Carl-Richard

Well, I'm specifically talking about people trying to get better at talking to women (and get laid), like the wikipedia definition of PUA. But sure, I can also appreciate being reductive here: I would also reduce all of PUA down to "social dynamics", but procedurally acquired ones. I one time worked as a research assistant analyzing the behavior of people teaching each other to tie knots. There were naturally different strategies for both teaching and learning to tie the knots, but what struck me was one pair where the person learning the knots had this incredibly complicated mentalistic way of remembering sequences (like they were looking into their minds eye, looking upwards, trying to create rules for memorizing the steps; and maybe not coincidentally, they were taking a long fucking time trying to learn it), meanwhile I was like shouting to myself internally "that's not how you learn how to tie a knot, just do it, just practice it, repetition, grind it out". I get the same feeling when I look at PUA "approaches" to socializing. Just do it, don't think so much about it. Sure, there are people that need that approach, i.e. they approach social situations mentalistically, be it because they lack the ability to read social cues, or they're just extremely mentalistic (which I again in both cases would definitionally describe as autism, granted again it's a spectrum and I'm not saying you're a non-verbal helmet-wearing fella that needs padded walls and professional care). Hell even I have had "autistic" insights about social situations myself that probably helped me for the better. But those arose naturally through experience. And that's part of my point: you can have mentalistic insights as you experience things, and that's part of getting the experience. And then they will be grounded in your experience and a richness of context. Meanwhile if you try to apply mentalistic concepts that you learned abstractly, you will many times not unlikely come off as a creep. Because you're not being sensitive to context and subtleties of the situation: you're not being natural.

In order to get women? You're leaving out the entire aim of PUA and equivocating it with the methods.

I think if you can genuinely process the scenario of thinking you killed a demon but you later found out you were mistaken and it was actually a human, you would not want to be punished for that.

Autism is a spectrum, so you're not special 😠

They thought it was a demon.

1. Autism is when you think about social situations rather than acting spontaneously in them. So definitionally, PUA is autism. 2. Find me 10 PUA seminar attendees and ask them how many hours total they had talking to girls before getting into PUA.

What if you get high on 5-MeO-DMT and you kill somebody in that state (you think they're a demon that will destroy all of reality, and in your infinitely time dilated POV, you planned to kill them for what felt like 5000 years before you finally managed to do it)?

PrOve mE wRoNG.

PUA is 1. autism coping with being social not coming natural, or 2. antisocials coping with not having had experience socializing. Of course many women think that is creepy.

They got banned. 2021 to be exact. Lonely and echochambery... hmm... could there be a different word for this?

Bro what even is this discussion 😭 Shame I'm not a mod so I can't not not ( @Basman ) flaunt my green dick of bannulations. You can predict the quality of a discussion based on how new a case or event is because you get people with shallow opinions dominating the discussion and taking it very seriously.

It's just a comment on what I perceive to be clarity of communication. Damn it's as if you described what I just described myself in different words. Huh, funny how that works in the context of this discussion.

The energy is a knitpicking "well ackchyually" nerd. If the description of the law contains the same double negative (which it may or may not), and if it was important to communicate that exact wording in this discussion (which I doubt), then it would be prudent to communicate using that exact wording. If you just want to communicate the basic differences of outcomes (and you want to be easily understood), then you would put it simply from the beginning. In the second paragraph, we were given the double negative version and then the straightforward version as a clarifier; we could've just had the straightforward version from the beginning 🤔 I will do the rest: "[...] burden of proof is on the prosecution to disprove her claim that she's not criminally responsible for her actions." -> "[...] burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove that she's criminally responsible for her actions." Adding the word "insane" (a negative) into the mix also screws things up: "[...] it's the prosecution that must prove that she's NOT legally insane in order for her "not guilty by reason of insanity" plea to fall apart." -> "[...] it's the prosecution that must prove that she's legally sane in order for her "not guilty by reason of insanity" plea to fall apart."

Dhuuuh mhghggggh durrrrrrrrr, hUuUuUhH? "Avoid Negative Words and Double Negatives to Strengthen Your Writing" — https://wordvice.com/blog/grammar-avoid-double-negatives/

The thing about Runescape is that there is always something to do, always something new you can try (on Oldschool Runescape, I have like 10 accounts with different combat builds, used for PvP, and I'm still making new ones), and it's uniquely self-directed. You choose your own destiny. Psychology says self-direction is one of the most fundamental and important things for making you feel alive. That's just one of the factors: the game is also incredibly interconnected through the skill system (what you referred to as the "job system"): For example (generally speaking, as there are niche training methods as exceptions, and most resources and items can also be bought with money, but let's assume no money): For Firemaking (I will capitalize all skills), you need Woodcutting. For woodcutting, you need an axe, which you need Smithing for. For smithing, you need Mining. For mining efficiently, you need to run efficiently which needs Agility. To run even more efficiently, you need energy potions so you need Herblore (or weight reducing equipment which you can get from quests and Hunter skill). For making potions, you need potion ingredients which you get from e.g. Farming and monster loot. For farming you need seeds which you can get from e.g. monsters (particularly some higher levelled ones which you more readily encounter in the Slayer skill), birdhouse runs (Hunter) and bird's nests falling out of trees when woodcutting, clue scrolls (buried treasures), Thieving chests and stalls, thieving farmer NPCs, etc. If you want a deep dive, this guy essentially made a PhD thesis on what makes Runescape Runescape: It might be that the later versions of the game became hyper-capitalized (microtransactions) and for Runescape in particular, a revamp of the combat system in 2012 ("Evolution of Combat") changed the game significantly in an attempt to become more modern (and it made people have to essentially re-learn the game, so a large portion of the player base quit). All in all, earlier versions of the games could be seen to represent a more authentic game experience, while later versions fell more prey to non- game experience factors like survivability and competition. Oldschool Runescape now polls all their significant updates and they need a 70% agreement to be implemented in the game, which is again a form of self-direction and ensures people like the game they are playing. And in that sense, Oldschool Runescape is not as much stagnating, as there are new additions being made to the game, but nothing really revolutionary (it's very incremental and "content-based" so that it builds on previous content and makes the interconnections between content larger). The biggest recent addition was probably the Sailing skill (but that has been anticipated since the beginning of the game 20 years ago and people wanted it). But even within this model, you run into problems like power creep and also Quality of Life creep (making practical sides of the game increasingly more smooth and seemless); the former threatens certain aspects of the game like especially PvP, while the latter of course makes parts of the game easier. And then, the appeal of the restoration project I mentioned is that you can play a version of the game which is not as over-powered and has little Quality of Life additions such that it becomes more challenging and raw (and of course nostalgic). People already are doing self-directed versions of this "challenge-increasing" inside the main versions of the game with gamemodes like Ironman, Ultimate Ironman, Hardcore Ironman, Group Ironman, and unofficial concepts like bronzeman mode, various "snowflake" ironman / restricted accounts (e.g. area-locked ironman, popularized by YouTuber Settled). Sometimes restrictions make you think outside the box and make you have to find new solutions, and in Runescape, this is incredibly fun because of the already self-directed and interconnected nature of the game. Ironman especially increases the level of interconnectedness exponentially as you can't trade with other players and you have to engage with more aspects of the game.

The fucking amount of double negatives in this post is insane. I can't prove you had the intent to write this cryptically, but the mere action is immoral. You could've written everything so much simpler.

Going duck hunting when you want to pet a swan.

Mayne, wymyn, muh lenses, I vieuw d wurld tru them.

I've observed or sort of deduced that when you learn more about health on your own you become more and more an "alternative health" person. It could also be when you learn more and more about intellectual ideas on your own, you become more and more "woo woo". "On your own" here would mean simply driven by your own interests and logic rather than the standard cultural conditioning or standard establishment thinking. If you look at the intellectual people I like, like Kastrup, Sheldrake, they're as woo woo as me and they are both quite independent thinkers (have existed peripherally or at odds with the establishment for long periods of time). Sheldrake unironically writes papers about whether the Sun is conscious ☀️👀

Meanwhile, I'm playing an unofficial restoration of a 22 year old game. https://lostcity.rs/t/faq-what-is-lost-city/16

Tarantino's physiological cock involves itself with a toe in a bottle. Most schizophrenic but logical thing I've written.

"Oh so you didn't understand the jargony term I just used 🤓; have you heard about my super-duper-ultra-gauge-symmetry-12th-quasi-micro-pico-900-backflip-tripple-cork-nano-cosmo-dimensional manifold-envelope-antilope-folded-into-an-origami-figure ship-in-a-bottle analogy 🤓?"

moat* Jargon check 🤓

Thing about when "normal" academics use jargon, you can virtually always check the references (if it's old jargon) for more information about it, or if it's new jargon, you usually get a very thorough run-through of what it is and how it is distinct from again, older stuff, which you can again check yourself in the references. The cross-referencing in science is not just a "group think" limitation; it's a way to establish accuracy. "My work is x y z, and not a b c d and e, you can read and check for yourself".

One problem with Langan's CTMU paper is the relative lack of references. If you don't show how your work is similar (or dissimilar) to previous work (which unless you're an absolute alien on earth, you should be able to do in some way), you make it simultaneously hard to actually understand your work and it shows you might not actually know about what works exist and that you can't actually show how it's unique (rather we have to trust your word for it because you have some jargony term that we pseudo-understand when you explain it). The scientific/academic community appreciates very much if you can identify a hole in existing knowledge and clearly show how you're filling that hole. If you're just constructing an almost completely self-contained system from the bottom up with no references to outside things, don't be surprised when that lack of referencing is reciprocated.