... you simply stop learning so much stuff about seduction because female's true value goes way down, and there is just no reason to work so hard to "get the girl"...

Simple conclusion:

1. If women or girls are High Value to you, you study lots of seduction, you are trying to be the best possible seducer around ...
2. If women or girls are Low Value, you simply have no reason to study so much seduction... you just want to get laid, thus you do what's necessary and nothing more...

 

[The Tool]

Love how you are assuming we have certain thoughts and ideals and are trying "expose to the world" that Richard and I have those thoughts.

You could not be any further from the truth. This comes from your narrow mindedness. And belief that you are the pillar of truth and above everyone else.

Due to that. I will not be commenting any further as obviously you have your thoughts and ideals and we have ours. ( Though you do not and will never quite grasp what ours are and will instead put words and thoughts into our mouths that are not truly ours. Such as for example that "we believe" women are the source of happiness and learn seduction for such purpose.) HA!

I learn about sex, love, and attraction because it is my passion. Hell. That knowledge is my career.

 

[Drck]

I do also love how you call me narrow minded... if anything, I'm trying to expand the horizons of knowledge, point out that seduction as it is being presented here has much more to it... I'm my numerous comments, should one bother to read, you can find things that no one else talks about here...

... Rising number of single moms, lower levels of testosterone, decreased masculinity, feminine behavior of guys, divorces (originated mostly by women), feminism, overall disrespect of men, mental diseases of women, obesity, "equality", broken guys emotionally and/or financially, brainwashing by lunatic media, poor quality of young women (e.g. many are not taking good care of children, they don't cook and clean, they are not faithful to husbands,...), you name it... Even so called Red Pill is sort of a taboo here, it is being disregarded as something bitter, never mind that it is based on knowledge of guys who've been around way longer than GC... Guys are being screwed left and right in this society... That is not being narrow minded, that is not being bitter either... that is a harsh reality that you can see everywhere around you... It is fine if you chose not to see it or call it trivial issues, but reality is simply different...

 

[Richard]

See, perhaps you guys are still somewhere deep inside believing that women or girls will make you somehow happy... Therefore if you don't see women in real light it makes you think that you as a guy should somehow get bitter... and that is true, many guys who really realize that women won't make them happy got bitter, they chose e.g. MGTOW, life without women...

Where did you even reach this conclusion about me at? Have you really missed my numerous posts where I lay out my existential thinking? I literally said it's impossible to derive any authentic happiness from anything outside yourself; that includes women. Like, seriously, how the fuck do you miss a point I've made at least 4 times?

I'm not responding to this anymore; all it's become is you trying to prove to me that I'm still ignorant, and me trying to prove to you that you're an idiot and it's laughable at this point. I follow humanistic-existential views in that the way to find the most authentic happiness is to become self-actualized and reach your maximum potential; which is subjective and unique to each person. That's exactly why the "reality" you talk about is so irrelevant to me because it's a fucking illusion, it's a facade, it's an idea that people are born in to and blindly accept because they don't know any better. What I'm ultimately concerned with is who people are when that system crumbles and there is nobody around to provide feedback anymore.

Enjoy your life, Drck, and stop putting words in my mouth.

 

[trashKENNUT]

Richard,

I didn't reply because what you said still doesn't make coherent sense to me. If you want to take another crack at trying to explain things then go ahead but, as of right now, anything I respond with would just be based in what I can guess you're trying to say.

I think you didn't read this.


Here's here...

Obviously you can be busy and what have you but that's the whole ppl need to understand.

Well yes, you have your reasons. You noted that my argument doesn't make coherent sense to you. I noted this by telling you that obviously you can be busy or whatever reason that is,

but that's the whole ppl need to understand.

How can i trust you? It's a powerplay at the most 'law of the jungle' fundamentals. The one paying attention is the one who loses. You see my point?

You see, even you yourself are not willing to drop my perceived image of not writing things correctly, and thus you dismiss me with that sentence "I didn't reply because what you said still doesn't make coherent sense to me". You see the whole idea?

Obviously perhaps this is one or more reasons:

1)you didn't understand what i am trying to convey
2)you were busy
3)you are tooling me

and more reasons

I am trying to show you what you are doing, and this is what everyone do. This is who we are, as humans. The one who perceive, loses.

Until i have "value", or perhaps, if i have what you want or perhaps once i write things in a better grammar...... then you might change from where you look, but then again, I don't know where you are and are you tooling me..... and why should i trust you...

and if you notice, once we get what we want, we move on fast. That's humans. That's us. And even this we can learn on how women feel so we can tweak our dating strategies.

neither you nor Drck has made a significant enough argument to get me to change my way of thinking.

You being dismissive. You never lay out what you didn't understand.

That's the whole idea doesn't it? You want me to perceive from where you are. Well I understand where you are. But i am pointing to rules that is similar to law of gravity.

But you are a human. Why get out of your own delusion? And are you aware....? And why trust me?..... And that itself proves my point.

EDIT: I'll also add one caveat because you seem to be doing the same thing I said Red Pill does; Essentially, you're saying "This is Reality" and I'm saying "No, it's not," and your argument against that is "Well, that's because you just don't know" and when I finally stop responding you say "See, he didn't respond. That's proof that he doesn't know, and thus, my reality is correct."

So you are telling me that law is gravity isn't real? That is one example.

And that's the thing. You are in your own reality or to be precise, delusion. I get that. We all need it or we die. Can you step out of it? I am aware of what i think. And i explain my side of it.

I want you to stand in my shoes, and look with me.... and if you don't understand my shoes, well you can ask me. Instead, you dismiss me by saying my argument doesn't make coherent sense.

Well i am calling you out. Tell me what doesn't make sense but then again, are you aware of where you are? do you know what you believe it? are you willing to step out of the delusion (which we all have) and trust me on this?

But why would you want to trust me because i already fail on your first impression or do not have what you want.

p.s: and yes, this is aggressive post. because it's real. but i have to pull it out of people. I feel ambivalent.

Zac

 

[Drck]

Richard: That's exactly why the "reality" you talk about is so irrelevant to me because it's a fucking illusion, it's a facade, it's an idea that people are born in to and blindly accept because they don't know any better.

Dude, there is something seriously wrong here, and you are calling me idiot for me describing reality...

Are the links below just lies? If not, I am providing clear facts whereas you are just providing opinion and insult. ... I don't have time to look up the precise statistics, but just look at what first pops up on google when one bothers to check:


Single moms:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... 2331059b68

or

www.wealthysinglemommy.com/single-mom-statistics

----------
Testosterone levels:

https://www.endocrine.org/news-room/pre ... en_decline

or

http://www.ourstolenfuture.org/newscien ... netal.html
-----------

Obesity:

https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html

or

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahhedgec ... 2142654ee2
------------
Children raised by single moms:

https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/are- ... worse-off/

or

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/ ... dren_.html

or

http://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/fo ... impact.txt
--------------


I can go on and on but it is obviously pointless. I'm not exactly sure how these are trivial issues or how do these make me an idiot, to my logic it just doesn't make any sense. Dispute the above or put it in broader sense, that is the way how healthy discussions work. The above are serious issues, one can chose not to worry about them but that doesn't mean they are not there.

My simple conclusions, feel free to describe where exactly I am wrong:

1. Today's society is very complex, especially when we live in multicultural environment
2. Obesity rates are high and still rising. Testosterone levels are in today's generations are lower than in previous generations. (Associate with lower masculinity) as already described above. Higher obesity rates and lower testosterone levels result in overall lower attraction
3. Rising number of single moms is perhaps "alarming" as described above. Children raised by single moms are not doing as good as children raised by stable and traditional (not just biological) family (mom+dad)

Simple and easy conclusions, show me where am I wrong or where the above is not true...

 

[Knight Who Say NI]

Drck and Zac actually are right. They are making the most logical assumptions based on the information they got. I had the same opinions quite a few years ago.

But after I got more educated on the subject, these views vanished.

Correct me if I'm wrong - and I'll make lots of assumptions -, but your take on this subject of "male decline" is that women (all of them) have a pretty nasty, ruthless side to them (or that it even is their true nature!) and that the truth is that we, men, are slaves to them? Maybe you've read Esther Vilar's The Manipulated Man, and take that nicely written book as "proof" of the female tyranny and that feminism happened when women finally decided to throw off their masks and assume their true dominance over society?

If it is anything like it, it is just a sign that you need to look for better sources of information.

Yes, over the last century happened a major, conscious engineering of society and feminism was one of the major tools used. But it was NOT a thing made by women. Post-war feminism purpose was to flood the workforce with (cheap) labor, drop wages and destroy unions. The ones that really got screwed over by feminism where women themselves, not men. Women got this strange "gift" of having to work to help provide for their family and having little time for their kids, and we are not expected to be the sole providers anymore - it's a safe bet to say that a century ago we wouldn't have the freedom we have today.

A good starting point to clear this confusion and understand modern day society is to watch this AMAZING film:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ3RzGoQC4s

Seriously, watch it, let it sink, then watch it again.

 

[trashKENNUT]

To everyone,

I love how people say i am "right". And then try to talk about their topic and say their topic is right or views are right. You know, this is what sales people, marketers, naturals do, everyone does it.

You know how many times i see it? A MILLION times.

Okay, if you want to be right in terms of being technical, which is winning, as oppose to me, which is about telling it like it is......



what is it that i am wrong?
Are you assuming i am wrong?
Which argument that i am wrong?
or that i fail in having what you want ?
or did i fail in your first barrier of entry whatever it is that your barrier is (beliefs/principles/etc)?

This is another reason why i can talk to a christian and they think i am one of them, or any group. I am just so detached from ideas unlike you guys, but i can attach an idea and you guys swear i was a Pope.

Zac