====== Alt.Seduction.Fast FAQ And Information 1/2 1/10/07======
speeding
Posting-Frequency: weekly
Last-modified: 12/18/2006
One of the first FAQs for ASF, dating back to 1994, can be found at
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.seduction.fast/browse_thread/thread/cb
1070b38474952b/1f8ddef64090b6f5?hl=en#1f8ddef64090b6f5
This FAQ is currently under ongoing changes. Please post a comment in the
thread for any changes, additions, or corrections you'd like to see. The
actual posting of the FAQ is currently maintained by Speeding, with input
from Now Im Confused and dracozna. All input is welcomed and open for
discussion. This document has been created to answer questions about
seduction related information and discussion. While some products,
services, or individuals might be named in this document, no endorcement
or sponsorship is meant or should be implied. This document contains six
parts formatted in two files.
File 1/2
I : Guidelines For Posting
II : History of ASF
III : Where To Start / What To Expect
File 2/2
IV : Common Acronyms
V : Phrases / Concepts
VI : Gurus, Methods, and Related Websites
I : Guidelines For Posting
The goals of this newsgroup are to discuss and improve the ideas and
methods used in social dynamics relating to other people and the
seduction of people, generally women of the opposite sex. Please make
sure that your post is related to the above goals of the newsgroup. ASF
deals with potentially mature subject matter and is not a place for
discussing the morality of seduction. Morality and lifestyle judgements
are generally not desired or welcomed. Nor are flames, insults, or
advertisements.
II : HISTORY OF ASF
#1: What is alt.seduction.fast?
#2: So, what is Alt.Seduction.Fast like today?
#3: Do you have to have any of Ross's products, or other products, to
participate?
#4: Can women participate in ASF?
#5: Are personals allowed in ASF?
#6: Will Ross or other gurus answer questions I ask?
#7: Is advertising allowed in ASF?
#8: Who is this Gordon person? Why not ignore him?
#9: What is this moderated ASF that I've heard about?
#10: Is a forum better than ASF?
This is the original Question #1 from the 1994 FAQ listed above....
1. What is alt.seduction.fast?
A discussion/ongoing exchange about the ideas, techniques and secrets of
Speed Seduction. Speed Seduction is the creation of Ross Jeffries, and it
is an outgrowth/special application of Neuro-Linguistic Programming.
Ross has developed methods that any man can use to attract the best
looking women, quickly and easily, using NLP language/persuasion patterns
specifically geared for seduction.
2. So, what is Alt.Seduction.Fast like today?
Alt.Seduction.Fast is still an unmoderated Usenet group that, ideally,
discusses methods that any man can use to attract high quality women. It
is commonly refered to as ASF and the term "The Community" is often a
reference to a somewhat underground society of men that aspire to become,
or already are, PUAs. The focus of ASF has moved from Ross Jeffries
product to a more open discussion of all commerical products and also of
seduction topics in general.
As of 11/16/2006, based on Google Groups, only two other groups exist on
Usenet specifically for seduction. Alt.Seduction is the root group and
Alt.Seduction.Outfoxing was a group created to discuss a competing
commerical product. ASF is listed as having "High" activity with 1689
subscribers, Alt.Seduction is listed as having low activity with 146
subscribers, and Alt.Seduction.Outfoxing is listed as having low activity
with 64 subscribers. Please note, there is *NO* moderated version of ASF
on Usenet. (see question #9)
The community has existed for quite some time, but the introduction of
the Internet has enabled previously taboo and less than open topics to
come to light. The seduction of men and women is no exception. The idea
that men can use certain scientifically documentable and reproducible
processes to help garner a higher than average success rate was first
garnered in books such as "The Lay Guide", "Foxhunting", and "Double Your
Dating". ASF was created to market, discuss, and improve a product called
Speed Seduction, which relies heavily on a new concept of Neuro-
Linguistic Programming. Ross and other seduction "gurus" became guests on
radio and TV talk shows about the controversial idea that women could be
"gamed".
With the introduction in 2005 of a book called "The Game", the idea of
seduction, which had been slowly gathering steam into mainstream, made a
breakthrough into true mainstream exposure. Neil Struass, the author, has
been a guest on many TV and radio shows. Since then, there have been
numerous magazine articles and even a TV show regardin seduction. The
business of seduction training went from being mostly an underground
movement into a multi-million dollar industry. Yet, the secrecy and
closed-mindedness of the seduction community is often still evident.
#3: Do you have to have any of Ross's products, or other products, to
participate?
No, but it helps to have at least some knowledge of the community. Anyone
with an open mind willing to share pickup/seduction secrets may
participate. There are numerous websites and products now available with
information.
#4: Can women participate in ASF?
Of course, provided they stay open-minded and are willing to discuss, not
flame. Seduction techniques can also be used by women to seduce whomever
they desire. Their input is also welcomed as an alternative point of
view. Though, there is a commonly held view that many women would
disagree as to the effectiveness of seduction material. Even while being
seduced by it. Women are very welcome here.
#5: Are personals allowed in ASF?
No. Please post personals in the appropiate alt.personals groups. If you
are looking for a wingmate, you can certainly ask here, but your odds of
getting a successful reply are low. There are many websites you can look
to for finding a wingmate. Two of the best sites for such endeavors might
be http://www.themysterymethod.com and P.A.I.R., located at
http://www.fastseduction.com/pair.shtml.
#6: Will Ross or other "gurus" answer questions I ask?
It's rare here, but it happens from time to time. There are plenty of
helpful... and not so helpful... posters willing to offer advice and
assistance. The true masters of seduction that kicked off the community
have largely moved on to more profitable ventures. So, you might get
answers, but free answers from a "guru" will be less than common. And,
keep in mind the shopper's law... caveat emptor.
#7: Is advertising allowed in ASF?
No. But since it is not a moderated group, there's no real enforcement
for this. Originally, the FAQ stated that ads could be submitted to Ross
Jeffries and he would decide how to assist in marketing. Ross has moved
on. You will find that some ads are very much unwelcomed. Other ads are
met with a warm reception. If you are here to sell something, you should
already realize that Usenet is a poor marketing choice. If you are here
to read... then you should again refer to caveat emptor.
#8: Who is this Gordon person? Why not ignore him?
This should perhaps be the new #1 question. Nearly every newcomer asks
it. The reply is nearly always the same. The truth is likely in the
middle. Yes, there is a person that regularly posts to ASF that has made
a HUGE number of extremely obnoxious posts. If you really wish to know
about these posts, just ask, and there will be plenty of replies about
the posting history of this person.
Ignoring him might, in fact, work. The common reply to this question is
that it does not. However, only one time in ASF history has there been an
actual concerted effort to ignore a poster. On 9/11/2006, there was a
request made to ignore a poster and only two posters replied to that
person on 9/11/2006. Whether it had an effect or not is perhaps
conjecture, though the poster's activity dropped on that day by well over
50%.
Perhaps the best answer for the question of ignoring a poster would be --
Do so if you desire, but do not bother with asking for others to do so
also.
#9: What is this moderated version of ASF that I've heard about?
mASF is not a moderated version of ASF, nor was it created to be such. A
detailed search of ASF posts shows that a website forum was created and
called mASF, but it was primarily created, as the posts back then stated,
to avoid having to answer repeated newcomer questions. While many will
state that it was created to avoid a particular poster, this claim is
highly dubious, as there is a long history of two posters that were/are
commonly considered disruptive to ASF. But, there is no record in the ASF
archives of any serious attempt to create a moderated ASF on Usenet.
Cost-free to use, mASF is a private forum on a private commerical
website, www.fastseduction.com. While it does contain a wealth of
seduction information, and many would claim it is the best location of
such information, it is a still a private forum operated on a private
commerical website as a for-profit business. There are many private
forums that contain seduction information.
#10: Is a forum better than ASF?
With any private service on a private website owned and operated as a
for-profit venture, you do not have the same freedoms that you have on
Usenet. On Usenet, your posts can not be deleted, censored, or altered,
once you have posted them. On a private server, your posts can be
deleted, censored, or altered with or without your permission. Usenet is
a free public service that is not owned by anyone and is highly unlikely
to ever cease to exist. Any privately owned website can be terminated at
any time and for any reason.
ASF is an unmoderated Usenet group. This means that anyone can post
anything they wish, within the limits of the law, and no one can do
anything other than complain about it. Like any unmoderated Usenet group,
there are flame wars, trolls, ads, vulgarity, and other behavior that
some people might not care to see. Anyone can post and anyone can read
the posts. Posts are nearly impossible to remove once made, due to the
nature of Usenet. Searching Usenet is rather limited, unless you use a
service that assists in such an endeavor. And while Usenet posts are
relatively permanent, the provider you use to access Usenet might not
store Usenet posts for nearly as long as other Usenet providers. But, you
can make a safe assumption your post will be preservered for posterity
somewhere.
On a private service, there may or may not be moderation. If there is
moderation, you may or may not have some input into the level of
moderation. But, ultimately, a private server has owners. People in
control. If the owners decide to shut down (or have to) then your posts
and any posts you enjoyed could easily be gone forever. Your posts can be
removed, moved, or even altered and this is completely at the whim of the
owners and moderators of the private forum. But, there is a much better
ratio of posts on-topic, while flames, ads, and other offensive behavior
is likely to be very low or nearly non-existant. If the forum has such a
capabilty, you might be able to perform very detailed searches on
postings. A forum is often organized into a much more readable format and
important topics and threads, if such is provided, can be made
"sticky"... meaning they are always at the top of the forum listing. Some
forums even provide the abilty to notify you via e-mail when a thread you
are interested in has a new posting entered on it.
So, the question of which is better is a personal preference, akin to
asking Mac versus PC. It depends on what you want.
III : Where To Start / What To Expect
The best place to start would be to read ASF postings. Read the FAQ and
get aquainted with the acronyms, phrases, terminology, and philosophies
of the community. Visiting the websites listed in Part 2 of this document
would also be a good investment of time. The newbie mission is commonly
the first suggested kickoff. Quite simply, your goal is to go out for
four weeks, four days each week, four hours each day, and talk to four
women per hour... without any concerns to picking the women up or even
what they look like. The goal is to simply get better at approaching and
talking with women. Often, this is followed with the eye contact mission,
in which you go out and practice making and keeping eye conact with women
(and even men) to see how important eye contact is and to develop a feel
for how to use EC to generate positive results.
Another helpful idea would be to start an analysis of what you want to
gain and what you expect or hope to achieve. An obvious first thought is
"I want to get laid." or "I want a woman". But be more specific for
yourself. Ask yourself what you are willing to do to achive your goals.
Ask yourself what you expect once you do. Ask what you plan to do once
you achieve this goal. Ask what you plan to do if you fail to achieve
your goal. Ask what your motivation for the goal is. It is you that needs
to determine what you expect from ASF and from improving your seduction
abilities. You that needs to determine what your level of success is.
You also need to decide how much you are willing to work to achieve your
goals. In time. In energy. In money. You need to decide what aspects of
yourself need to be improved.
But, what you should expect is that nothing will answer all your
questions. ASF is a guide to a better way of life. It's a guide to
improving your life.
--- End 1/2 ----
Odious
"speeding" <no...@biz.org> wrote in message
news:Xns98B44AC32...@69.28.186.120...
> ====== Alt.Seduction.Fast FAQ And Information 1/2 ======
> Posting-Frequency: weekly
> Last-modified: 12/18/2006
>
>
> One of the first FAQs for ASF, dating back to 1994, can be found at
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.seduction.fast/browse_thread/thread/cb
> 1070b38474952b/1f8ddef64090b6f5?hl=en#1f8ddef64090b6f5
>
>
> This FAQ is currently under ongoing changes.
Why the passive voice, there speeding? The FAQ is undergoing changes?
No, YOU have presumed that you should change the FAQ.
So that should read, "I am changing the FAQ."
But then people would clearly see the arrogance in a noob rewriting the FAQ
without any OK from the group creators. Which must be why you're using
passive voice to try and imply this is some process of which you are not the
sole driving force.
DarkKobold
sleeping, so he is typing up the next war and peace. Besides, I think
Ray may be gone, so we need a new loon to take over. He's not as funny
as Ray, but he could get there in a year...
Formhandle
none of the questions you list come up frequently? Some of them have
barely, if ever, come up at all except from you.
Also, by repeating a FAQ instead of a pointer to one, you're just
flooding the group with copies of something that you're going to change
constantly. Some up with something solid or wait until you do before
sharing. I mean, it can't be that hard, it's just a single document.
Another thing is, how many people are contributing to your version of
the FAQ? If it's just you, it's not representative of the group, it's
just your opinions.
You may want to rant about my using FS to share a FAQ but the fact
remains that I and others took the time to ensure it covered many actual
often-asked beginner questions, and answered them thoroughly. Many
contributors are also cited and I don't flood the place with duplicate
copies, I only automate the publishing of a pointer to it so if it
changes nobody will get confused between multiple varying copies on USENet.
You bugged the hell out of all of us with your probes recently, so now I
ask you basically the same thing. What's your point?
--
Form <formh...@fastseduction.com>
Fast Seduction 101 - http://www.fastseduction.com/
Class is now in session...
Say goodbye to trolls, newsloons, and spam.
Gain (FREE) access to the moderated ASF newsgroups at:
http://www.fastseduction.com/discussion/
speeding
news:c7qdnYYRaKuZ5zjY...@giganews.com:
> The most common aspect of a FAQ is "Frequently". How is this a FAQ if
> none of the questions you list come up frequently? Some of them have
> barely, if ever, come up at all except from you.
The first seven questions are all from the original FAQ. Not quite, but
almost word for word. So yeah, they aren't asked that often any more. But
since they were in the original, I put them in the update of the original.
The last three questions are easily the most commonly asked questions on
ASF. The question about Ray is still an ongoing subject in several threads.
> Also, by repeating a FAQ instead of a pointer to one, you're just
> flooding the group with copies of something that you're going to
> change constantly. Some up with something solid or wait until you do
> before sharing. I mean, it can't be that hard, it's just a single
> document.
How does someone post a pointer to a Usenet post? You are talking about a
pointer to a commerical web portal. IE: Spam. It's not possible to "point"
to a Usenet post because Usenet posts do not HAVE pointers. They have
headers. And I've never heard of a news reader yet that can pull a header
in a manner like a URL does for a website. At best, you could point to a
Google archive or some other... WEBSITE. But if you can explain to me how I
can search a news group directly... please let me know. Grepping on a
server is about all I can imagine for trying that.
As for changing the FAQ, I doubt it'll change much more. This is only the
third week it's been posted. Give other ASF readers a chance to read the
thing. I understand you'd much rather direct them to a commerical web
portal. I'd rather they stay on Usenet.
Or did you forget one of the concerns raised about creating the web forum
in the first place... the concern about people not finding out about the
web forum... Gee... daily advertising?
====
Thurs, Aug 9 2001 6:38 am
<cut...>
2. We'll probably have a lot less newbies who find out about it. I
would consider this to be a loss. (I stumbled across this NG purely
by accident as I'm sure many other now-regulars have). I'd hope we
could actively promote the new location maybe with a daily post back
here in the original usenet group. (it could be scattered in amongst
all the Ray posts).
regards,
Scorpo rAFC
====
> Another thing is, how many people are contributing to your version of
> the FAQ? If it's just you, it's not representative of the group, it's
> just your opinions.
Well, since it's about a fourth from the original FAQ... that's not my
opinion. It might be someone else's. Another fourth comes from commonly
defined terms. I found them defined on a web site portal, among other
places I frequent. The majority, though, was a contribution from Now Im
Confused. The only part that is from me is the part about a web portal that
is calling itself the alternative to ASF. Even though there's another
website that's also called www.altseductionfast.com.
> You may want to rant about my using FS to share a FAQ but the fact
> remains that I and others took the time to ensure it covered many
> actual often-asked beginner questions, and answered them thoroughly.
> Many contributors are also cited and I don't flood the place with
> duplicate copies, I only automate the publishing of a pointer to it so
> if it changes nobody will get confused between multiple varying copies
> on USENet.
You aren't "sharing" it. You aren't posting an FAQ about ASF. You're
posting spam about a web portal. It directs traffic to a web portal. Call
it what it is. If it was an ASF FAQ then it would contain questions and
answers. But it doesn't. It contains a link.
And yes, you and a few others whined and bitched and yes... did a great
deal to help, way back in 2001, about how to answer and avoid having to
repeat answering newbie questions. Did you forget that was the reason for
wanting to create mASF in the first place? Let me remind you what one
person said...
========
Fri, Aug 10 2001 12:40 am
To chime in as the devil's advocate....creating a moderated newsgroup,
while not a bad idea...has inherent problems associated with it. I
believe I was one of the first posters to bitch someone out and tell
them to start a fuckin moderated newsgroup and stop the fucking
whining about newbie posts. A few downsides, some already pointed out
are 1. moderator persoality/personal bias 2. time consuming 3. I read
over and over there is a huge archive of info. available...if all the
answers are already there....why is there a need for a new group, let
alone a moderated one? 4. missed opportunities to further develop
tolerance, patience, etc. with dealing with AFC's and 'cockblocks'
(i.e. group efficiency blocks/info. blocks) 5. missed opportunites for
RAFC's to CHALLENGE THEMSELVES to take LEADERSHIP and develop those
skills 6. hiding from reality/dealing with change and adapting and
overcoming obsticales....
just food for thought.
psychobabble
========
As for the bullshit about flooding multiple copies... are you forgetting
that you have not one, but TWO automatically posted floods that point to
the exact same resource?
> You bugged the hell out of all of us with your probes recently, so now
> I ask you basically the same thing. What's your point?
The point is that until I took the initiative a few weeks ago, ASF hasn't
had an FAQ that is *FOR* ASF. It's got two spam broadcasts that point to a
web portal where someone can go off Usenet to read a forum's FAQ. But it
doesn't have an FAQ that is ON ASF itself. So, I took Psychobabble's advice
and I found the original FAQ that was posted to ASF when it first started.
And I updated it a bit, with a lot of input from Now Im Confused. But, it's
still an FAQ that is ON ASF and about ASF... not a spam link to a web
portal that's not on Usenet and lest you forget... basically states...
My FAQ is not an official FAQ for ASF any more than any other FAQ someone
might compile. It's merely a collection of opinions. Suggestions and
contributions are welcome, although the authors reserve the right of final
decision as to what ends up in it. This FAQ is, however, official for the
forums available through Fast Seduction. The policies laid out in this
document are expected to be followed strictly when posting to the moderated
ASF forums.
Gee... that might look vaguely familiar to you....
So, what's YOUR beef? After all... you aren't claiming to have an offical
FAQ either. At least the FAQ I'm posting was the original FAQ from way back
when. Your is not much more than a pointer to a web forum FAQ. If you got a
beef with an actual ASF FAQ, bring it. What would you like to see in it?
What would you like to see different? What questions do you think should be
there?
Or is your objection merely that it isn't directing traffic strongly
enough, as was feared by another poster back in 2001?
--
You could be a Cylon and not even know it...
Now Im Confused
> Formhandle <formh...@fastseduction.com> wrote in
> news:c7qdnYYRaKuZ5zjY...@giganews.com:
>
> > Also, by repeating a FAQ instead of a pointer to one, you're just
> > flooding the group with copies of something that you're going to
> > change constantly. Some up with something solid or wait until you do
> > before sharing. I mean, it can't be that hard, it's just a single
> > document.
>
> How does someone post a pointer to a Usenet post?
news:Xns98B44AC32...@69.28.186.120
> You are talking about a pointer to a commerical web portal. IE:
> Spam. It's not possible to "point" to a Usenet post because Usenet
> posts do not HAVE pointers. They have headers. And I've never heard
> of a news reader yet that can pull a header in a manner like a URL
> does for a website.
Gnus
news:Xns98B44AC32...@69.28.186.120
> > Another thing is, how many people are contributing to your version of
> > the FAQ? If it's just you, it's not representative of the group, it's
> > just your opinions.
>
Then contribute.
> The point is that until I took the initiative a few weeks ago, ASF hasn't
> had an FAQ that is *FOR* ASF. It's got two spam broadcasts that point to a
> web portal where someone can go off Usenet to read a forum's FAQ. But it
> doesn't have an FAQ that is ON ASF itself. So, I took Psychobabble's advice
> and I found the original FAQ that was posted to ASF when it first started.
> And I updated it a bit, with a lot of input from Now Im Confused. But, it's
> still an FAQ that is ON ASF and about ASF... not a spam link to a web
> portal that's not on Usenet and lest you forget... basically states...
>
I just talked about the format and some questions that should be
answered, i havn't actually answered any. i also said it should only
be posted bi-monthly.
--
The guy who fails at the game is the one who
goes out looking for women to make him
feel good about himself.
The guy who succeeds at the game is the one
who goes out and makes other people feel good
about themselves. - Style
Formhandle
> Formhandle <formh...@fastseduction.com> wrote in
> news:c7qdnYYRaKuZ5zjY...@giganews.com:
>
>> The most common aspect of a FAQ is "Frequently". How is this a FAQ if
>> none of the questions you list come up frequently? Some of them have
>> barely, if ever, come up at all except from you.
>
> The first seven questions are all from the original FAQ.
Which was in sore need of updating. Which is what happened.
There's also no "official" here. With the help of a few others, I put
together a more constructive FAQ. You're just re-posting what became
out-dated and added a couple crap questions.
> Not quite, but
> almost word for word. So yeah, they aren't asked that often any more. But
> since they were in the original, I put them in the update of the original.
> The last three questions are easily the most commonly asked questions on
> ASF. The question about Ray is still an ongoing subject in several threads.
Because people get drawn into that crap. Dredging up crap only causes
the crap to continue.
Most people can figure out things pretty quick on their own, especially
in regards to that topic. A FAQ is meant to save newbies some time with
the most frequently asked questions. A FAQ is not meant to be a
political mouthpiece.
>> Also, by repeating a FAQ instead of a pointer to one, you're just
>> flooding the group with copies of something that you're going to
>> change constantly. Some up with something solid or wait until you do
>> before sharing. I mean, it can't be that hard, it's just a single
>> document.
>
> How does someone post a pointer to a Usenet post? You are talking about a
> pointer to a commerical web portal. IE: Spam.
So post it somewhere else. You can create a blog for free. As can be
witnessed by recent events, even an idiot can do it.
> It's not possible to "point"
> to a Usenet post because Usenet posts do not HAVE pointers. They have
> headers. And I've never heard of a news reader yet that can pull a header
> in a manner like a URL does for a website. At best, you could point to a
> Google archive or some other... WEBSITE. But if you can explain to me how I
> can search a news group directly... please let me know. Grepping on a
> server is about all I can imagine for trying that.
You know, your argument may have been plausible prior to 1993. But you
are basically saying you are refusing to use a certain technology (the
web) which supports access consistency just so you can continue to be
limited by USENEt protocol for the purpose of purity.
If I thought the way you did, FS& mASF would not exist and the same
200-300 vocal people would be arguing on ASF (sprinkled with a few
actual PUAs), there would be Ross & a few other pickup/seduction
resources out there, Neil's book would have never been written,
Mystery's idea for a infield workshop biz would have taken forever to
launch, DYD would have not had an initial burst of market penetration,
and basically the entire landscape of pickup resources and options and
businesses out there would be 10% of what they are now.
This whole niche would have floundered and disappeared almost into
oblivion. It was great way back, of course even a little is very
useful, but that's where it was heading. Obscurity and eventually oblivion.
> As for changing the FAQ, I doubt it'll change much more.
Then what's the point? This was already done. You're not even
re-inventing the wheel. Your rolling out a rough chiseled round stone
for all of us to look.
> This is only the
> third week it's been posted. Give other ASF readers a chance to read the
> thing. I understand you'd much rather direct them to a commerical web
> portal. I'd rather they stay on Usenet.
I don't care where people go. I'm just providing an option for them if
they don't want to be here. As far as the FAQ on my site, I don't think
anyone gives a fuck except you or the dude who's the basis of one of
your FAQ questions. It's not like I'm pitching a product when sharing
the link or charging access or doing anything other than pointing it to
somewhere that has a consistency of availability for the long term.
There's even a PLAIN TEXT version of the same exact same FAQ. If you
have no problems with the FAQ, and only that it's visible on a web page
that generates revenue indirectly, then point to the plain text version.
It's not as nicely formatted, but I went out of my way to make it
dynamic so that when the HTML version is updated, the plain text version
automatically updates itself. I did this because I could predict you 6
years ago LOL.
> Or did you forget one of the concerns raised about creating the web forum
> in the first place... the concern about people not finding out about the
> web forum... Gee... daily advertising?
There's a separate weekly post for that. One post is for the FAQ,
another is for mASF. Daily? Since when do the automated posts show up
here daily? They're once per week. They also make use of consistent
formatting so if anyone wants to filter them out, they can easily.
I'm still wondering about you're rolling out the chiseled wheel. What's
the point? You really still didn't answer that. At least make it
constructive and useful. Or are you just doing it for political agenda?
--
Now Im Confused
After thinking this over and reading Jay's post. And looking at it
objectively and for substance. I have to say that speeding, you should
forget about the FAQ, don't post it, Jay's FAQ is very good and it is
free. Google has ads, but i am SURE you still use that. So just
because he is trying to make a buck or two or whatever should not take
away from the fact that the info is good.
I still stand behind my dislike of his forum for many reasons, bad
interface, stupid PUA ratings, not free as-in-freedom, people can take
down/edit posts, etc. But then again i don't post and i rarely, rarely
read there, but the FAQ and player's guide, PAIR, Slang, etc. I do
however send people to his site for the /youarenew and /asf-faq.shtml,
as they have good data.
We need as little drama to this group as possible, and to just have
people get the questions they have answered. Down with the trolls, and
KJs, just ask questions get good with women, and see the sun shine. If
you are really good on a subject answer just that question, not
everything that someone new could ask. In the end it doesn't matter
that much anyways, because you only really learn in field.
Odious
"Formhandle" <formh...@fastseduction.com> wrote in message
news:ErKdncuIp6o1GTvY...@giganews.com...
>
> I'm still wondering about you're rolling out the chiseled wheel. What's
> the point? You really still didn't answer that. At least make it
> constructive and useful. Or are you just doing it for political agenda?
>
Speeding is one of those dork dudes that isn't happy unless he's whining
about something in a very pointless and nit picky way. We all know guys
who, having no social life, become obsessed with the minutia of absolutly
pointless bullshit.
Like trek nerds arguing about which captain is best.
The reason he's having a shit fit over the FAQ... is simply bcause he has
nothing better to do.
Now Im Confused
Now that i have come to agree that the FAQ should go, do you really
think a personal attack is the best way to get the point across that
speeding is wasteing his time?
speeding
news:87lkk97...@localhost.localdomain:
> speeding <no...@biz.org> writes:
>
>> Formhandle <formh...@fastseduction.com> wrote in
>> news:c7qdnYYRaKuZ5zjY...@giganews.com:
>>
>> > Also, by repeating a FAQ instead of a pointer to one, you're just
>> > flooding the group with copies of something that you're going to
>> > change constantly. Some up with something solid or wait until you
>> > do before sharing. I mean, it can't be that hard, it's just a
>> > single document.
>>
>> How does someone post a pointer to a Usenet post?
>
> news:Xns98B44AC32...@69.28.186.120
Well, I admit I don't know all the functionality of Xnews all that well,
but I got no clue where I'd use this to get something. I tried using a
search enginre, but nothing there either. Wouldn't the "news" part in front
point to a news server?
But, let's just say you COULD point to a post like that. Then it should be
completely and totally possible for Formhandle to change his ASF from being
a spam pointer to a web portal into a real and honest FAQ about ASF that is
posted right on ASF. He could post a legitimate ASF FAQ using a pointer,
then. Just like he's saying I could do that. Cool!!
>> You are talking about a pointer to a commerical web portal. IE:
>> Spam. It's not possible to "point" to a Usenet post because Usenet
>> posts do not HAVE pointers. They have headers. And I've never heard
>> of a news reader yet that can pull a header in a manner like a URL
>> does for a website.
>
> Gnus
>
> news:Xns98B44AC32...@69.28.186.120
>
>
>> > Another thing is, how many people are contributing to your version
>> > of the FAQ? If it's just you, it's not representative of the
>> > group, it's just your opinions.
>>
>
> Then contribute.
That's my thought too.
>> The point is that until I took the initiative a few weeks ago, ASF
>> hasn't had an FAQ that is *FOR* ASF. It's got two spam broadcasts
>> that point to a web portal where someone can go off Usenet to read a
>> forum's FAQ. But it doesn't have an FAQ that is ON ASF itself. So, I
>> took Psychobabble's advice and I found the original FAQ that was
>> posted to ASF when it first started. And I updated it a bit, with a
>> lot of input from Now Im Confused. But, it's still an FAQ that is ON
>> ASF and about ASF... not a spam link to a web portal that's not on
>> Usenet and lest you forget... basically states...
>
> I just talked about the format and some questions that should be
> answered, i havn't actually answered any. i also said it should only
> be posted bi-monthly.
Well, the questions already had answers, I suppose. I got them, as I
pointed out, from a few places, but they were all pretty much the same in
content. But, you contributed with questions. If you wanted to critize the
FAQ, you'd have at least a basis for complaining, since you are saying
something about improving it. Rather than complaining about how it's not
nice.
speeding
news:ErKdncuIp6o1GTvY...@giganews.com:
> speeding wrote:
>
>> Formhandle <formh...@fastseduction.com> wrote in
>> news:c7qdnYYRaKuZ5zjY...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> The most common aspect of a FAQ is "Frequently". How is this a FAQ
>>> if none of the questions you list come up frequently? Some of them
>>> have barely, if ever, come up at all except from you.
>>
>> The first seven questions are all from the original FAQ.
>
> Which was in sore need of updating. Which is what happened.
Yeah. But, I didn't change them all that much. You're not complaining about
them, are you? If so, what do you believe could be given as an answer?
> There's also no "official" here. With the help of a few others, I put
> together a more constructive FAQ. You're just re-posting what became
> out-dated and added a couple crap questions.
But, it's the only one actually being posted here. It's hard to say that
the FAQ I'm saying is outdated and has crap questions if it's the only FAQ
being put *ON* ASF and when you've offered nothing constructive towards it.
>> Not quite, but
>> almost word for word. So yeah, they aren't asked that often any more.
>> But since they were in the original, I put them in the update of the
>> original. The last three questions are easily the most commonly asked
>> questions on ASF. The question about Ray is still an ongoing subject
>> in several threads.
>
> Because people get drawn into that crap. Dredging up crap only causes
> the crap to continue.
Is it your claim that "the crap" was not as prevelent a month ago, before
there was an FAQ being posted on ASF? I would have to disagree. I'd say
that people have been drawn into the Flame War long before I started asking
about posting an FAQ on ASF.
> Most people can figure out things pretty quick on their own,
> especially in regards to that topic. A FAQ is meant to save newbies
> some time with the most frequently asked questions. A FAQ is not
> meant to be a political mouthpiece.
Agreed. What part of the FAQ do you believe is a political mouthpiece? An
Inconvenient Truth is a "political mouthpiece". Yet it's also
scientifically accurate and honest. Sure, some people don't wish for the
message to get out. It hurts their interests. But it's not a pack of
lies... it's just... an inconvenient truth.
I'd hope you'd welcome accurate and honest information. Surely you aren't
claiming mASF is a Usenet group? Are you? Is your objection the last
question, that points out the differences between a forum and a Usenet
group? Are you saying the answers are not accurate and correct? Or just
saying that you just don't like to see them answered?
Actually, though, I do agree there is a problem with the answer. There is
not JUST one site that calls itself ASF. There are *TWO* sites that call
themselves ASF. One is a commerical web portal and the other is strictly a
web forum with no portal and only ads from the hosting site. It's not right
for me to mention one site and not the other... not when both are using the
name ASF...
Tell me... how's this sound???
==================
#9: What is the moderated version of ASF?
There is no moderated version of ASF. There are two web forums that are
using the name ASF in their title. Neither site was created to be a
moderated version of ASF. However, both sites contain archived postings of
the Usenet ASF. There is no record in the ASF archives of any serious
attempt to create a moderated ASF on Usenet.
http://www.altseductionfast.com/forum/ ==> A web forum that, aside from
ads from the hosting service, is otherwise commerical free.
http://www.fastseduction.com/discussion/ ==> Also refered to as mASF. A
commerical web portal with various ads that are discretely placed on the
top and sides.
==================
Of course, I might be pushing to say that altseductionfast.com was not
created to be a moderated version of ASF... but I don't recall having seen
anyone discuss it on ASF before.
>>> Also, by repeating a FAQ instead of a pointer to one, you're just
>>> flooding the group with copies of something that you're going to
>>> change constantly. Some up with something solid or wait until you
>>> do before sharing. I mean, it can't be that hard, it's just a
>>> single document.
>>
>> How does someone post a pointer to a Usenet post? You are talking
>> about a pointer to a commerical web portal. IE: Spam.
>
> So post it somewhere else. You can create a blog for free. As can be
> witnessed by recent events, even an idiot can do it.
How do I post a blog on ASF? The whole point of posting an FAQ on ASF is to
post an FAQ **ON** ASF. There's was no FAQ being posted on ASF. That's
why I started asking about it. Now there is. What's your beef with seeing
an FAQ posted on ASF?
>> It's not possible to "point"
>> to a Usenet post because Usenet posts do not HAVE pointers. They have
>> headers. And I've never heard of a news reader yet that can pull a
>> header in a manner like a URL does for a website. At best, you could
>> point to a Google archive or some other... WEBSITE. But if you can
>> explain to me how I can search a news group directly... please let me
>> know. Grepping on a server is about all I can imagine for trying
>> that.
>
> You know, your argument may have been plausible prior to 1993. But
> you are basically saying you are refusing to use a certain technology
> (the web) which supports access consistency just so you can continue
> to be limited by USENEt protocol for the purpose of purity.
The "web" is not Usenet. Posting to the web is not the same as posting
someont **ON** Usenet. Something posted on the web can be changed at will
easily. Something hosted on a web server could be shut down by someone
tomorrow. But something posted on Usenet is eternal. (relatively, of
course)
Someday Usenet might cease to exist. But it hasn't yet. Let's look at your
argument though, from a different persepctive. Yes, the web has access
consistancy (so long as the website remains up) is can be made searchable
and an FAQ posted on a website can even use links to skip to individual
questions. Yery handy and nice. Not ancient like Usenet. I agree 100% with
you on this.
So, by this logic of yours... why are you posting on Usenet instead of on
your web? Shouldn't you be completely eschewing use of Usenet... after all,
it's outdated and so limited. Yes, I understand that many want to get
OTHERS to shun Usenet and move to a web portal or forum. But, your argument
is that YOU want to use that technology. So, why aren't you there instead
of here?
Put it yet another way... You come to Usenet... so why do you preach
about how outdated you consider it to be? Isn't that like a preacher going
into a bar to complain about the evils of alcohol comsumption while
partaking of the wine... in the bar. Or like Ken Lay trying to give a
speech about his high moral ethics.
> If I thought the way you did, FS& mASF would not exist and the same
> 200-300 vocal people would be arguing on ASF (sprinkled with a few
> actual PUAs), there would be Ross & a few other pickup/seduction
> resources out there, Neil's book would have never been written,
> Mystery's idea for a infield workshop biz would have taken forever to
> launch, DYD would have not had an initial burst of market penetration,
> and basically the entire landscape of pickup resources and options and
> businesses out there would be 10% of what they are now.
Of course they would exist. It's not as if you created these entities as
some alturistic endeavor to create a moderated Usenet version of ASF. If
you didn't create a wonderful business enterprise... someone else would
have.
That would be like saying that if Bill Gates hadn't started DOS then
Microsoft wouldn't exist. Sure, technically it wouldn't be a company called
MS... but there'd be something pretty much like it. Granted, the company
that would have formed might not be as good or as giving or as customer
focused... but someone would have created it or something akin to it. (My
psychic intuition says it would have called MacOS...)
You're basically claiming that if you hadn't created the wheel, we'd all be
riding on horseback and living in teepees. Somehow, I doubt that your
competitors/rivals/partners really consider you as the inspiration for
their creative muse. They might be glad (or not) that you came along. But
I'm sure they all figure they'd be just fine anyways. (for a perspective on
this, ask how Gates, Jobs, McNealy, and Bosack/Lerner all think they'd be
doing if one of them hadn't started up along with the others.)
> This whole niche would have floundered and disappeared almost into
> oblivion. It was great way back, of course even a little is very
> useful, but that's where it was heading. Obscurity and eventually
> oblivion.
Sure, sure. We'd all be using accoustic couplers and teletypes. No one
would have envisioned the Internet. Computers would be huge water cooled 5
tons machines that use punch cards for data entry and storage. You aren't
serious, are you? Do you REALLY consider yourself the Godfather of
Seduction? Now *YOU* are starting to sound like you believe in the tales of
a "seduction mafia".
>> As for changing the FAQ, I doubt it'll change much more.
>
> Then what's the point? This was already done. You're not even
> re-inventing the wheel. Your rolling out a rough chiseled round stone
> for all of us to look.
So, what's your beef? If it was done, then what's the problem with seeing
something that is missing brought back? It's not as if you're saying
there's something better. There's not. There's no other FAQ being posted to
ASF. So what's your beef?
>> This is only the
>> third week it's been posted. Give other ASF readers a chance to read
>> the thing. I understand you'd much rather direct them to a commerical
>> web portal. I'd rather they stay on Usenet.
>
> I don't care where people go. I'm just providing an option for them
> if they don't want to be here. As far as the FAQ on my site, I don't
> think anyone gives a fuck except you or the dude who's the basis of
> one of your FAQ questions. It's not like I'm pitching a product when
> sharing the link or charging access or doing anything other than
> pointing it to somewhere that has a consistency of availability for
> the long term.
Sure. Sure. You don't care where they go.. but if they do go.. you want to
tell them where to go. There's an abundance of people on ASF that seem to
want to tell others where to go.
And yes, you are pitching a product. Actually, several. I haven't bothered
to try to count the ads... but I'd venture to say I'd need more than one
hand to count them up. that's the point of a web portal, isn't it. Mass
adverising.
Here's a question for you... why doesn't the FAQ on your site provide links
to other web forums? Why are the only things referenced in the FAQ on your
site pointers to your site?
> There's even a PLAIN TEXT version of the same exact same FAQ. If you
> have no problems with the FAQ, and only that it's visible on a web
> page that generates revenue indirectly, then point to the plain text
> version.
That sound's like a WONDERFUL idea. Except, of course, it is the SAME FAQ
for your site... not for ASF. But otherwise, yes... it might be a wonderful
idea if there was an FAQ on ASF that pointed to an FAQ *for* ASF. Silly
me... I'm just posting an FAQ for ASF directly on ASF. Rather than posting
a pointer to it.
> It's not as nicely formatted, but I went out of my way to make it
> dynamic so that when the HTML version is updated, the plain text
> version automatically updates itself. I did this because I could
> predict you 6 years ago LOL.
That's all nice and wonderful that you have an FAQ for your site in plain
text that is updated when you update the FAQ for your site in HTML. Too bad
there's not an FAQ for ASF that is updated on ASF when an HTML version is
updated on... um... ASF. Okay... next question... how do I post HTML format
on Usenet. If I wanted to try to make someting <b>bold</b> or maybe <u>
underlined</u>... would putting the html tags on it do that? I didn't think
it would. But wow. If it did.. then Usenet could be just like a web forum.
Maybe someone should try to upgrade Usenet. It's so old. LOL.
>> Or did you forget one of the concerns raised about creating the web
>> forum in the first place... the concern about people not finding out
>> about the web forum... Gee... daily advertising?
>
> There's a separate weekly post for that. One post is for the FAQ,
> another is for mASF. Daily? Since when do the automated posts show
> up here daily? They're once per week. They also make use of
> consistent formatting so if anyone wants to filter them out, they can
> easily.
Not the autmoated posts. At least I don't think the poster said anythign
about automated posts. Just talking about the forum daily. Gee. That
doesn't happen. Besides, that was one posters concerns. What did the
Committee to Form a Moderated Usenet Group decide on?
Oh yes... the same thing that any group can decide on in ASF. Nothing.
> I'm still wondering about you're rolling out the chiseled wheel.
> What's the point? You really still didn't answer that. At least make
> it constructive and useful. Or are you just doing it for political
> agenda?
I'm rolling out the chiseled wheel because there's nothing else rolling
around. Why didn't you speak up when I was asking about it? When I was
asking for input... where was your voice?
But now you're complaining about "political mouthpieces". I still don't see
you offering up ideas for what an FAQ on ASF should look like. Since there
wasn't an FAQ on ASF until I brought it back... what is your complaint
about the old one being updated and reposted?
You certainly seem to have something to say about politics and interests.
But not much to say about what an FAQ on ASF should look like. So, care to
help with developing/improving the posting of an FAQ on ASF? Or are you ust
upset that there is someone posting an FAQ on ASF?
--
speeding
But, as even Jay points out.. Jay's FAQ is not an ASF FAQ. It is an FAQ for
his web forum. There's no FAQ for ASF. As for Google... not really.
Yahoo. But not Google. However, that's like comparing applies to oranges...
or Usenets to Websites.
I'm not against FS of mASF. What I'm against is saying that the mASF FAQ is
a Usenet FAQ. It's not. Yes, Google has ads. And Google owns the website.
They can do whatever they want with it. But Usenet is public. Google can
post to Usenet, sure... but they can't censor it. They can censor Google.
(at risk of a lawsuit? maybe?)
I agree the info on FS and on mASF is good. As good as the info on MM, as
good as on ASF.com, as good as on socialskillz, as good as on Bristol Lair,
as good as on.... well... you get the idea... That's not something I'd
disagree with in any manner.
But, the mASF FAQ is not an ASF FAQ. An ASF FAQ should mention more than
just one site or one product. What do you call an article in a magazine
that is posted by a company that talks about the wonderful goodness of a
product... just their product... without comparing it to any other
products. I call it an ad. And generally, in a magazine... at the top or
the bottom of something being posted by a company to promote their
product... there is a line that says "advertisement".
On Usenet, I think it's called spam.
> I still stand behind my dislike of his forum for many reasons, bad
> interface, stupid PUA ratings, not free as-in-freedom, people can take
> down/edit posts, etc. But then again i don't post and i rarely, rarely
> read there, but the FAQ and player's guide, PAIR, Slang, etc. I do
> however send people to his site for the /youarenew and /asf-faq.shtml,
> as they have good data.
I happen to like his forum. The PUA ratings... well... but I think the idea
of letting the readers pick how good a post is... and then banning posters
that get marks for being consistantly bad... brilliant. I don't post, but I
read. Not as much as from MM... I think MM is better. But I read it all the
same. I'd even think about putting /youarenew in the FAQ... but hell...
that's given to everyone by everyone. So why should I do it when there's
ten others that are faster at doing it? I do have the site listed, though.
But, this isn't about the data on the site. I don't think there's a
disagreement about the usefullness of it. There is, though, a disagreement
about asf-faq. Because the faq is not an faq for ASF. It's an FAQ for the
forum. It even says so quite specifically. There's no FAQ that's actually
for ASF. Nowhere in the "asf-faq" are any reference given to other
locations for information.
> We need as little drama to this group as possible, and to just have
> people get the questions they have answered. Down with the trolls, and
> KJs, just ask questions get good with women, and see the sun shine. If
> you are really good on a subject answer just that question, not
> everything that someone new could ask. In the end it doesn't matter
> that much anyways, because you only really learn in field.
But, part of the drama is that, you might not agree... but then again, you
might... Ray is actually correct in calling the mASF and "ASF" FAQ postings
spam. They are. Pure and simple. It would be no different than if Mystery
was to post a TMM FAQ... and call it the ASF FAQ.. and then direct all
questions to his site.
If Ray was to post an FAQ and call it the ASF FAQ.. and then point traffic
to his server... put up a few Q&As... and a few ads... and say that his FAQ
is the ASF FAQ... would you call it anything other than spam? Anything that
advertises a single product is an advertisement. Or, as it's called on
Usenet... spam.
And THAT is what this is about. Putting an FAQ on ASF that is about and for
ASF, not about and for a web site.
speeding
> Now that i have come to agree that the FAQ should go, do you really
> think a personal attack is the best way to get the point across that
> speeding is wasteing his time?
I don't consider it a waste of time. I'm honestly trying to put something
up on ASF that is strictly about making ASF better. Not about pointing ASF
readers offsite. And it really is my point of view that when someone is so
vehemitely against improving ASF and just pushing people offsite.. there's
likely a reason for that motive. Especially if it involves pushing them in
a specific direction.
Now Im Confused
> Now Im Confused <no...@none.none> wrote in
> >
Ok then post the faq, and ingnore anyone who isn't saying someting
productive. No one can stop you from posting the faq, and anyone can
killfile it. There is no need to start a holy war over a FAQ.
> On Usenet, I think it's called spam.
>
> > I still stand behind my dislike of his forum for many reasons, bad
> > interface, stupid PUA ratings, not free as-in-freedom, people can take
> > down/edit posts, etc. But then again i don't post and i rarely, rarely
> > read there, but the FAQ and player's guide, PAIR, Slang, etc. I do
> > however send people to his site for the /youarenew and /asf-faq.shtml,
> > as they have good data.
>
> I happen to like his forum. The PUA ratings... well... but I think
> the idea of letting the readers pick how good a post is... and then
> banning posters that get marks for being consistantly
> bad... brilliant. I don't post, but I read. Not as much as from
> MM... I think MM is better. But I read it all the same. I'd even
> think about putting /youarenew in the FAQ... but hell... that's
> given to everyone by everyone. So why should I do it when there's
> ten others that are faster at doing it? I do have the site listed,
> though.
>
> But, this isn't about the data on the site. I don't think there's a
> disagreement about the usefullness of it. There is, though, a
> disagreement about asf-faq. Because the faq is not an faq for
> ASF. It's an FAQ for the forum. It even says so quite
> specifically. There's no FAQ that's actually for ASF. Nowhere in the
> "asf-faq" are any reference given to other locations for
> information.
>
I think the questions people actually care about and read are the ones
in the "Commonly Asked Questions" section.
Really i don't get it, exactly what questions on
http://fastseduction.com/asf-faq.shtml don't apply to uASF?
> > We need as little drama to this group as possible, and to just
> > have people get the questions they have answered. Down with the
> > trolls, and KJs, just ask questions get good with women, and see
> > the sun shine. If you are really good on a subject answer just
> > that question, not everything that someone new could ask. In the
> > end it doesn't matter that much anyways, because you only really
> > learn in field.
>
> But, part of the drama is that, you might not agree... but then
> again, you might... Ray is actually correct in calling the mASF and
> "ASF" FAQ postings spam. They are. Pure and simple. It would be no
> different than if Mystery was to post a TMM FAQ... and call it the
> ASF FAQ.. and then direct all questions to his site.
>
I agree that Jay's posts are a bit annoying, but then again he was
here before us and he did do a good thing creating a very highly
respected meeting place for members of the community.
> If Ray was to post an FAQ and call it the ASF FAQ.. and then point
> traffic to his server... put up a few Q&As... and a few ads... and
> say that his FAQ is the ASF FAQ... would you call it anything other
> than spam? Anything that advertises a single product is an
> advertisement. Or, as it's called on Usenet... spam.
>
> And THAT is what this is about. Putting an FAQ on ASF that is about
> and for ASF, not about and for a web site.
>
OK then do it and ignore everyone else.
speeding
I can agree with that. Especially since it's the only FAQ being posted on
ASF. But, the "holy war" was here long before I was. Every week an
automated spambot posts a link to a web portal. And every week our
beloved kook changes the topic line to SPAM and calls it spam. That's a
very old war indeed.
No doubt. And that they are on a web site is likely an easier format for
reading them, too. That the pointer to the website advertises for the
website, though, it a bit less ideal. Ditto for the fact that the FAQ
itself has advertisements all over it. (on the sides)
After all, it should be perfectly possible to place those very same
questions on a website that has no commercial interests... Or even to put
it on a web host that has commerical interests... but to seperate the FAQ
questions from the rest of the hosted content. (kind of like how I posted
a photo a few weeks ago... yes, its on my wehost... but there's nothing
on the photo or in the link that will get you to the rest of the site,
other than the front end domain name.)
If the FAQ has no products mentioned on it and there were no ads on it
and it did not link to and point to a commerical website... do you think
I'd be objecting? (I wouldn't) Do you think Ray would? (I do, but I
can't know that for certainty until it happens) I don't see Ray raising
objections to the ASF FAQ even though it puts him in a bad light.
> Really i don't get it, exactly what questions on
> http://fastseduction.com/asf-faq.shtml don't apply to uASF?
I understand you don't. Because... I didn't say the questions didn't.
They are excellent questions. Again, where does this - If not A, then B
- logic come into play here? I've never said that the FAQ on FS is not
excellent. I've never said that FS isn't a good forum. All I've said is
that an FAQ for ASF should be on ASF. At the very least, it could be on a
web page that is STRICTLY for the FAQ... The FAQ on FS is nice, but it's
still an advertisment for FS.
What part of advertising for a single commerical product do you think is
valid for the FAQ on a Usenet group? (well, I'll even give you a 'props'
answer... if it was an advert for Ross' product, that might be valid,
since the group in question was started to advertise his product)
>> > We need as little drama to this group as possible, and to just
>> > have people get the questions they have answered. Down with the
>> > trolls, and KJs, just ask questions get good with women, and see
>> > the sun shine. If you are really good on a subject answer just
>> > that question, not everything that someone new could ask. In the
>> > end it doesn't matter that much anyways, because you only really
>> > learn in field.
>>
>> But, part of the drama is that, you might not agree... but then
>> again, you might... Ray is actually correct in calling the mASF and
>> "ASF" FAQ postings spam. They are. Pure and simple. It would be no
>> different than if Mystery was to post a TMM FAQ... and call it the
>> ASF FAQ.. and then direct all questions to his site.
>
> I agree that Jay's posts are a bit annoying, but then again he was
> here before us and he did do a good thing creating a very highly
> respected meeting place for members of the community.
Yes he did. But that does not say anything about or address that fact
that it is spam. Would you or would you not agree that a post that
advertizes a single product is an advertisement? And would that also then
define it as spam?
Put it this way... why don't the posts for the FS FAQ state in the title
SPAM: @@@ FS (aka "Moderated ASF") Forum Info & Access @@@ 2007-01-10
SPAM: @@@ NEW VISITORS READ THIS FIRST (mASF FAQ) @@@ 2007-01-08
Or, since I like to tout reverse logic... would you say that the FAQ I
reposted has an advertisement for a single product? Would you define it
as spam? If Ray was to start posting an FAQ to his website, would you
not find it objectionable/questionable?
>> If Ray was to post an FAQ and call it the ASF FAQ.. and then point
>> traffic to his server... put up a few Q&As... and a few ads... and
>> say that his FAQ is the ASF FAQ... would you call it anything other
>> than spam? Anything that advertises a single product is an
>> advertisement. Or, as it's called on Usenet... spam.
>>
>> And THAT is what this is about. Putting an FAQ on ASF that is about
>> and for ASF, not about and for a web site.
You didn't answer the question I asked. Would you call a RAY FAQ posted
by Ray to direct traffic to his site that advertises his site and his
site alone... spam? Would you openly support it? Would you say that since
it (assuming it did) has good information on it, that it should be used
as the stardard? What if it was Mystery? Or Ross (who at least has a
valid claim on advertising his product on his group)? Or Juggler? Or
anyone else?
> OK then do it and ignore everyone else.
I thank you for the - If A then not B - logic. You are closing off to a
point of view simply because you do not want to consider it. I'm still
listening. I'm still considering. But I'm also getting quite used to the
fact that when *ANY* point of view does not fall into the party line,
then it is not considered.
Formhandle
The way I see it, he's just rolling out a chiseled round stone and
saying "see, this is what the wheel originally looked like" and spending
far too much time doing just that.
He's focused on this now because it probably finally hit him recently
how fruitless it was to spearhead trying to make this place useful, even
on a small scale, while also cleaning up the crap (when really it is
impossible to do so).
He stands on the position that this place is valuable because it's
unmoderated. And that's fine. In fact in my own automated posts I
state this - that there is a good side and bad side, and basically
outline the difference between one place an another, and then what's
left is to leave people to vote with their feet.
Odious wrote:
thehc...@aol.com
Formhandle wrote:
> I think it's better if speeding just did something constructive.
>
The most constructive thing he could do would be sucking on a tailpipe.
Now Im Confused
> I think it's better if speeding just did something constructive.
>
> The way I see it, he's just rolling out a chiseled round stone and
> saying "see, this is what the wheel originally looked like" and
> spending far too much time doing just that.
>
> He's focused on this now because it probably finally hit him
> recently how fruitless it was to spearhead trying to make this place
> useful, even on a small scale, while also cleaning up the crap (when
> really it is impossible to do so).
>
> He stands on the position that this place is valuable because it's
> unmoderated. And that's fine. In fact in my own automated posts I
> state this - that there is a good side and bad side, and basically
> outline the difference between one place an another, and then what's
> left is to leave people to vote with their feet.
>
Not a flame.
So what is your reason for coming around these parts if the value in
this forum is so low?
speeding
news:SLidnZBv__nUui3Y...@giganews.com:
> I think it's better if speeding just did something constructive.
Got any ideas? I already reconstructed the old FAQ for ASF, so that ASF
would have one on it. I'd love to hear more ideas though.
> The way I see it, he's just rolling out a chiseled round stone and
> saying "see, this is what the wheel originally looked like" and
> spending far too much time doing just that.
But, you keep forgetting... there's no wheel on ASF. So, I simply put the
missing wheel back on. ASF hasn't had an FAQ in quite a while, from what
I can tell. It could use one. I put it up. You didn't complain or offer
any ideas when I asked about putting an FAQ up. But now you're all upset
over the idea of an FAQ on ASF. So, offer up some ideas on how to make
ASF better.
> He's focused on this now because it probably finally hit him recently
> how fruitless it was to spearhead trying to make this place useful,
> even on a small scale, while also cleaning up the crap (when really it
> is impossible to do so).
Not at all. It's not fruitless trying to make ASF useful. What's
fruitless is trying to use ASF as a marketing tool. No... you're right.
It's been very useful, hasn't it? But, there's no reason that ASF can't
be a marketing tool for you AND be useful for newcomers also... is there?
Let's face the truth, here Form. Gordon's not made a single peep about
the FAQ I dredged up from the past. Even though it casts him in a most
unfavorable light. But, on your ad for the web portal, every time you
post it, it calls it SPAM. Do you think, honestly now, that if you
stopped posting the ad for FS, that he's start posting the FAQ from the
past as being spam?
Perhaps the first step in making ASF useful is to see it as a place that
can be useful.
> He stands on the position that this place is valuable because it's
> unmoderated. And that's fine. In fact in my own automated posts I
> state this - that there is a good side and bad side, and basically
> outline the difference between one place an another, and then what's
> left is to leave people to vote with their feet.
It's not just that it's unmoderated... but also public, free, and not
maintained at the whim and will of the person that owns it. Usenet is
unowned and most likely eternal. Or, it will almost certainly outlive all
of us. Your web portal most likely will not. Unless you plan to sell it
to someone at some point or to give it to an heir when you retire/punch
out... it will disappear. If you don't pay the bills... your web portal
will cease to exist. Usenet will exist so long as ISPs and newsreaders
carry it.
My position is that your web portal is just dandy. But is it a web
portal, not a Usenet group. Calling your site a Usenet group is simply a
lie. Calling your site *the* alternative to ASF is also a lie. Your site
is a forum, just like the many other forums out there. Well... except
that your is also an ad portal. Most of the others are for one product
(if any) only.
DarkKobold
> Let's face the truth, here Form. Gordon's not made a single peep about
> the FAQ I dredged up from the past. Even though it casts him in a most
> unfavorable light. But, on your ad for the web portal, every time you
> post it, it calls it SPAM. Do you think, honestly now, that if you
> stopped posting the ad for FS, that he's start posting the FAQ from the
> past as being spam?
Because, let's face it, everyone cares deeply what Gordon thinks.
Deeply. It's not at all because he is banned from FS. Oh, and way to
make him the AUTHORITY on what is spam and what isn't. And here, I
thought people were being unneccessarily harsh on you.
>
> My position is that your web portal is just dandy. But is it a web
> portal, not a Usenet group. Calling your site a Usenet group is simply a
> lie. Calling your site *the* alternative to ASF is also a lie.
Why? Because it isn't on USENET? That makes it not an alternative? Wow,
you are Gordon's replacement.
>Your site
> is a forum, just like the many other forums out there. Well... except
> that your is also an ad portal. Most of the others are for one product
> (if any) only.
>
Who cares how many products are advertised? And do you think Formhandle
can support FS on hugs and good wishes? It costs money.
By the way, how is posting a FAQ making you better at PU? .... ....
.... .... ... ... ... ...
I guess we will need a new Gordon eventually.
Formhandle
> Formhandle <formh...@fastseduction.com> writes:
>
>> I think it's better if speeding just did something constructive.
>>
>> The way I see it, he's just rolling out a chiseled round stone and
>> saying "see, this is what the wheel originally looked like" and
>> spending far too much time doing just that.
>>
>> He's focused on this now because it probably finally hit him
>> recently how fruitless it was to spearhead trying to make this place
>> useful, even on a small scale, while also cleaning up the crap (when
>> really it is impossible to do so).
>>
>> He stands on the position that this place is valuable because it's
>> unmoderated. And that's fine. In fact in my own automated posts I
>> state this - that there is a good side and bad side, and basically
>> outline the difference between one place an another, and then what's
>> left is to leave people to vote with their feet.
>>
>
> Not a flame.
>
> So what is your reason for coming around these parts if the value in
> this forum is so low?
Curiosity. The automated posts are reminders of the other option.
I don't think I've ever said this place has 0 value, I'm sure it's still
useful to some, especially those who don't mind the crap. Low value is
still value. I think I may occasionally say this place has gone to
crap, which it has, I don't see it as low value enough to ignore because
certainly some guys still come here with the intention to have real &
productive discussions. But it's drowned out by the crap, which was
determined long ago not to be able to get rid of.
I'm usually curious to see if anything interesting shows up here, but
mostly like a lot of others like to have a laugh when I see the latest
spewings from the trolls and loonies.
For sure I stopped archiving this place quite a while ago, it just made
no sense when out of every 100 posts only 2 or 3 made it past spam,
troll, and crap filters to be worthy of archiving.
Formhandle
> Formhandle <formh...@fastseduction.com> wrote in
> news:SLidnZBv__nUui3Y...@giganews.com:
>
>> I think it's better if speeding just did something constructive.
>
> Got any ideas? I already reconstructed the old FAQ for ASF, so that ASF
> would have one on it. I'd love to hear more ideas though.
Yes:
- Encourage the guys who post good stuff to keep doing so.
- Find articles on the web, share the link, and encourage people to discuss.
- Avoid discussions of the resident loons, don't even acknowledge them,
it only leads to trolling and more crap.
I don't bother with this because I've busy with other stuff but nobody
will fault you for being productive.
In fact I think I gave you suggestions a while back in regards to web
stuff, and here I am being even more constructive for you.
I guess you could either run with it or repeat useless behavior. People
get annoyed by those who yak & don't actually do shit about anything.
I'm sure a certain % of people hate my guts for whatever reason, but
nobody can ever fault me for being a pure loudmouth, I actually get
stuff done.
You're not being respected for the things you're doing because it's all
fruitless and empty. At the very least, I, a big target of your rants
and political complaints, am here to encourage you and this should
impress upon you the difference on how people choose paths to follow.
>> The way I see it, he's just rolling out a chiseled round stone and
>> saying "see, this is what the wheel originally looked like" and
>> spending far too much time doing just that.
>
> But, you keep forgetting... there's no wheel on ASF. So, I simply put the
> missing wheel back on. ASF hasn't had an FAQ in quite a while, from what
> I can tell.
Nobody really kept anyone from reposting that FAQ, but the people who
were re-posting it regularly at one point figured the new FAQ was more
relevant and useful (my guess). What I'm saying is, what you're doing
is kind of pointless and that's what it screams out loud to everyone
which is why I kinda feel sad you're wasting time on it when clearly you
could be motivated to do something DIFFERENT which, actually, might be
both more productive AND beneficial to people. And then maybe you won't
get trashed by others as a troll.
> It could use one. I put it up. You didn't complain or offer
> any ideas when I asked about putting an FAQ up.
That would be really retarded. I already did this effort a while back,
and I already automate the regular posting of a FAQ that just about
everyone finds useful. Anyone who doesn't can just decide to filter it out.
> But now you're all upset
> over the idea of an FAQ on ASF. So, offer up some ideas on how to make
> ASF better.
No I'm not, go ahead and post your FAQ. I just think you're wasting
your time.
But, hey, you know what, tell you what, just to show you how much your
wrong about your position, if you actually improve your version of the
FAQ and make it useful and 100% unbiased and actually accurate, I will
set it up to be automatically published for you. It just can't be
called "official" because there's no way to qualify that, it's just
another FAQ to be found here. I will ONLY do this for you if it's
useful and addresses the most commonly asked questions and so long as no
part of it refers to newsloons & such. Just a totally positive FAQ.
List every damn web site in this entire niche, even. I've got a list of
at least 300 so I can keep up with things, and even that is probably
only a small portion.
We can even have a vote, you get 10 regular posters here, just 10, not
sock puppets or known trolls, to give your version of the FAQ a
thumbs-up and I'll make sure it appears here weekly.
No catch, but I bet you'll say no with some excuse like "How do I know
you'll post it weekly?", etc. You know what, you don't, but then again
nothing would stop YOU from doing it either and the only difference
isn't the regularity but of the ability to create something of value.
That is your challenge.
>> He's focused on this now because it probably finally hit him recently
>> how fruitless it was to spearhead trying to make this place useful,
>> even on a small scale, while also cleaning up the crap (when really it
>> is impossible to do so).
>
> Not at all. It's not fruitless trying to make ASF useful. What's
> fruitless is trying to use ASF as a marketing tool. No... you're right.
> It's been very useful, hasn't it? But, there's no reason that ASF can't
> be a marketing tool for you AND be useful for newcomers also... is there?
>
> Let's face the truth, here Form. Gordon's not made a single peep about
> the FAQ I dredged up from the past. Even though it casts him in a most
> unfavorable light. But, on your ad for the web portal, every time you
> post it, it calls it SPAM. Do you think, honestly now, that if you
> stopped posting the ad for FS, that he's start posting the FAQ from the
> past as being spam?
>
> Perhaps the first step in making ASF useful is to see it as a place that
> can be useful.
>
>> He stands on the position that this place is valuable because it's
>> unmoderated. And that's fine. In fact in my own automated posts I
>> state this - that there is a good side and bad side, and basically
>> outline the difference between one place an another, and then what's
>> left is to leave people to vote with their feet.
>
> It's not just that it's unmoderated... but also public, free, and not
> maintained at the whim and will of the person that owns it.
Show me how that is NOT the case with any USENEt feed provider. You are
at the whim of your USENet provider. So you skip to a different one.
Then you're at their will.
> Usenet is
> unowned and most likely eternal.
USENet is a prorogation protocol, it is not a "place". It's like the
original Napster. That does not mean it's eternal and it does not mean
it's "unowned" anymore than the Internet itself is "unowned". What
makes it work is the combined resources of many places who have decided
to support the infrastructure. At any time, it is all at the will of
one person or another. In fact any group could be at the will of a
small group of people who want to make an effort of trying to get a
group to stop being propagated. Such a group may not succeed 100% but
they can certainly get some or many feed providers to stop propagating
any particular group. You're at the whim of those people. You're also
at the whim of any provider you choose to get access from.
> Or, it will almost certainly outlive all
> of us.
Probably not. USENet will probably die out in the next 10-15 years.
How? My thought is all the file-sharing networks eventually evolve to
replicate the way USENet works for messaging.
> Your web portal most likely will not.
It will probably evolve, too, to become even more useful in ways we
can't even conceive of now.
> Unless you plan to sell it
> to someone at some point or to give it to an heir when you retire/punch
> out... it will disappear. If you don't pay the bills... your web portal
> will cease to exist. Usenet will exist so long as ISPs and newsreaders
> carry it.
Newsreaders don't carry USENet LOL.
I guess if someone stopped paying the bills at Yahoo & MSN, there they
go too. "Poof". Hey, what will all those people with Yahoo mail
accounts do? I guess they should just give them up now seeing as how
USENet is far superior to Yahoo since it has longevity built into it! :)
> My position is that your web portal is just dandy. But is it a web
> portal, not a Usenet group. Calling your site a Usenet group is simply a
> lie.
Um, it is a USENEt group. It's just not propagated. It's just as
accessible as any other newsgroup by any other ISP, it just so happens
that I don't propagate it to support the moderation mechanisms in place.
> Calling your site *the* alternative to ASF is also a lie.
Why? It *IS* *THE* alternative. I built it and maintained it to be
that way and have kept my word on it for over 5 years and don't intend
to change that vision. That is no lie.
Shit man, what we're talking about here is I stepped up and DID
something. What are you doing? Complaining & rolling out the original
stone wheal with some edges smoothed out a little.
> Your site
> is a forum, just like the many other forums out there.
It's available as a newsgroup, using a newsreader. This has been told
you to numerous times.
> Well... except
> that your is also an ad portal. Most of the others are for one product
> (if any) only.
Yet no single ad appears on the newsfeed side when using a newsreader.
Someone can create an account and view & post to it using only a
newsreader and not see one single ad and not get charged a single penny.
Shit man if you miss this point altogether I'm going to have to call you
a tard out of principle.
Krus T. Olfard
news:1169238832.8...@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
I'm sure a.s.f. will need a new gordy loser eventually but I truly doubt
that speeding is up to the task.
His HQ (humor quotient) is considerably lower.
--
Krustavus Teofilus Olfard
------------------
Everything I post is my opinion. If you don't like my opinions then
killfile me, if you have the balls.
BTW: If there is one clear rule in this world, it's "Do NOT stick your
finger in the ancient alien coffin."
speeding
>
>> Let's face the truth, here Form. Gordon's not made a single peep about
>> the FAQ I dredged up from the past. Even though it casts him in a most
>> unfavorable light. But, on your ad for the web portal, every time you
>> post it, it calls it SPAM. Do you think, honestly now, that if you
>> stopped posting the ad for FS, that he's start posting the FAQ from
the
>> past as being spam?
>
> Because, let's face it, everyone cares deeply what Gordon thinks.
> Deeply. It's not at all because he is banned from FS. Oh, and way to
> make him the AUTHORITY on what is spam and what isn't. And here, I
> thought people were being unneccessarily harsh on you.
It's not about whether he can post on FS or about what he is claiming.
It's about his complete lack of any claim at all. He's more than quick to
jump up and point at anything he doesn't agree with, regardless of the
facts behind it. Yet, he's not said a peep about the FAQ.
>> My position is that your web portal is just dandy. But is it a web
>> portal, not a Usenet group. Calling your site a Usenet group is simply
a
>> lie. Calling your site *the* alternative to ASF is also a lie.
>
> Why? Because it isn't on USENET? That makes it not an alternative? Wow,
> you are Gordon's replacement.
Of course because it's not on Usenet. A commerical web portal is so
vastly different that Usenet that making comparisions would be asinine.
Usenet is a text only and free system.
As for the bullshit about comparing me to Gordon and people being
harsh... that's fine with me since those same people are the ones
supporting a commerical web portal against the use of free and open
access.
>>Your site
>> is a forum, just like the many other forums out there. Well... except
>> that your is also an ad portal. Most of the others are for one product
>> (if any) only.
>
> Who cares how many products are advertised? And do you think Formhandle
> can support FS on hugs and good wishes? It costs money.
He could. But no, not very likely. It makes money, yes. Which is why it's
not Usenet. That's why comparing it or any other forum to Usenet is
asinine. Once again, if Ray had a forum and was posting notices and
pointers to his forum on Usenet... would you say it is anything other
than spam?
> By the way, how is posting a FAQ making you better at PU? .... ....
> .... .... ... ... ... ...
What? What does that have to do with spam? (although, it does help, since
I'm reading and checking it... so I'm also learning about it.)
> I guess we will need a new Gordon eventually.
Well, you're doing fine already. Although you've got a lot of competition
from the other Gordonites.
speeding
68.142.88.120:
> I'm sure a.s.f. will need a new gordy loser eventually but I truly doubt
> that speeding is up to the task.
> His HQ (humor quotient) is considerably lower.
Thank You!!!!!
speeding
dnXYSF6bwsyzYn...@giganews.com:
> Now Im Confused wrote:
>
>> Formhandle <formh...@fastseduction.com> writes:
>>
>>> I think it's better if speeding just did something constructive.
>>>
>>> The way I see it, he's just rolling out a chiseled round stone and
>>> saying "see, this is what the wheel originally looked like" and
>>> spending far too much time doing just that.
>>>
>>> He's focused on this now because it probably finally hit him
>>> recently how fruitless it was to spearhead trying to make this place
>>> useful, even on a small scale, while also cleaning up the crap (when
>>> really it is impossible to do so).
>>>
>>> He stands on the position that this place is valuable because it's
>>> unmoderated. And that's fine. In fact in my own automated posts I
>>> state this - that there is a good side and bad side, and basically
>>> outline the difference between one place an another, and then what's
>>> left is to leave people to vote with their feet.
>>>
>>
>> Not a flame.
>>
>> So what is your reason for coming around these parts if the value in
>> this forum is so low?
>
>
> Curiosity. The automated posts are reminders of the other option.
So why even bother with the automated posts? After all, you are the one
that claims to not need spam to advertise for the site.
> I don't think I've ever said this place has 0 value, I'm sure it's
still
> useful to some, especially those who don't mind the crap. Low value is
> still value. I think I may occasionally say this place has gone to
> crap, which it has, I don't see it as low value enough to ignore
because
> certainly some guys still come here with the intention to have real &
> productive discussions. But it's drowned out by the crap, which was
> determined long ago not to be able to get rid of.
>
> I'm usually curious to see if anything interesting shows up here, but
> mostly like a lot of others like to have a laugh when I see the latest
> spewings from the trolls and loonies.
>
> For sure I stopped archiving this place quite a while ago, it just made
> no sense when out of every 100 posts only 2 or 3 made it past spam,
> troll, and crap filters to be worthy of archiving.
>
>
--
speeding
news:T6idnbn0E6plpCzY...@giganews.com:
> speeding wrote:
>
>> Formhandle <formh...@fastseduction.com> wrote in
>> news:SLidnZBv__nUui3Y...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> I think it's better if speeding just did something constructive.
>>
>> Got any ideas? I already reconstructed the old FAQ for ASF, so that
>> ASF would have one on it. I'd love to hear more ideas though.
>
> Yes:
>
> - Encourage the guys who post good stuff to keep doing so.
Good idea. But I've been doing that already. One step ahead of ya there.
> - Find articles on the web, share the link, and encourage people to
> discuss. - Avoid discussions of the resident loons, don't even
> acknowledge them, it only leads to trolling and more crap.
Good idea. But, with a few exceptions, I've been doing that already. Well,
actually, the loons I discusss are you and the Gordonites. But you are
right, discussion with you and the Gordonites does seem lead to trolling
and crap. But, I haven't given up hope that some of you can see reason.
> I don't bother with this because I've busy with other stuff but nobody
> will fault you for being productive.
If you don't bother, then why are you here? Isn't this you bothering, right
now? Aren't your advertisements for your web portal instances of you
bothering with being here? It's not like you're busy updating FS all that
much,. The FAQ and the Player's Guide hasn't changed in about 4 or so
years, accourding to the dates on them.
> In fact I think I gave you suggestions a while back in regards to web
> stuff, and here I am being even more constructive for you.
You're not being constructive for me. You're defending your policy of
advertising your site on Usenet. You are saying that you don't bother here
on ASF and you don't consider ASF a tool for marketing your web portal. I'm
asking you why you are bothering here and why you are using ASF as a
marketing tool for your portal when you claim to be doing neither.
> I guess you could either run with it or repeat useless behavior.
> People get annoyed by those who yak & don't actually do shit about
> anything. I'm sure a certain % of people hate my guts for whatever
> reason, but nobody can ever fault me for being a pure loudmouth, I
> actually get stuff done.
Yes. You're marketing here and bothering here. You're getting a lot of work
done. Marketing and... what... research? I don't hate you.. or most anyone
else... but I do wonder why you are bothering here and why you are
marketing here... especially since you say that marketing here and
bothering here are not your goals or even things you do.
> You're not being respected for the things you're doing because it's
> all fruitless and empty. At the very least, I, a big target of your
> rants and political complaints, am here to encourage you and this
> should impress upon you the difference on how people choose paths to
> follow.
You say it's fruitless and empty. Many others that also support and assist
your site say it's fruitless and empty. People that say that leaving ASF to
move to one and only one specific web portal say it's fruitless and empty.
I say that it's not fruitless and empty to work to improve ASF. But, you
are correct that we have different paths we follow.
I am trying to improve ASF. I'm showing that it is being used as a
marketing tool and that someone is bothering with trying to keep it
fruitless and empty, other than his advertisments. You are claiming that
you don't bother with ASF and don't market here. And yet here you are. And
so are your advertisments for your site.
>>> The way I see it, he's just rolling out a chiseled round stone and
>>> saying "see, this is what the wheel originally looked like" and
>>> spending far too much time doing just that.
>>
>> But, you keep forgetting... there's no wheel on ASF. So, I simply put
>> the missing wheel back on. ASF hasn't had an FAQ in quite a while,
>> from what I can tell.
>
> Nobody really kept anyone from reposting that FAQ, but the people who
> were re-posting it regularly at one point figured the new FAQ was more
> relevant and useful (my guess). What I'm saying is, what you're doing
> is kind of pointless and that's what it screams out loud to everyone
> which is why I kinda feel sad you're wasting time on it when clearly
> you could be motivated to do something DIFFERENT which, actually,
> might be both more productive AND beneficial to people. And then
> maybe you won't get trashed by others as a troll.
You say that nobody "really" kept anyone from posting the FAQ. Yet isn't
that your complaint? That someone is posting the FAQ. Isn't that what this
discussion that you aren't bothering on ASF with is about? It's about the
posting of an FAQ on ASF instead of pointing people to a web portal for
one.
Yes, what you are saying is that my efforts are pointless. You are also
saying that you don't market to ASF. Yet each week there is an automated
advertisment posted to ASF. Are you saying those ads aren't yours? You are
also saying you don't bother with ASF because it's basically fruitless and
empty. Yet here you are.
If I'm wasting my time trying to improve ASF... and you are claiming it's
basically a waste of my time and that ASF is fruitless and empty... then
what are you doing? Proving to me that ASF is fruitless and empty? Proving
to me that it's not worth your (or my) efforts... by making an effort to
prove this? Proving to me that ASF is not worth marketing by posting an
automated advertisement?
If it's not worth the time... why are you here? f it's not a place for
marketing... why not post the ASF FAQ here, rather than a pointer to it on
a web portal?
>> It could use one. I put it up. You didn't complain or offer
>> any ideas when I asked about putting an FAQ up.
>
> That would be really retarded. I already did this effort a while
> back, and I already automate the regular posting of a FAQ that just
> about everyone finds useful. Anyone who doesn't can just decide to
> filter it out.
But you don't post an automated FAQ. You post an automated advertisement
for your site. If you were posting the ASF FAQ, then there would already
have been an FAQ on ASF. But there wasn't. We wouldn't be having this
discussion if you were posting an FAQ to ASF. We wouldn't be having this
discussion if I wasn't posting an FAQ to ASF that contradicts your
advertising. But here's two real curious kinds of questions...
Would we be having this conversation here on ASF if you thought ASF was a
fruitless and empty waste of your time?
Would you be posting an advertisement for your site here on ASF if you
didn't consider ASF to be a place worth using for marketing?
>> But now you're all upset
>> over the idea of an FAQ on ASF. So, offer up some ideas on how to
>> make ASF better.
>
> No I'm not, go ahead and post your FAQ. I just think you're wasting
> your time.
So you've said. You've also said you don't market on ASF and that you don't
bother with ASF. Yet, you are here now and you are posting advertisments on
ASF on a weekly basis.
> But, hey, you know what, tell you what, just to show you how much your
> wrong about your position, if you actually improve your version of the
> FAQ and make it useful and 100% unbiased and actually accurate, I will
> set it up to be automatically published for you. It just can't be
> called "official" because there's no way to qualify that, it's just
> another FAQ to be found here. I will ONLY do this for you if it's
> useful and addresses the most commonly asked questions and so long as
> no part of it refers to newsloons & such. Just a totally positive
> FAQ. List every damn web site in this entire niche, even. I've got a
> list of at least 300 so I can keep up with things, and even that is
> probably only a small portion.
I never called it offical. And I've asked for ideas to improve it. Since
you've offered none, then you must be saying that you alreasy consider it
to be useful. If it's unbiased, it's only unbiased towards Gordon...
possibly. But Gordon's not complaining. You are. Yet it's totally fair
towards you and your advertising. So, feel free set up automated posting
for me, provided you don't go changing it so that it is biased towards your
marketing goals.
As I recall, your advertising does refers to newsloons. And yours doesn't
mention other websites. Not a one. Except yours. So, how is that different
than my mentioning one person by name? A person that's not raised a single
objection to it? Why are you objecting for him? ....Are you defending him?
Why do you agree with his posts? What are you, a 9/11 hater or something?
:) (HC logic at its best)...
How about this... You stop the ads for mASF... and change the ASF FAQ to
point to only the questions listed from http://www.fastseduction.com/asf-
faq.shtml#questions... but put these questions onto a seperate page on your
site, such that all the ads are gone... it's just a page with just the
questions... and I'll stop postng the FAQ..... since then there would be a
better FAQ on ASF. Even being linked off site.
> We can even have a vote, you get 10 regular posters here, just 10, not
> sock puppets or known trolls, to give your version of the FAQ a
> thumbs-up and I'll make sure it appears here weekly.
The regular posters you refer to mostly tend to say that ASF is fruitless
and pointless and a waste of time. They only post here because of Gordon,
as the claims go. So that would be asinine. Tell you what though... how
about we get just one poster to do that... ask Gordon. He's the one that my
FAQ version directly mentions. Ask Gordon which FAQ version he considers
spam versus not.
But, I'm not looking for approval. Not from him and not from you. I'm
simply posting up an FAQ that actually and honestly on ASF and is not
advertising a web portal. Nice try on the AMOG tactic, but I'm not an
approval seeker. (props to you... someone that studies this stuff actually
using it... it's about time) That part of my AFC side is mostly burned out.
> No catch, but I bet you'll say no with some excuse like "How do I know
> you'll post it weekly?", etc. You know what, you don't, but then
> again nothing would stop YOU from doing it either and the only
> difference isn't the regularity but of the ability to create something
> of value. That is your challenge.
My challenge has already been laid down. My challenge is met. I asked for
opinions. I asked for advice. I asked for input. And not even Gordon was
complaining. You are, now that it directly conflicts against your
advertising.
Your challenge is to remove the advertising from the FAQ. Can you do that?
I'll bet you come up with some excuse like how it's not possible to remove
the advertising from a page posted to your site... or that you won't stop
advertising your site... or that it's not necessary to remove the
advertising...
I don't have a Usenet provider. I have an ISP. My ISP provides access to
Usenet. Granted, I don't get every available Usenet feed out there. But, I
could if I used a different Usenet feeder. But Usenet itself is free.
Access to it is not. The WWW and the Internet is free. Access to it is not.
I'm at the will of my access provider as far as what access I can get...
but no one controls or owns Usenet.
There is almost no way that Usenet itself is going to change. It's not like
someone somewhere can change code or flip a switch and Usenet itself goes
away. It's not like someone can make a change and Usenet itself will
require a login process. It's not like someone can decide to remove posts
from Usenet itself and they get removed from Usenet. All of those things
are very easy to change on a portal, page, or forum. If you walk over (or
whatever) to your server and kill it... then FS and all the forums and
posts are also gone.
>> Usenet is unowned and most likely eternal.
>
> USENet is a prorogation protocol, it is not a "place". It's like the
> original Napster. That does not mean it's eternal and it does not
> mean it's "unowned" anymore than the Internet itself is "unowned".
The Internet is also unowned. It's at best, controlled and moderated by an
internation group. But yes, it's not a place or a machine or a single
service. It's not something that can just be shut down... not like Napster
was or like FS and its forums could be.
> What makes it work is the combined resources of many places who have
> decided to support the infrastructure. At any time, it is all at the
> will of one person or another. In fact any group could be at the will
> of a small group of people who want to make an effort of trying to get
> a group to stop being propagated. Such a group may not succeed 100%
> but they can certainly get some or many feed providers to stop
> propagating any particular group. You're at the whim of those people.
No. A group can ASK for propagation to be stopped. Not only will the not
succeed 100%, the likelyhood they would succeed at all is not very high. As
you point out, what makes Usenet (or the Internet) work is the combined
resources of all the people on the planet that support it. It's not the
will of one person or another. It's the will of ALL the people. Everyone
that supports it. Which is why you could ask for Usenet or the Internet to
be turned off. But the odds of even getting a change made to a small
portion of it is nearly zero, unless you can get a near global concensus.
But, shutting off a web forum is pretty simple. Stop paying your bills and
you'll discover that it's very simple. If you are hosting the content on
your own servers... walk over and shut them off. And you'll see how simple
it is. Ask www.mysterymethod.com how easy it is for a website to simply
disappear. It did. Overnight. That website is gone. Granted, it really just
moved to www.themysterymethod.com. But it's entirely possible for that site
to simply shut down. And then it's gone. Usenet isn't going to just shut
down.
> You're also at the whim of any provider you choose to get access
> from.
Just as they are at my whim to continue purchasing their service. Access
isn't the point. If you shut off your servers... then whether I have access
to the Internet or not...I'm not getting on your forum. Your forum can
cease to exist simply on your whim to shut down. Usenet can not cease to
exist, not unless, as you stated, you get a global concensus to shut it
down.
>> Or, it will almost certainly outlive all
>> of us.
>
> Probably not. USENet will probably die out in the next 10-15 years.
> How? My thought is all the file-sharing networks eventually evolve to
> replicate the way USENet works for messaging.
I don't doubt the file sharing networks will replicate how Usenet works.
But, I do doubt that Usenet will cease. File sharing just doesn't offer the
same ease or access that file sharing does. File sharing is dependant on
file sharing servers. Now, if enough ISPs, academies, and governments
decide to start hosting file sharing servers... then perhaps I can see that
happening. But, there are already doing that. They even gave it a name.
Usenet.
>> Your web portal most likely will not.
>
> It will probably evolve, too, to become even more useful in ways we
> can't even conceive of now.
Or it can cease to exist. But, what do you plan to do with it in 50 years?
Will you even be around to know? Can you say that you GUARENTEE it will
continue to exist in 50 years? Or even just next year?
>> Unless you plan to sell it
>> to someone at some point or to give it to an heir when you
>> retire/punch out... it will disappear. If you don't pay the bills...
>> your web portal will cease to exist. Usenet will exist so long as
>> ISPs and newsreaders carry it.
>
> Newsreaders don't carry USENet LOL.
News readers don't. Funny funny. But news servers do.
> I guess if someone stopped paying the bills at Yahoo & MSN, there they
> go too. "Poof". Hey, what will all those people with Yahoo mail
> accounts do? I guess they should just give them up now seeing as how
> USENet is far superior to Yahoo since it has longevity built into it!
> :)
Yep. They would. And could. What would all those people with Yahoo accunts
do? Jack shit. They would lose all access to their mail accounts... and
depending on how Yahoo shuts down... might not have ANY way to get mail
that was on the servers. Not only does the access cease... but the CONTENT
also ceases to exist. What happened to people that had Juno e-mail
accounts. If they didn't get their mail off the servers before they shut
down... they lost that mail forever.
But this is strawman.
>> My position is that your web portal is just dandy. But is it a web
>> portal, not a Usenet group. Calling your site a Usenet group is
>> simply a lie.
>
> Um, it is a USENEt group. It's just not propagated. It's just as
> accessible as any other newsgroup by any other ISP, it just so happens
> that I don't propagate it to support the moderation mechanisms in
> place.
No, it's not a Usenet group. When I post a message on Usenet... does it
show up on your news feed? When someone posts a message to your usefeed...
does it show up on Usenet? It's not propagated. And if its not propagated,
then it's not Usenet. Usenet is a propagated system. Something that's not
propagated is then not a part of a propagated system. It's BASED on Usenet.
It's not a part OF Usenet.
You are saying that your moderated forum is just as accessible as any other
newsgroup? So, if I can get into Cox and their news server... what would I
add to the news feed file to add mASF to Cox's feed? If I had a news server
in my basement (if I had a basement) that got direct feed from Usenet...
what would I add to allow it to post to your moderated forum? If I was the
news admin at AT&T (or is it at&t?) and I wanted to add mASF to the offered
news groups... what settings should I use to add it?
None... thank you. Your system is not propagated. It is not a part of
Usenet. It is a private system on a private server and if you shut it off,
it is gone forever.
>> Calling your site *the* alternative to ASF is also a lie.
>
> Why? It *IS* *THE* alternative. I built it and maintained it to be
> that way and have kept my word on it for over 5 years and don't intend
> to change that vision. That is no lie.
No, it is not. www.themysterymethod.com is another web forum that is also
an alternative to your site and to Usenet. www.socialskillz.com is yet
another alternative to your forum and to Usenet. www.theseductionbible.com
is another alternative to your forum and to Usenet.
www.altseductionfast.com is also an alternative to your site and to
Usenet... AND THAT SITE even seems to get the the ASF feed. I haven't tried
posting there to see if the post would propagate to here, though.
There are *MANY* alternatives. If any one site could claim to be "the"
alternative to ASF Usenet... it would be www.altseductionfast.com... as at
least that site GETS AND POSTS to ASF. Yours does not. But, feel free to
start having your servers propagate all the posts made on FS to ASF and
then that would make me wrong.
> Shit man, what we're talking about here is I stepped up and DID
> something. What are you doing? Complaining & rolling out the
> original stone wheal with some edges smoothed out a little.
Yes, you created a web portal, website, and a forum. And you advertise it
to ASF. It would be no different that what Gordon's done, Mystery's done,
or many others have done... except they don't post a weekly advertisement
to ASF claiming to be the only alternative to ASF.
>> Your site
>> is a forum, just like the many other forums out there.
>
> It's available as a newsgroup, using a newsreader. This has been told
> you to numerous times.
Great... How do I get access to the news reader using Cox and Xnews? When I
ask Cox to add it to their newsfeeds... what should I be asking them to
look for? When I ask AT&T to add it to their feeds... when I ask Charter to
add it to theirs... when I ask Google to add it to their archives... when I
ask MIT to add it to their servers... when I ask OSU to add it to theirs...
...what should I tell them to look for?
I'm looking forward to my posts on your forum being propagated on Usenet.
>> Well... except
>> that your is also an ad portal. Most of the others are for one
>> product (if any) only.
>
> Yet no single ad appears on the newsfeed side when using a newsreader.
> Someone can create an account and view & post to it using only a
> newsreader and not see one single ad and not get charged a single
> penny.
Great. And when it is propgagated to the servers maintained by Cox.. and
AT&T, and Charter, and Google, and ... then I know I won't have to worry
that if you shut your servers down, that the posts nor the access will
disappear. I'll be able to get it from any feed from Usenet.. not just
through your servers. So, what's that setting I need to relay to a few of
the various ISPs and academies so they will start picking up your feeds?
> Shit man if you miss this point altogether I'm going to have to call
> you a tard out of principle.
Look in the mirror when you say it. You're claiming that it's not like the
other forums that are not part of a propagated system, because it's got
news reader access. But then you say it's not propagated. You say it's the
alternative to ASF... but it doesn't post to ASF nor does it even GET ASF.
It's not even marginally connected to ASF. It was created as a means to
AVOID ASF. Not to be an alternative to it. It was created, lest you forget,
because people wanted to avoid answering the same newcomer questions over
and over again.
And there's often a document that gets posted to a newsgroup to help with
that. It's called an FAQ. Something that wasn't being posted on ASF for
quite some time until I restarted it.
Johannes Seppi
>Formhandle <formh...@fastseduction.com> wrote in news:6I-
>dnXYSF6bwsyzYn...@giganews.com:
>
>> Now Im Confused wrote:
>>
>>> Formhandle <formh...@fastseduction.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> I think it's better if speeding just did something constructive.
>>>>
>>>> The way I see it, he's just rolling out a chiseled round stone and
>>>> saying "see, this is what the wheel originally looked like" and
>>>> spending far too much time doing just that.
>>>>
>>>> He's focused on this now because it probably finally hit him
>>>> recently how fruitless it was to spearhead trying to make this place
>>>> useful, even on a small scale, while also cleaning up the crap (when
>>>> really it is impossible to do so).
>>>>
>>>> He stands on the position that this place is valuable because it's
>>>> unmoderated. And that's fine. In fact in my own automated posts I
>>>> state this - that there is a good side and bad side, and basically
>>>> outline the difference between one place an another, and then what's
>>>> left is to leave people to vote with their feet.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not a flame.
>>>
>>> So what is your reason for coming around these parts if the value in
>>> this forum is so low?
>>
>>
>> Curiosity. The automated posts are reminders of the other option.
>
>So why even bother with the automated posts? After all, you are the one
>that claims to not need spam to advertise for the site.
>
OK, it will probably not convince you, but
1) Formhandle created the "moderated version of AFS", whether you
accept it or not, and
2) it is a service and not spam to point to the place where the
regulars went to
Johannes
speeding
news:g4v4r2trms5g7qnta...@4ax.com:
I accept he created it. No doubts there. He created it to avoid having to
repeatedly answer newcomer questions. That's clear from the ASF archives.
> 2) it is a service and not spam to point to the place where the
> regulars went to
What is your definition of the word spam? and not the lunch meat...
Perhaps you have a different definition. Mine is basically... repeatedly
sending commercial (advertising) messages to many or group recipients.
Such as if Gordon (or another name) was to post a message weekly telling
people to visit his web site as the alternative to ASF.
> Johannes
Johannes Seppi
Sigh... He greated the *groups* on fastseduction.com as a moderated
alternative to ASF.
>> 2) it is a service and not spam to point to the place where the
>> regulars went to
>
>What is your definition of the word spam? and not the lunch meat...
>Perhaps you have a different definition. Mine is basically... repeatedly
>sending commercial (advertising) messages to many or group recipients.
>Such as if Gordon (or another name) was to post a message weekly telling
>people to visit his web site as the alternative to ASF.
>
Yes, but since Formhandle's site *is* the moderated alternative for
ASF it is a service, as I wrote above. Most of the regulars accepted
it as this alternative and moved there. Thiat site has been greeted as
a long awaited solution for a certain problem.
That you don't want to accept this is your problem. If you don't like
it, then filter it, but don't expect the world to change to fit to
*your* expectations.
Johannes
Alex
jse...@gmx.kaspam.at wrote on 1/21/07 2:28 AM:
> If you don't like
> it, then filter it, but don't expect the world to change to fit to
> *your* expectations.
Hmmm.... Where have I heard that told to speeding before?
HeeroYuy
"Alex" <akau...@nyc.NOSPAM.rr.com> wrote in message
news:C1D8F902.F18B5%akau...@nyc.NOSPAM.rr.com...
I think about 5 of us, including yourself, tried to pound that tidbit of
respect-earning advice into his pin head. Sadly, like most trolls, it seems
he just will never learn to shut up for once in his miserable life and take
someone's advice.
rix...@gmail.com
speeding wrote:
> "DarkKobold" <darkk...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:1169238832.8...@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
> >
> >> Let's face the truth, here Form. Gordon's not made a single peep about
> >> the FAQ I dredged up from the past. Even though it casts him in a most
> >> unfavorable light. But, on your ad for the web portal, every time you
> >> post it, it calls it SPAM. Do you think, honestly now, that if you
> >> stopped posting the ad for FS, that he's start posting the FAQ from
> the
> >> past as being spam?
> >
> > Because, let's face it, everyone cares deeply what Gordon thinks.
> > Deeply. It's not at all because he is banned from FS. Oh, and way to
> > make him the AUTHORITY on what is spam and what isn't. And here, I
> > thought people were being unneccessarily harsh on you.
>
> It's not about whether he can post on FS or about what he is claiming.
> It's about his complete lack of any claim at all. He's more than quick to
> jump up and point at anything he doesn't agree with, regardless of the
> facts behind it. Yet, he's not said a peep about the FAQ.
Which FAQ? Your's or Formhandle's.
>
>
> As for the bullshit about comparing me to Gordon and people being
> harsh... that's fine with me since those same people are the ones
> supporting a commerical web portal against the use of free and open
> access.
And what's wrong with supporting (meaning agreeing with its usefulness)
a commercial site that you don't have to pay for? Unless you watch HBO
(which you pay for) most commercial sites have to earn a way to keep it
in business. But you don't have to support the advertisers (especially
if you don't agree with them), you can give a donation (but I thought
that was voluntary). What happened to the forefathers of ASF? Did
they leave here because they couldn't get their message across? I've
seen better groups (such as some on Yahoo) that are as good as
Formhandle's (no disrespect) and others that offer the same content.
And I've seen those groups remove individuals because of reasons that
went against the gist of their forums (not necessarily quick because
some of those 'moderators' gave them chances to stay on-topic).
Like it matters...
>> >> Let's face the truth, here Form. Gordon's not made a single peep about
>> >> the FAQ I dredged up from the past. Even though it casts him in a most
>> >> unfavorable light. But, on your ad for the web portal, every time you
>> >> post it, it calls it SPAM. Do you think, honestly now, that if you
>> >> stopped posting the ad for FS, that he's start posting the FAQ from
>> >> the past as being spam?
Parker's past history of AOL chat rooms, with files printed on CD and doc's
from AOL's legal dept, grp-ie has no flockin' chance to deny his Internet
history. Add to that the emails sent by the (now almost reaching 100)
people who have been "..bothered.." by this child molesting/asswipe coward,
that those who "..r there.." can, if needed, show up IN court to nail grp-ie's
ass to the court room wall. Let's show his posts, that called women Judges
"..cunts n whores..", and ANY Judge in ANY court a "..fuckin' judge/court..".
Gordon Roy "..herpes makes my 'GAME' work.." Parker has no CLUE the records
saved, and his posting history he so hard tried to nuke, that will cut him at
the (..no..he has no Balls..Denise has them..) knees in any "..I/Failure.."
he can pretend to dream up, or have his, um, 'hellen' street walk for change.
>> > Because, let's face it, everyone cares deeply what Gordon thinks.
>> > Deeply. It's not at all because he is banned from FS. Oh, and way to
>> > make him the AUTHORITY on what is spam and what isn't. And here, I
>> > thought people were being unneccessarily harsh on you.
It's almost like he WANTS it to happen..
>> It's not about whether he can post on FS or about what he is claiming.
>> It's about his complete lack of any claim at all. He's more than quick to
>> jump up and point at anything he doesn't agree with, regardless of the
>> facts behind it. Yet, he's not said a peep about the FAQ.
When U have nothing, U have nothing to lose..
>Which FAQ? Your's or Formhandle's.
Got over 10 GIG of grp-ie posting history, all "FAQ'S", and public and
PERSONAL emails from many who have contacted L/E folks. It's not pretty..
>> As for the bullshit about comparing me to Gordon and people being
>> harsh... that's fine with me since those same people are the ones
>> supporting a commerical web portal against the use of free and open
>> access.
Not with me. I have ***NO*** interest in those who need Usenet to
get laid, and that is one of grp-ie's biggest fears. Name one of ya
who has *MET* grp-ie face to face...with video proof. Hands up.
Fuz has gotten closer, and owns the video shit (since he paid 4 it)
but I tell ya..Parker is a loser. ANYONE who FEARS ANYTHING this joke
says lost the battle. Parker is a joke. Fuz has Vid of him CRYING after
a (HB7) tossed the drink...and the Vid of the bartender laughing. HA HA HA
>And what's wrong..
..nothing, which is why any of ya need such crap, go where there is
no BS involved, no "..grp-ie.." I never post there, nor visit...
I got a woman, and She's as mean as me..
JJTj
------------Sung to the N.Y. Dolls song "Personality Crisis" ----
YEEEAAHHHHH!!! YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH..
<WAIT> NO NO NO NO ..NO NO NO.. N0! N0!
Well we can't take him this week
And his dolls can't write another S-P-E-A-CCCCC-HHH !!!
..they hope for a better day when this newsloon just fades away..
all' about that "..inexcusable failure.."
...if he likes it &/or no-t..
But now his um, 'hellen' & herpes, 'dats all he got..
(Judge hadd'a rule about that "..inexcusable..")
yeah...yeah yeah yeah...
But now he needs to be a man, now he got to be 'da man'..
AND he KNOWS he gots to do it all, NOW NOW WOWS !!!
Yet he thinks about the times he failed, on every account..
..& it sure got to be a 'drag' when he wants2 kill his'self..
he has to deal with "..AOL.." chat rooms where he molest' about
(He denied' 'bout..)
..'bout his "..inexcusable failure.."
..a Judge told him that.....that's what he got..
But now his mommie, and dollies, 'dats all he got..
Just GOTTA SHOUT ABOUT HIS "..inexcusable.."
YEAH YEAH YEAH...YEAH...
<break for crowd to think the song is over..>
And he's a... coward hate monger on that 9/11 afternoon..
<livin proof of a real loonie-toon ! ! >
change on into da sock-puppet, fooling no 1 2 soon..
he WETS his UNDER-ROOOOOSSSSSS!!!!!!
......"..inexcusable failure.."
if he likes it &/or no-t....It's always "..NOT.."
But now his, 'hellen' and herpes ' dats whot he got..
That loser is a "..INEXCUSABLE FAILURE !!!!.."
YEAH YEAH..YEAH YEAH..
Now, with all da perks n free rides Penni Parker pays 4
His dollies become his 'private friends' nite n day 4..
That "..inexcusable.." 's (failing to do it all againnnnn)
(ah ah..no longer fun..)
"..inexcusable.." will his pain ever end..?
<not 2 B so much like a..>
"..inexcusable.." impressions of a joke,
..n 2 pretend 2 pretend 2 pretend too pretend,
"..inexcusable ..".." dreams of celebrities he'll never meet
(he lives their life off television)
Talkin' about that "..inexcusable failure.."
if he likes it &/or no-t....It's always "..NOT.."
But now um, 'hellen' and herpes ' dats whot he got..
hey grp-ie don't you worry
"..inexcusable failure.." please don't cry
he's just a "..inexcusable failure.." and cannot stop
Because he walks a "..inexcusable.."
Talks a "..inexcusable failure.."
speeding
Yes, we agree. He created the moderated forum on FS so a few folks could
avoid answering newcomer questions. That's exactly what the archives
show. We do agree, yes.
>>> 2) it is a service and not spam to point to the place where the
>>> regulars went to
>>
>>What is your definition of the word spam? and not the lunch meat...
>>Perhaps you have a different definition. Mine is basically...
>>repeatedly sending commercial (advertising) messages to many or group
>>recipients. Such as if Gordon (or another name) was to post a message
>>weekly telling people to visit his web site as the alternative to ASF.
>
> Yes, but since Formhandle's site *is* the moderated alternative for
> ASF it is a service, as I wrote above. Most of the regulars accepted
> it as this alternative and moved there. Thiat site has been greeted as
> a long awaited solution for a certain problem.
But it's not THE moderated alterative... it is *AN* alternative. One
among many. Claiming that FS is the one and only alternative to ASF is
total bullshit. There are many. I'm sure we can both name a few others. I
agree, it was greated as the solution to avoiding newcomer questions. So,
that makes ASF the perfect place for newcomers to come and ask newcomer
questions. After all, they aren't welcomed to ask repeated newcomer
questions at FS. That was the point of creating FS... to avoid them. So
why encourage them to go there?
> That you don't want to accept this is your problem. If you don't like
> it, then filter it, but don't expect the world to change to fit to
> *your* expectations.
We are agreeing, then. We both agree that FS was created to avoid
newcomer questions. So, that only leaves the question of why FS
advertises here on ASF if the claims that FS wants to avoid newcomer
questions... and more to the correct point... that ASF is dead and not a
viable marketing tool....
Why would someone make weekly advertisements on a station they consider
to be unwatched... especially if they don;t want to sell to the customer
base that watches that station?
(think of it this way... would you expect to see Girls Gone Wild ads on
Lifetime TV at 5pm on a Thursday? If GGW started advertising on a
station they consider to be worthless and not having their tarket
market... wouldn't you wonder why?)
speeding
news:1169409981.0...@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com:
>
> speeding wrote:
>> "DarkKobold" <darkk...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> news:1169238832.8...@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> >
>> >> Let's face the truth, here Form. Gordon's not made a single peep
>> >> about the FAQ I dredged up from the past. Even though it casts him
>> >> in a most unfavorable light. But, on your ad for the web portal,
>> >> every time you post it, it calls it SPAM. Do you think, honestly
>> >> now, that if you stopped posting the ad for FS, that he's start
>> >> posting the FAQ from
>> the
>> >> past as being spam?
>> >
>> > Because, let's face it, everyone cares deeply what Gordon thinks.
>> > Deeply. It's not at all because he is banned from FS. Oh, and way
>> > to make him the AUTHORITY on what is spam and what isn't. And here,
>> > I thought people were being unneccessarily harsh on you.
>>
>> It's not about whether he can post on FS or about what he is
>> claiming. It's about his complete lack of any claim at all. He's more
>> than quick to jump up and point at anything he doesn't agree with,
>> regardless of the facts behind it. Yet, he's not said a peep about
>> the FAQ.
>
> Which FAQ? Your's or Formhandle's.
Mine. He weekly calls Form's spam. Which kicks off a minor spat of
flames. Every week. Almost like there's a motive for it.
>> As for the bullshit about comparing me to Gordon and people being
>> harsh... that's fine with me since those same people are the ones
>> supporting a commerical web portal against the use of free and open
>> access.
>
> And what's wrong with supporting (meaning agreeing with its
> usefulness) a commercial site that you don't have to pay for? Unless
> you watch HBO (which you pay for) most commercial sites have to earn a
> way to keep it in business. But you don't have to support the
> advertisers (especially if you don't agree with them), you can give a
> donation (but I thought that was voluntary). What happened to the
> forefathers of ASF? Did they leave here because they couldn't get
> their message across? I've seen better groups (such as some on Yahoo)
> that are as good as Formhandle's (no disrespect) and others that offer
> the same content. And I've seen those groups remove individuals
> because of reasons that went against the gist of their forums (not
> necessarily quick because some of those 'moderators' gave them chances
> to stay on-topic).
I don't have any problems with supporting a commercial site... even *IF*
you pay for it. What I mind is supporting a commercial site and claiming
that advertising from that site is not advertising. When I see a
comemrial for the WB, as an example, I have no problem with seeing it and
watching it. But, no one says that it is anything but an advertisement.
Or, for another example, I don't mind seeing 30 minute infomercials
advertising for a product. But they state upfront that they are an
infomercial... and the station generally puts up a statement saying that
the comemrical is not the opinion of the station. It's usually pretty
clear it's an advertisement... and when it's not, the company making the
ad gets fined for it. (like one of the diet infomercials just got nailed
with)
The founders of ASF, I believe, did leave. At least that's the claims. I
believe the claims were that they could get their message across better
in other manners. That ASF was no longer viable, for them, as a marketing
tool. Someone else took over, perhaps.
I agree there are other sites that are as good (or nearly as) as Form's.
And that many offer the same content. Which is the issue, I suppose. The
claims raised here is that Form's site it the only site. That there is no
alternative to ASF but his forum. That his forum is the only forum that
offers anything even remotely like ASF. And I'm saying that claim is
basically bullshit. I'm also saying that advertising for his is
advertising for his site.
Johannes Seppi
[...]
>>>> OK, it will probably not convince you, but
>>>>
>>>> 1) Formhandle created the "moderated version of AFS", whether you
>>>> accept it or not, and
>>>
>>>I accept he created it. No doubts there. He created it to avoid having
>>>to repeatedly answer newcomer questions. That's clear from the ASF
>>>archives.
>>
>> Sigh... He greated the *groups* on fastseduction.com as a moderated
>> alternative to ASF.
>
>Yes, we agree. He created the moderated forum on FS so a few folks could
>avoid answering newcomer questions. That's exactly what the archives
>show. We do agree, yes.
>
Well, you misinterpret what I am saying and then say we agree? Where
did you learn that debating style?
The reason "to avoid answering newcoimer questions" exists only in
your head.
What I cannot understand is why you don't simply ask the people
around that time as to why the group has been created. But no, you
have to do your own little Sherlock Holmes number and then tu shut out
reality to be able to keep your "facts".
>>>> 2) it is a service and not spam to point to the place where the
>>>> regulars went to
>>>
>>>What is your definition of the word spam? and not the lunch meat...
>>>Perhaps you have a different definition. Mine is basically...
>>>repeatedly sending commercial (advertising) messages to many or group
>>>recipients. Such as if Gordon (or another name) was to post a message
>>>weekly telling people to visit his web site as the alternative to ASF.
>>
>> Yes, but since Formhandle's site *is* the moderated alternative for
>> ASF it is a service, as I wrote above. Most of the regulars accepted
>> it as this alternative and moved there. Thiat site has been greeted as
>> a long awaited solution for a certain problem.
>
>But it's not THE moderated alterative... it is *AN* alternative. One
>among many. Claiming that FS is the one and only alternative to ASF is
>total bullshit.
Yes, claiming that would be bullshit. But who *is* claiming it? *You*
are doing it here to build your strawman.
>There are many. I'm sure we can both name a few others.
>I agree, it was greated as the solution to avoiding newcomer questions.
No, you don't agree, as that would presuppose that that was my take on
things, too. You just restate one of your pet theories.
> So,
>that makes ASF the perfect place for newcomers to come and ask newcomer
>questions. After all, they aren't welcomed to ask repeated newcomer
>questions at FS. That was the point of creating FS... to avoid them. So
>why encourage them to go there?
>
>> That you don't want to accept this is your problem. If you don't like
>> it, then filter it, but don't expect the world to change to fit to
>> *your* expectations.
>
>We are agreeing, then. We both agree that FS was created to avoid
>newcomer questions. So, that only leaves the question of why FS
>advertises here on ASF if the claims that FS wants to avoid newcomer
>questions... and more to the correct point... that ASF is dead and not a
>viable marketing tool....
Well, you couldn't have shown better that you don't let reality
interfere with your model of the world.
Well, I should have known better than preaching to the deaf, or in
this case, those that stuff both fingers in their ears while going "la
la la"
Johannes
speeding
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 09:53:40 GMT, speeding <no...@biz.org> wrote:
> [...]
>
>>>>> OK, it will probably not convince you, but
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Formhandle created the "moderated version of AFS", whether you
>>>>> accept it or not, and
>>>>
>>>>I accept he created it. No doubts there. He created it to avoid having
>>>>to repeatedly answer newcomer questions. That's clear from the ASF
>>>>archives.
>>>
>>> Sigh... He greated the *groups* on fastseduction.com as a moderated
>>> alternative to ASF.
>>
>>Yes, we agree. He created the moderated forum on FS so a few folks could
>>avoid answering newcomer questions. That's exactly what the archives
>>show. We do agree, yes.
>>
>
> Well, you misinterpret what I am saying and then say we agree? Where
> did you learn that debating style?
> The reason "to avoid answering newcoimer questions" exists only in
> your head.
No no... that's directly from the archives of ASF. The posts back in 2001
discussing the virtues and vices of creating a moderated version of ASF
discussed the problems of how to avoid newcomer questions that kept being
repeated.
Oh. I get it. You're saying that the forum created by Form on FS wasn't
about making an alternative to ASF at all. I guess you could be right.
after all... there were several regulars that stated they didn't see a need
or even a desire for creating a moderated version of ASF. But that kind of
runs counter to the current claims that the FS forum was created as some
alternative to ASF and that it is the only alternative to ASF.
> What I cannot understand is why you don't simply ask the people
> around that time as to why the group has been created. But no, you
> have to do your own little Sherlock Holmes number and then tu shut out
> reality to be able to keep your "facts".
What part of - read the archives - did you miss? Because I didn't miss it
when I asked about all this. That's the only answer that I was given. So I
did read the archives. And the archives clearly show the debate about the
need for a moderated version of ASF centered on some people that hated
seeing the same questions asked over and over versus others that thought
that having newcomers ask the same questions didn't really justify an
effort to create a moderated version of ASF. No one was wanting to step up
and create a moderated version of ASF, but Form decided to create a forum
that could be made compatible with news readers on FS.
>>>>> 2) it is a service and not spam to point to the place where the
>>>>> regulars went to
>>>>
>>>>What is your definition of the word spam? and not the lunch meat...
>>>>Perhaps you have a different definition. Mine is basically...
>>>>repeatedly sending commercial (advertising) messages to many or group
>>>>recipients. Such as if Gordon (or another name) was to post a message
>>>>weekly telling people to visit his web site as the alternative to ASF.
>>>
>>> Yes, but since Formhandle's site *is* the moderated alternative for
>>> ASF it is a service, as I wrote above. Most of the regulars accepted
>>> it as this alternative and moved there. Thiat site has been greeted as
>>> a long awaited solution for a certain problem.
>>
>>But it's not THE moderated alterative... it is *AN* alternative. One
>>among many. Claiming that FS is the one and only alternative to ASF is
>>total bullshit.
>
> Yes, claiming that would be bullshit. But who *is* claiming it? *You*
> are doing it here to build your strawman.
No. Form himself claimed it is THE alternative. Allow me to quote it...
--------
news:SLidnZBv__nUui3Y...@giganews.com
> Calling your site *the* alternative to ASF is also a lie.
Why? It *IS* *THE* alternative.
--------
So, you are saying that Formhandle, the creator of the forum, is making a
claim that is full of shit? *HE* is the one, among others, that is claiming
it... let me say it as he did... *IS *THE* alternative....
It's not a strawman when the person that created a thing claims it to be
something that even you seem to say it is not. It is THIS claim, more than
anything, that I disagree with. I do not, let me scream it, because it
seems to get lost quite often.... I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST FS AS A
FORUM. I READ IT AND LOVE IT. But, it is just another forum. It is not the
single sole alternative to ASF... Yet that *IS* the claim Formhandle made
in the quote above AND... more importantly, it is the claim made in the
weekly advertisment posted for the forum.
>>There are many. I'm sure we can both name a few others.
>>I agree, it was greated as the solution to avoiding newcomer questions.
>
> No, you don't agree, as that would presuppose that that was my take on
> things, too. You just restate one of your pet theories.
Perhaps that is true. If I read you correctly here, you are disagreeing
with Formhandle's claim that his forum is the... wait... *IS* *THE*
alternative to ASF. You seem to be saying, as I did, that this claim is
bullshit. You also seem to be saying that the FS forum was created as
something other than what was claimed by Formhandle and others during the
discussions listed in the archives back in 2001. Perhaps that is also
correct... you don't believe Formhandle's claim that his forum *IS* *THE*
alternative... so perhaps you don't believe his claim back in 2001 when he
and others were discussing a way to avoid newcomer questions.
Though, then... if you say Formhandle was making another false claim...
that he didn't create the forum to avoid newcomer questions... what other
reason would there have been? It certainly can't be due to disruptive
reasons... since between Gordon and Steele, seven years had pasted without
anyone seriously considering a moderated version of ASF... and Gordon had
only been posting for about a couple of years. Though Steele's ghost was
whispered of during the debates back in 2001, I'd have to say that it
wasn't out of any desire to avoid Steele. Or Gordon. Otherwise, it would
have happened long before then.
>> So,
>>that makes ASF the perfect place for newcomers to come and ask newcomer
>>questions. After all, they aren't welcomed to ask repeated newcomer
>>questions at FS. That was the point of creating FS... to avoid them. So
>>why encourage them to go there?
>>
>>> That you don't want to accept this is your problem. If you don't like
>>> it, then filter it, but don't expect the world to change to fit to
>>> *your* expectations.
>>
>>We are agreeing, then. We both agree that FS was created to avoid
>>newcomer questions. So, that only leaves the question of why FS
>>advertises here on ASF if the claims that FS wants to avoid newcomer
>>questions... and more to the correct point... that ASF is dead and not a
>>viable marketing tool....
>
> Well, you couldn't have shown better that you don't let reality
> interfere with your model of the world.
More that I prefer my reality to conform to the the known and existing
facts. And since the facts from 2001 show Formhandle and others discussing
the vices and virtues of creating a moderated forum to avoid newcomer
questions, I have to go with that as the reason for a moderated forum being
created. But, given that you don't believe Formhandle's claims about his
forum as being the sole alternative to ASF... I can understand your
hesitation to buy his claims in 2001 either. But since others were also
discussion the subject of avoiding newcomer questions... why do you
disbelieve theirs?
> Well, I should have known better than preaching to the deaf, or in
> this case, those that stuff both fingers in their ears while going "la
> la la"
I'd recommend you take your fingers out of your ears. But, perhaps a better
idea would be for you to open your eyes and read the archives from 2001
where the notion of a need for a moderated ASF was being discussed. Then
you can read yourself where several people were discussing why there was or
was no a need for it... why some said it would not be easy to create it on
Usenet... and why some said that it shouldn't be that big a deal to answer
the questions or just ignore them.
Johannes Seppi
>Johannes Seppi <jse...@gmx.kaspam.at> wrote in
>news:il39r2lbfll9n0lfb...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 09:53:40 GMT, speeding <no...@biz.org> wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>>>>> OK, it will probably not convince you, but
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Formhandle created the "moderated version of AFS", whether you
>>>>>> accept it or not, and
>>>>>
>>>>>I accept he created it. No doubts there. He created it to avoid having
>>>>>to repeatedly answer newcomer questions. That's clear from the ASF
>>>>>archives.
>>>>
>>>> Sigh... He greated the *groups* on fastseduction.com as a moderated
>>>> alternative to ASF.
>>>
>>>Yes, we agree. He created the moderated forum on FS so a few folks could
>>>avoid answering newcomer questions. That's exactly what the archives
>>>show. We do agree, yes.
>>>
>>
>> Well, you misinterpret what I am saying and then say we agree? Where
>> did you learn that debating style?
>> The reason "to avoid answering newcoimer questions" exists only in
>> your head.
>
>No no... that's directly from the archives of ASF. The posts back in 2001
>discussing the virtues and vices of creating a moderated version of ASF
>discussed the problems of how to avoid newcomer questions that kept being
>repeated.
>
But if you say "we agree" it would have to have come out of *my*
writing which it definitely didn't.
>Oh. I get it. You're saying that the forum created by Form on FS wasn't
>about making an alternative to ASF at all. I guess you could be right.
>after all... there were several regulars that stated they didn't see a need
>or even a desire for creating a moderated version of ASF. But that kind of
>runs counter to the current claims that the FS forum was created as some
>alternative to ASF and that it is the only alternative to ASF.
>
No, I'm not saying that, either.
>> What I cannot understand is why you don't simply ask the people
>> around that time as to why the group has been created. But no, you
>> have to do your own little Sherlock Holmes number and then tu shut out
>> reality to be able to keep your "facts".
>
>What part of - read the archives - did you miss? Because I didn't miss it
>when I asked about all this. That's the only answer that I was given.
Well, since I was around at that time and I answer differently, it
cannot be the *only* answer. Perhaps the only answer you liked, but
certainly not the only one.
> So I did read the archives.
But you didn't read what I wrote above. Why didn't you *ask* the
people who were around at that time? Because you don't like the
answer?
> And the archives clearly show the debate about the
>need for a moderated version of ASF centered on some people that hated
>seeing the same questions asked over and over versus others that thought
>that having newcomers ask the same questions didn't really justify an
>effort to create a moderated version of ASF. No one was wanting to step up
>and create a moderated version of ASF, but Form decided to create a forum
>that could be made compatible with news readers on FS.
>
Yes, and that forum was created as the "moderated version of ASF",
made accessible via newsreaders and has been immediately accepted by
lots of people.
>>>>>> 2) it is a service and not spam to point to the place where the
>>>>>> regulars went to
>>>>>
>>>>>What is your definition of the word spam? and not the lunch meat...
>>>>>Perhaps you have a different definition. Mine is basically...
>>>>>repeatedly sending commercial (advertising) messages to many or group
>>>>>recipients. Such as if Gordon (or another name) was to post a message
>>>>>weekly telling people to visit his web site as the alternative to ASF.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but since Formhandle's site *is* the moderated alternative for
>>>> ASF it is a service, as I wrote above. Most of the regulars accepted
>>>> it as this alternative and moved there. Thiat site has been greeted as
>>>> a long awaited solution for a certain problem.
>>>
>>>But it's not THE moderated alterative... it is *AN* alternative. One
>>>among many. Claiming that FS is the one and only alternative to ASF is
>>>total bullshit.
>>
>> Yes, claiming that would be bullshit. But who *is* claiming it? *You*
>> are doing it here to build your strawman.
>
>No. Form himself claimed it is THE alternative. Allow me to quote it...
>
>--------
>news:SLidnZBv__nUui3Y...@giganews.com
>
>> Calling your site *the* alternative to ASF is also a lie.
>
>Why? It *IS* *THE* alternative.
>--------
Well, if you bother to read the reference you will see that this post
doesn't contain the quote you give here.
But anyway, you are distorting what formhandle said.Iit has been
created as "the moderated alternative to ASF", not as the be all and
end all replacement to all seduction related sites.
>
>So, you are saying that Formhandle, the creator of the forum, is making a
>claim that is full of shit? *HE* is the one, among others, that is claiming
>it... let me say it as he did... *IS *THE* alternative....
>
No, I ain't saying that. But then I am not trying to force my
interpretation on what he was talking about. There is something like
context, you know?
>It's not a strawman when the person that created a thing claims it to be
>something that even you seem to say it is not. It is THIS claim, more than
>anything, that I disagree with. I do not, let me scream it, because it
>seems to get lost quite often.... I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST FS AS A
>FORUM. I READ IT AND LOVE IT. But, it is just another forum. It is not the
>single sole alternative to ASF... Yet that *IS* the claim Formhandle made
>in the quote above AND... more importantly, it is the claim made in the
>weekly advertisment posted for the forum.
>
Well... I still call that a straw man.
>>>There are many. I'm sure we can both name a few others.
>>>I agree, it was greated as the solution to avoiding newcomer questions.
>>
>> No, you don't agree, as that would presuppose that that was my take on
>> things, too. You just restate one of your pet theories.
>
>Perhaps that is true. If I read you correctly here, you are disagreeing
>with Formhandle's claim that his forum is the... wait... *IS* *THE*
>alternative to ASF. You seem to be saying, as I did, that this claim is
>bullshit. You also seem to be saying that the FS forum was created as
>something other than what was claimed by Formhandle and others during the
>discussions listed in the archives back in 2001. Perhaps that is also
>correct... you don't believe Formhandle's claim that his forum *IS* *THE*
>alternative... so perhaps you don't believe his claim back in 2001 when he
>and others were discussing a way to avoid newcomer questions.
>
Well, I hope you don't earn your living as a mind reader ;-)
>Though, then... if you say Formhandle was making another false claim...
>that he didn't create the forum to avoid newcomer questions... what other
>reason would there have been? It certainly can't be due to disruptive
>reasons... since between Gordon and Steele, seven years had pasted without
>anyone seriously considering a moderated version of ASF... and Gordon had
>only been posting for about a couple of years. Though Steele's ghost was
>whispered of during the debates back in 2001, I'd have to say that it
>wasn't out of any desire to avoid Steele. Or Gordon. Otherwise, it would
>have happened long before then.
>
I don't see much sense to answer that, since you are taking up both
your and my side of the conversation anyway.
Well, as I and several others already told you, we were *here* at the
time, and I at least certainly don't need your advice to find out what
took place at that time. I may be older than you, but believe me my
memory is still up to the task of knowing what happened a few years
ago.
But, to finalize this, I don't see any profit for either of us to
continue this further, so from my side this will be the last post to
this theme.
Johannes
Formhandle
>> I don't bother with this because I've busy with other stuff but nobody
>> will fault you for being productive.
>
> If you don't bother, then why are you here? Isn't this you bothering, right
> now?
I spend like 5-15 minutes here a week. That's not bothering. That's
keeping an eye on what's going on for the sake of curiosity and making
sure something totally stupid or inaccurate about FS isn't being
propagated. Hence, my bothering to reply to you.
> Aren't your advertisements for your web portal instances of you
> bothering with being here? It's not like you're busy updating FS all that
> much,.
Are you fucking serious? I just released a major overhaul on the
motherfucker in November, not to mention numerous additional features.
I'm doing new stuff AS WE SPEAK and I've got a couple of bigger projects
for it yet to be released that have been delayed because - I'm ALWAYS
working on fixing things and adding other more immediately-needed stuff.
Jesus H fucking Christ, if you're going to make claims, then at least
TRY to be accurate. You could at least TRY not to be insulting.
> The FAQ and the Player's Guide hasn't changed in about 4 or so
> years, accourding to the dates on them.
Is there something in those things needing change that isn't already
being worked on?
>> In fact I think I gave you suggestions a while back in regards to web
>> stuff, and here I am being even more constructive for you.
>
> You're not being constructive for me. You're defending your policy of
> advertising your site on Usenet. You are saying that you don't bother here
> on ASF and you don't consider ASF a tool for marketing your web portal. I'm
> asking you why you are bothering here and why you are using ASF as a
> marketing tool for your portal when you claim to be doing neither.
Wipe your own ass, and figure it all out for yourself.
The trolling behavior and comments continue even when I'm trying to be
helpful to you while everyone else just belittles you. I put my hand
out and you bite at it, thanks, as if anything I do is anything more
than being helpful and finding a way to make sure that there is a way to
support that method of being helpful.
After all this time, you know JACK FUCKING SHIT about me and here you
are continuing to be a turd.
You're as sock. Plain & simple.
Looks like a sock. Sounds like a sock. Acts like a sock.
Will get treated like a sock.
>> I guess you could either run with it or repeat useless behavior.
>> People get annoyed by those who yak & don't actually do shit about
>> anything. I'm sure a certain % of people hate my guts for whatever
>> reason, but nobody can ever fault me for being a pure loudmouth, I
>> actually get stuff done.
>
> Yes. You're marketing here and bothering here. You're getting a lot of work
> done. Marketing and... what... research? I don't hate you.. or most anyone
> else... but I do wonder why you are bothering here and why you are
> marketing here... especially since you say that marketing here and
> bothering here are not your goals or even things you do.
Sock.
>> You're not being respected for the things you're doing because it's
>> all fruitless and empty. At the very least, I, a big target of your
>> rants and political complaints, am here to encourage you and this
>> should impress upon you the difference on how people choose paths to
>> follow.
>
> You say it's fruitless and empty. Many others that also support and assist
> your site say it's fruitless and empty. People that say that leaving ASF to
> move to one and only one specific web portal say it's fruitless and empty.
> I say that it's not fruitless and empty to work to improve ASF. But, you
> are correct that we have different paths we follow.
>
> I am trying to improve ASF. I'm showing that it is being used as a
> marketing tool and that someone is bothering with trying to keep it
> fruitless and empty, other than his advertisments. You are claiming that
> you don't bother with ASF and don't market here. And yet here you are. And
> so are your advertisments for your site.
I'm done with you, sock.
--
Now Im Confused
Instead of fucking around with speeding in those 5-15min, the rest of
us wouldn't mind if you gave a bit of advice on PU. Just a
suggestion. Additionally it would probably be better for your blood
pressure.
speeding
Read what I wrote again. I said it was the only answer *I* was given.
Whether I like or dislike the answer is irrelevant. Both to me and to the
issue. The only answer I was given was to read the archives. And the
archives showed the answer very clearly.
>> So I did read the archives.
>
> But you didn't read what I wrote above. Why didn't you *ask* the
> people who were around at that time? Because you don't like the
> answer?
I *DID* ask. Repeatedly. And that answer I was given, repeatedly, was to
read the archives. And that archives clearly showed the answer... which was
that the forum was created to avoid answering newcomer questions. Can you
show anything differently from the archives?
>> And the archives clearly show the debate about the
>>need for a moderated version of ASF centered on some people that hated
>>seeing the same questions asked over and over versus others that
>>thought that having newcomers ask the same questions didn't really
>>justify an effort to create a moderated version of ASF. No one was
>>wanting to step up and create a moderated version of ASF, but Form
>>decided to create a forum that could be made compatible with news
>>readers on FS.
>
> Yes, and that forum was created as the "moderated version of ASF",
> made accessible via newsreaders and has been immediately accepted by
> lots of people.
Yes, it was created to be accessible via newsreaders and was accepted by
some, but not all, of the people. It was clearly disputed as being a
moderated version of ASF even then. Several people clearly stated that they
saw no need, support, or desire for a moderated version of ASF. Which is
why, as they pointed out, no moderated version of ASF was ever created.
Yes, thank you, I grabbed the wrong tag.... it is
news:T6idnbn0E6plpCzY...@giganews.com
> But anyway, you are distorting what formhandle said.Iit has been
> created as "the moderated alternative to ASF", not as the be all and
> end all replacement to all seduction related sites.
It's not a distortion at all, It's an exact and direct quote. No distortion
possible. not when it has the asterisks and ALL CAPS to make it a clear
statement. It was not created as the moderated alternative to ASF. The
archives clearly showed there was no concensus or even real support for the
creation of a moderated alternative to ASF. If there was, then there would
BE a moderated version of ASF, and there is not. The FS forum isn't even
near being a moderated version of ASF, as it doesn't even carry the ASF
feed nor feed from it to here... like www.altseductionfast.com does.
And the issue, really, is saying it is *THE* alternative... it's not *THE*
alternative... it is *AN* alternative. But, clearly, Form quoted above
claims it is *THE* alternative... using *THE* instead of *AN* is an
implication that there is no other alternative. And there are many
alternatives.
>>So, you are saying that Formhandle, the creator of the forum, is
>>making a claim that is full of shit? *HE* is the one, among others,
>>that is claiming it... let me say it as he did... *IS* *THE*
>>alternative....
>
> No, I ain't saying that. But then I am not trying to force my
> interpretation on what he was talking about. There is something like
> context, you know?
Well then, why don't you clear up what Form handle clearly screamed using
asterisks and ALL CAPS? When he plainly and simply said that it *IS* *THE*
alternative... are you saying what he meant was that it *IS* *THE*
alternative that *IS ONLY ONE AMONG MANY* alternatives? Why didn't he say
what he meant then, because it seems he was clearly claiming, just as he
does in his spam FAQ, that he considers his forum to be THE (ONLY)moderated
alternative to ASF. and that claim is bogus.
>>It's not a strawman when the person that created a thing claims it to
>>be something that even you seem to say it is not. It is THIS claim,
>>more than anything, that I disagree with. I do not, let me scream it,
>>because it seems to get lost quite often.... I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING
>>AGAINST FS AS A FORUM. I READ IT AND LOVE IT. But, it is just another
>>forum. It is not the single sole alternative to ASF... Yet that *IS*
>>the claim Formhandle made in the quote above AND... more importantly,
>>it is the claim made in the weekly advertisment posted for the forum.
>
> Well... I still call that a straw man.
You can call it a strawman, but the fact of the issue is that the FS forum
is *NOT* the only moderated alternative to ASF. But, that *IS* what
Formhandle wrote. That he considers it to be THE (ONLY) alternative to ASF.
But, what he claims and reality are far different.
>>>>There are many. I'm sure we can both name a few others.
>>>>I agree, it was greated as the solution to avoiding newcomer
>>>>questions.
>>>
>>> No, you don't agree, as that would presuppose that that was my take
>>> on things, too. You just restate one of your pet theories.
>>
>>Perhaps that is true. If I read you correctly here, you are
>>disagreeing with Formhandle's claim that his forum is the... wait...
>>*IS* *THE* alternative to ASF. You seem to be saying, as I did, that
>>this claim is bullshit. You also seem to be saying that the FS forum
>>was created as something other than what was claimed by Formhandle and
>>others during the discussions listed in the archives back in 2001.
>>Perhaps that is also correct... you don't believe Formhandle's claim
>>that his forum *IS* *THE* alternative... so perhaps you don't believe
>>his claim back in 2001 when he and others were discussing a way to
>>avoid newcomer questions.
>
> Well, I hope you don't earn your living as a mind reader ;-)
I used to. But, I shouldn't need to read a person's mind when they make a
direct quote using asterisks and ALL CAPS to state very clearly that they
consider their forum to be THE (ONLY) alternative. But, perhaps you will
clear up Formhandle's meaning, since you are saying that his meaning does
not match his clear direct quote using asterisks and ALL CAPS.
>>Though, then... if you say Formhandle was making another false
>>claim... that he didn't create the forum to avoid newcomer
>>questions... what other reason would there have been? It certainly
>>can't be due to disruptive reasons... since between Gordon and Steele,
>>seven years had pasted without anyone seriously considering a
>>moderated version of ASF... and Gordon had only been posting for about
>>a couple of years. Though Steele's ghost was whispered of during the
>>debates back in 2001, I'd have to say that it wasn't out of any desire
>>to avoid Steele. Or Gordon. Otherwise, it would have happened long
>>before then.
>
> I don't see much sense to answer that, since you are taking up both
> your and my side of the conversation anyway.
That's only because you keep shifting your side when you don't like being
confronted by the fact that Formhandle is making a claim you do not agree
with but desire to defend his claim anyways.
>>>> So,
>>>>that makes ASF the perfect place for newcomers to come and ask
>>>>newcomer questions. After all, they aren't welcomed to ask repeated
>>>>newcomer questions at FS. That was the point of creating FS... to
>>>>avoid them. So why encourage them to go there?
>>>>
>>>>> That you don't want to accept this is your problem. If you don't
>>>>> like it, then filter it, but don't expect the world to change to
>>>>> fit to *your* expectations.
>>>>
>>>>We are agreeing, then. We both agree that FS was created to avoid
>>>>newcomer questions. So, that only leaves the question of why FS
>>>>advertises here on ASF if the claims that FS wants to avoid newcomer
>>>>questions... and more to the correct point... that ASF is dead and
>>>>not a viable marketing tool....
>>>
>>> Well, you couldn't have shown better that you don't let reality
>>> interfere with your model of the world.
>>
>>More that I prefer my reality to conform to the the known and existing
>>facts. And since the facts from 2001 show Formhandle and others
>>discussing the vices and virtues of creating a moderated forum to
>>avoid newcomer questions, I have to go with that as the reason for a
>>moderated forum being created. But, given that you don't believe
>>Formhandle's claims about his forum as being the sole alternative to
>>ASF... I can understand your hesitation to buy his claims in 2001
>>either. But since others were also discussion the subject of avoiding
>>newcomer questions... why do you disbelieve theirs?
No answer? No way to refute, disagree, or clarify what the others from 2001
were saying? Perhaps they were saying things out of context and not as
clearly as you think they meant, also... Their words didn't match their
meaning, also?
>>> Well, I should have known better than preaching to the deaf, or in
>>> this case, those that stuff both fingers in their ears while going
>>> "la la la"
>>
>>I'd recommend you take your fingers out of your ears. But, perhaps a
>>better idea would be for you to open your eyes and read the archives
>>from 2001 where the notion of a need for a moderated ASF was being
>>discussed. Then you can read yourself where several people were
>>discussing why there was or was no a need for it... why some said it
>>would not be easy to create it on Usenet... and why some said that it
>>shouldn't be that big a deal to answer the questions or just ignore
>>them.
>
> Well, as I and several others already told you, we were *here* at the
> time, and I at least certainly don't need your advice to find out what
> took place at that time. I may be older than you, but believe me my
> memory is still up to the task of knowing what happened a few years
> ago.
Great, then you should have no problems in showing what the archives
showed. You should have no problem is clarifying what someone meant when
they said that there didn't seem to be a desire or need for a moderated
version of ASF. Perhaps you think those folks had some meaning different
from what their words stated? If so, why don't you quote them for me... and
then tell me what you think they meant? Because I am assuming they meant
what they said.
> But, to finalize this, I don't see any profit for either of us to
> continue this further, so from my side this will be the last post to
> this theme.
Feel free to stick your fingers in your ears and cover your eyes. It seems
to be the only way to communicate a point about this anyways. You don't
believe that what Formhandle stated was what he meant. You apparentl;y
don't think that what others said in 2001 was what they meant. And I
suppose that by covering your eyes and plugging your ears, you can inject
anything you wish to believe in place of what was said. But, I still prefer
to believe that what was said was meant and that evidence trumps faith
every time.
> Johannes
HC
speeding wrote:
> Read what I wrote again.
I'd rather drink battery acid.
Formhandle
> Instead of fucking around with speeding in those 5-15min, the rest of
> us wouldn't mind if you gave a bit of advice on PU. Just a
> suggestion. Additionally it would probably be better for your blood
> pressure.
Sure thing.
speeding
>> Your challenge is to remove the advertising from the FAQ. Can you do
>> that? I'll bet you come up with some excuse like how it's not
>> possible to remove the advertising from a page posted to your site...
>> or that you won't stop advertising your site... or that it's not
>> necessary to remove the advertising...
I don't have enough time to bother with your tripe below. So, let's cut
to the chase here. You are spamming. You are advertising your site. You
challenged me about the FAQ. I met it. I challenge you to post an FAQ
that does not point to or advertise for your site.
Can you remove the spam from your FAQ?
Do that, and I won't need to post an FAQ for ASF anymore. But there is no
other FAQ being posted to ASF, otherwise.
Formhandle <formh...@fastseduction.com> wrote in
news:WLednXw3LI9duSjY...@giganews.com:
--
speeding
news:87tzyi2...@localhost.localdomain:
>
> Instead of fucking around with speeding in those 5-15min, the rest of
> us wouldn't mind if you gave a bit of advice on PU. Just a
> suggestion. Additionally it would probably be better for your blood
> pressure.
>
That's a hell of a good idea. I'm done with him until he can pony up and
face me like a man. Until he can accept my challenge as I took his. Can he
cut the spam out of the FAQ he wants to make official? I doubt it.
Johannes Seppi
>I met your challenge Form. You ducked mine completely.
>
>>> Your challenge is to remove the advertising from the FAQ. Can you do
>>> that? I'll bet you come up with some excuse like how it's not
>>> possible to remove the advertising from a page posted to your site...
>>> or that you won't stop advertising your site... or that it's not
>>> necessary to remove the advertising...
>
>I don't have enough time to bother with your tripe below. So, let's cut
>to the chase here. You are spamming. You are advertising your site. You
>challenged me about the FAQ. I met it. I challenge you to post an FAQ
>that does not point to or advertise for your site.
>
>Can you remove the spam from your FAQ?
>
>Do that, and I won't need to post an FAQ for ASF anymore. But there is no
>other FAQ being posted to ASF, otherwise.
>
You are challenging Formhandle? I must say, you become more and more
like Ray, the only thing you have still to work on is the amusement
value.
Johannes
DarkKobold
> challenged me about the FAQ. I met it. I challenge you to post an FAQ
> that does not point to or advertise for your site.
>
Wait, where is the challenge? You are making an ultimatum, not a
challenge. Form gave you chance, get support for your FAQ, he drops
his.
Where is the challenge for him? Editing text? A moron could do that.
Clearly his is capable of editing the text. There is no challenge, just
an ultimatum.
You really are the next Ray.
Alex
at darkk...@hotmail.com wrote on 1/26/07 9:55 PM:
Nah, speeding is just a long-winded idiot.
He's actually almost as pathetic as Gordon though.
Krus T. Olfard
news:C1E02BD0.F27B8%akau...@nyc.NOSPAM.rr.com:
More long winded but not nearly as funny.
--
Krustavus Teofilus Olfard
------------------
Everything I post is my opinion. If you don't like my opinions then
killfile me, if you have the balls.
BTW: If there is one clear rule in this world, it's "Do NOT stick your
finger in the ancient alien coffin."
babyb...@gmail.com
Make over £10,000 a month, using PAYPAL and a proven process, with
just a
£6.00 investment. That's right, just six pounds invested. It's easy,
quick
and simple, and can be repeated whenever you want. How many times do
you
want to make over £10,000? You choose. You just need to read this
simple and
clear report, follow the rules and move quickly on this one.
Ok, a little while back, I was browsing through newsgroups and
message
boards, and came across an article similar to this that said you could
make
thousands of pounds within weeks with only an initial investment of
£6.00!
So I thought, "Yeah right, this must be a scam", but like most of us,
I was
curious, so I kept reading. After consulting with some friends, they
themselves heard about this but were, like me sceptical about the
idea. So I
thought to myself "why not give it a try, its only £6, I mean I've
spent
more than that on lunch!" So I gave it a try and OH MY GOD!!! Trust
me, the
results were staggering!
Let's cut the boring part and get straight into it. This can be done
by
anyone in the world. PAYPAL VERIFIES THAT THIS BUSINESS PROGRAM IS
100%
LEGAL AND IS A BIG HIT, TAKES JUST 15-30 MINUTES AND A SMALL £6
INVESTMENT.
This project has been on TV programmes such as 20/20, Oprah, and the
Wall
Street Journal. It's been in existence in many forms for at least a
decade.
The entire process is FAST, EASY and VERY, VERY LUCRATIVE. I WAS
SHOCKED
WHEN I SAW HOW MUCH MONEY CAME FLOODING INTO MY PAYPAL ACCOUNT I
turned £6
into over £10,000. I will GUARANTEE that you will enjoy a similar
return!
The only things you will need are:
1. An email address.
2. A Business or Premier PAYPAL account (FREE)
3. Just 20 to 30 minutes of your time.
This program takes just half an hour to set up. After that, there is
absolutely no work whatsoever to do on your part. You have
absolutely
NOTHING to lose, and there is NO LIMIT to the amount of income you
can
generate from this one single business program. Let's get started,
just
follow the instructions exactly as set out below and then prepare you
for a
HUGE influx of cash over the next 30 days! Here's what you need to
do.
STEP 1: Setting up your FREE PAYPAL Account
It's extremely safe and very easy to set up a FREE PAYPAL account!
Copy and
paste the following link exactly into the address bar:
https://www.paypal.com/uk/mrb/pal=EPD2QXJ3BLX9G (notice the secure
"https"
within the link)
Be sure to sign up for a FREE PREMIER or BUSINESS account (and not a
PERSONAL account) otherwise you won't be able to receive credit card
payments from other people.
STEP 2: Sending PAYPAL money
To give means to receive, and receive you will. Many waste £6 on
nothing of
use. You'll make over £10,000 with the £6 you invest.
To send money, all you do is click on 'send money' located in blue at
the
top of the page next to 'welcome'.
Now all you have to do is send £1.00 by way of PAYPAL to each of the
address below.
Make sure the subject of the payment says... "PLEASE ADD ME TO YOUR
MAILING
LIST".
(this keeps the program 100% legal... so please don't forget!)
These are the e-mail addresses you send £1 to. (That is £1 to each
address.)
1) funksoulbroth...@hotmail.com
2) alders_el...@hotmail.co.uk
3) mardel...@hotmail.co.uk
4) housto...@aol.com
5) rzvi...@gmail.com 6) dido...@hotmail.co.uk
Remember, all of this is ABSOLUTELY LEGAL! You are creating a service!
If
you have any doubts, please refer to Title 18 Sec. 1302 & 1241 of the
United
States Postal laws.
STEP 3: Adding Your Email Address
After you send your £1.00 payment, to each email on the list above,
Take the #1) email off the list that you saw above, move the other
addresses
up one - (#6 becomes #5 & #5 becomes #4 and #4 becomes #3 & #3 becomes
#2
and #2 becomes #1. etc)
Now add YOUR email address (the one used in your PAYPAL account) to
position
#6) on the list.
*** MAKE SURE THE EMAIL YOU SUPPLY IS EXACTLY AS IT APPEARS IN YOUR
PAYPAL
ACCOUNT SO YOU CAN GET PAID ***
STEP 4: The Pure Joy of Receiving PAYPAL Money!
You are now ready to post your copy of this message, to at least
50-200
newsgroups, message boards. I post to 200 for quicker surer results.
There
are close to 32,000 news groups, this makes it easy for you to earn
money.
All you need is 200 news groups, but the more you post, the more money
you
make - as well as everyone else on the list!
In this situation your job is to let as many people see this letter
as
possible. So they will make you and me rich and of course
themselves!!! You
can even start posting the moment your email is confirmed. Payments
will
still appear in your PAYPAL account even while your bank account is
being
confirmed.
DIRECTIONS: HOW TO POST TO NEWSGROUPS & MESSAGE BOARDS
You do not need to re-type this entire letter to do your own posting.
Simply
do the following:
STEP 1: Put your CURSOR at the beginning of this letter and drag your
CURSOR
to the bottom of this document, and select 'copy' from the edit menu.
This
will copy the entire letter into your computer's temporary memory.
STEP 2: Open a blank 'Notepad' file and place your cursor at the top
of the
blank page. From the 'Edit' menu select 'Paste'. This will paste a
copy of
the letter into notepad so that you can add your email to the list.
STEP 3: Save your new Notepad file as a .txt file. If you want to do
your
postings in different sittings, you'll always have this file to go
back to.
STEP 4: Use Netscape or Internet Explorer and try searching for
various
newsgroups, on-line forums, message boards, bulletin boards, chat
sites,
discussions, discussion groups, online communities, etc.
EXAMPLE: Go to any search engine like yahoo.com, google.com,
altavista.com,
excite.com - then search with subjects like? Millionaire message
board? Or?
Or? Opportunity message board? Or? Money making discussions? Or?
Business
bulletin board? Or? Money making forum? etc. You will find thousands
&
thousands of message boards. Click them one by one then you will find
the
option to post a new message.
STEP 5: Visit these message boards and post this article as a new
message by
highlighting the text of this letter and selecting 'Paste' from the
'Edit'
menu. Fill in the Subject, this will be the header that everyone sees
as
they scroll thru the list of postings in a particular group, click the
post
message button. You're done with your first one! Congratulations!
THAT'S
IT!! All you have to do is jump to different newsgroups and post away.
After
you get the hang of it, it will take about 30 seconds for each
newsgroup!
REMEMBER, THE MORE NEWSGROUPS AND/OR MESSAGE BOARDS YOU POST IN, THE
MORE
MONEY YOU WILL MAKE!!!
That's it! You will begin receiving money within days!
***JUST MAKE SURE THE EMAIL YOU SUPPLY AND PUT AT THE BOTTOM OF LIST
ABOVE,
IS EXACTLY AS IT APPEARS ON YOUR PAYPAL ACCOUNT SO YOU GET PAID.***
WHY IT'S EASY TO MAKE £10,000 CASH: OK, lets say I receive only 5
replies (a
very low example). So then I Made £5.00 with my email at #6 on the
letter.
Now, each of the 5 persons who just sent me £1.00 make the MINIMUM
200
posting, each with my email at #5 and only 5 persons respond to each
of the
original 5, that is another £25.00 for me, now those 25 each make 200
MINIMUM posts with my email at #4 and only 5 replies each, I will
bring in
an additional £125.00! Now, those 125 persons turn around and post
the
MINIMUM 200 with my email at #3 and only receive 5 replies each, I
will make
an additional £625.00! OK, now here is the fun part, each of those
625
persons post a MINIMUM 200 letters with my email at #2 and they only
receive
5 replies that just made me £3,125.00!!! Those 3,125 persons will all
deliver this message to 200 newsgroups with my email at #1 and if
still 5
persons per 200 newsgroups react I will receive £15,625.00!
£15,625.00! from an original investment of only £6.00! AMAZING!!
When your email is no longer on the list, you just take the latest
posting
in the newsgroups, and send out another £6.00 to emails on the list,
putting
your email at number 6, after sending your £1 payments and start
posting
again. The thing to remember is, thousands of people all over the
world are
joining the internet and reading these articles everyday, JUST LIKE
YOU are
now!! All this takes is £6, which most people waste on nothing really
important anyway. IT REALLY WORKS!!!
There are tons of new honest users and new honest people who are
joining the
internet and newsgroups everyday and are willing to give it a try.
Estimates
are at 20,000 to 50,000 new users of the Internet, every day.
What will happen over the course of 30 days? Well, this money will be
sent
to you by a few thousand people just like yourself, who are willing
to
invest £6.00 and around 30 minutes of their time to receive around
£10,000
or more in cash. The first payments will arrive within a few days and
then
they will continue at the rate of about 100 payments per day for about
30
days (obviously this will depend on how quickly you act and how
quickly
people take you up on this offer and then pass it on). After that
time, the
volumes of payments begin to taper off as your email is removed from
the No
1 position. That's all you need to do!
There will be around £10,000 in payments waiting for you in your
PAYPAL
account within the next few weeks. £10,000 for just 30 minutes work!
This is
real money that you can spend on anything you wish! Just deposit it to
your
own bank account or spend it directly from your PAYPAL account!!! It's
just
that easy!!!
Send your emails only to people who are likely to want to participate
and
move quickly on this.
Remember, play FAIRLY and HONESTLY and this will work. This really
isn't
another one of those crazy scams! As long as people follow through
with
sending out £6.00, it works!
Remember, play FAIRLY and HONESTLY and this will really work. There's
no use
trying to cheat for only £6.00 Please. Use only opt-in resources for
this
material it will work for you and it works much faster without
soliciting or
spamming and has higher responses!!!
N.B. REMEMBER, IT IS 100% LEGAL! AND THE MONEY YOU CAN MAKE IS
REALISTIC.
DON'T PASS THIS UP
SOME EMAIL TESTIMONIALS RECEIVED.
"I followed the instructions just 2 weeks and 4 days ago, and although
I
haven't made 10 grand yet, I am already up to £6,135. I am absolutely
gob
smacked".
Mr. A baker, Leicester.
"Well what can I say? I sent out 40 emails like the plan said then I
just
forgot about the whole thing. To be honest, I didn't really think
anything
would come of it, but "I checked my PayPal account a week later and
there
was over £3000.00 in it!!!"
Robert, South London.
"After 30 days I now have over £11,000 to spend".
L. Wang, Northampton.
"I was shocked when I saw how much money came flooding into my PayPal
account. Within 3 weeks my account balance has ballooned to £7,449"
Shirley Wicks, Essex.
Send this to others, regardless of wherever you go ahead or not, they
may
want to make over £10,000 even if you don't! This business actually
works!
Even if you think 'nah this sounds like a scam' PASS IT ON! There are
people
out there who can see through the 'nah this sounds like a scam'
rubbish and
actually see the MAJOR benefits this system can really make!
Just copy and paste the link into the address bar of your web browser
and
away you go.
https://www.paypal.com/uk/mrb/pal=EPD2QXJ3BLX9G
WITH WARM WISHES, GOD BLESS YOU ALL AND YOUR LOVED ONE'S.