.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:45 amI wanna me
Page 1 of 2
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:45 amPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:47 amHere's my video clip.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:26 amHuh??? what video clip?
Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:49 amIt's obvious this chick is a total sham, I can't believe anybody pays attention to her posts anymore.
Which I guess illustrates once again that most PUAs aren't confident enough in their game to challenge themselves to anything other than fool's mate.
Sad.
Which I guess illustrates once again that most PUAs aren't confident enough in their game to challenge themselves to anything other than fool's mate.
Sad.
.
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:24 am.
.
Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 2:57 pm.
Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 3:20 pmThis is great Ratio. I like how you've created an entirely new word to incorporate into our already massive amout of PU jargon. J/K.
Really though, Ratio is right about this. When I interact with women, I always presume...which is essentially what Ratio is doing. Presuming is more powerful, even if you're wrong, than simply asking a question.
Further, with an ID you can lead a woman down all kinds of paths. Want to get her into the realm of sex? Use this technique. It works!
Really though, Ratio is right about this. When I interact with women, I always presume...which is essentially what Ratio is doing. Presuming is more powerful, even if you're wrong, than simply asking a question.
Further, with an ID you can lead a woman down all kinds of paths. Want to get her into the realm of sex? Use this technique. It works!
Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 4:56 pmI've already been using this since the class. Instead of asking them to meet me...I tell them. It's much better. thanks for the info.
Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 5:33 pmThis is good. I didn't really have a name for it -- an Interrogatory Declaration is descriptive.
The advantages you listed and the examples are good ones. I would add that it demonstrates openness, which helps to induce openness on her part. You're not hiding anything and you're not trying to get something from her.
The advantages you listed and the examples are good ones. I would add that it demonstrates openness, which helps to induce openness on her part. You're not hiding anything and you're not trying to get something from her.
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:39 pmGood post and great concept. It made me think that you can also make an ID without a presumption.
TQ: Are you fun?
ID: I was trying to figure out if you're fun.
Another way may be to issue a challenge.
TQ: Want to watch a DVD at my place?
ID: It's too bad you can't come over to my place to watch a DVD. I have a killer collection.
However, I disagree that an ID is never supplicative, because if it comes from a fear of rejection of the question then it can come across as weak.
Strong: How old are you?
Weak: I was wondering if you could tell me your age.
Of course that could come from how you say it. Questions can be strong and demanding. Declarations can be weak and unintrusive.
TQ: Are you fun?
ID: I was trying to figure out if you're fun.
Another way may be to issue a challenge.
TQ: Want to watch a DVD at my place?
ID: It's too bad you can't come over to my place to watch a DVD. I have a killer collection.
However, I disagree that an ID is never supplicative, because if it comes from a fear of rejection of the question then it can come across as weak.
Strong: How old are you?
Weak: I was wondering if you could tell me your age.
Of course that could come from how you say it. Questions can be strong and demanding. Declarations can be weak and unintrusive.