Article "How To Deal With A Player" from WOMEN
Win At Betting
I like the quote about how players eventually get their hearts smashed by a
woman who is as self-absorbed as they are.
Anti-player is the wave of the future.
Ray Gordon, GENIUS
http://www.cybersheet.com
Mirak
"Win At Betting" <winatb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020421170540...@mb-mm.aol.com...
> http://www.women.com/dating/survive/articles/0,12718,272708_278402,00.html
>
> I like the quote about how players eventually get their hearts smashed by
a
> woman who is as self-absorbed as they are.
>
> Anti-player is the wave of the future.
But don't you think that saying to a girl "I am not a player" will do the
opposite ? lol
Formhandle
> http://www.women.com/dating/survive/articles/0,12718,272708_278402,00.html
>
> I like the quote about how players eventually get their hearts
> smashed by a woman who is as self-absorbed as they are.
>
> Anti-player is the wave of the future.
You're a fucking idiot.
The article states that if a guy has at least 3 of the following traits,
he's a "player" and/or a "bad boy":
* Good looks
(Yes, an instant sign of a bad boy... LOL)
* Charm
(Oh, no. Can't have a guy with charm. That must be BAD.)
* Magnetic personality
(Wouldn't want a guy that is actually INTERESTING, would they? Nah.)
* Lots of female "friends"
(Yeah, hold out for the guy that's a loner. They guy that's afraid to
be near or around women. What a catch.)
* Fear of commitment
(Basically, 99.99% of men.)
This is yet another one of those rationalizing female-written articles
which blames a certain brand of men as the reason for their romantic
difficulties. As if they had no responsibility whatsoever in their
choice of men. "It's the man's fault". The article is just another
bunch of horseshit veiled as an ATTEMPT to give women "dating" advice.
Just like the constant horseshit "dating" advice force fed to men by the
media.
Here's a quote:
"Are you one of those [self-absorbed] women? Didn't think so."
LOL, yeah right. Any woman who reads this article, sees herself in it,
and decides to "take action" by avoiding (or dumping) guys with at least
3 of the traits above isn't self-absorbed. Sure.
No woman could possibly ever take conscious action based on the "advice"
from this article. Except for the women who are actively looking for
long term "dating" relationships with losers.
--
jay <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/
Win At Betting
>a
>> woman who is as self-absorbed as they are.
>>
>> Anti-player is the wave of the future.
>
>But don't you think that saying to a girl "I am not a player" will do the
>opposite ? lol
You don't tell her you're not a player, you tell her you have no respect for
women who hang with players.
Win At Betting
The "lots of female friends" trait is especially true, and most successful
"players" get by on high CUPID ratings.
Then again, you're pretty NEW to this aren't you?
Got a girlfriend to share with the world yet, Jay?
Ray Gordon, GENIUS
http://www.cybersheet.com
Tigerstyle
I only wish 'anti-Ray' were the wave of the future.
Weren't you just saying a little while ago about how you can't trust
women and shit tests and some other crap like that?
The author of that article you metioned is a women named Patrizia
Diluccio.
So which is it Ray are you a:
1) player
2) player-hater
3) misogynist
4) whatever it takes to further your rant-of-the-day.
Please explain how you can justify "not trusting women" and then turn
around and tell ol' Patrizia "You go, girlfriend".
BTW everyone, read that article and it is a superficial pile of
steaming muleshit if I every saw one. Go check it out (but cover your
noses).
-Tigerstyle
Formhandle
> Got a girlfriend to share with the world yet, Jay?
Everyone knows you're my bitch.
Goodbye for another year or so...
--
jay <formh...@fastseduction.com>
Fast Seduction 101 - http://www.fastseduction.com/
Class is now in session...
Say goodbye to trolls, newsloons, and spam.
Win At Betting
>
>Everyone knows you're my bitch.
Don't kid yourself, Missy.
>Goodbye for another year or so...
So you dodge the issue, Chris Berman....(Berman never played pro football but
tried to fit in with the guys as if he were an ex-pro on ESPN -- reminds me of
this guy).
Odious
Ray doesn't even know the difference between a player, a seducer, and a
pick up artist.
Odious
Heh Ray doesn't think... he just tells whatever lie he thinks might help
him sell some shit.
Odious
Formhandle wrote:
>
> Win At Betting (Ray Gordon, Moron) wrote:
>
> > http://www.women.com/dating/survive/articles/0,12718,272708_278402,00.html
> >
> > I like the quote about how players eventually get their hearts
> > smashed by a woman who is as self-absorbed as they are.
> >
> > Anti-player is the wave of the future.
>
> You're a fucking idiot.
>
> The article states that if a guy has at least 3 of the following traits,
> he's a "player" and/or a "bad boy":
>
> * Good looks
> (Yes, an instant sign of a bad boy... LOL)
>
> * Charm
> (Oh, no. Can't have a guy with charm. That must be BAD.)
>
LOL! Most of the bad boys I know aren't charming at all, they are
abrasive.
> * Magnetic personality
> (Wouldn't want a guy that is actually INTERESTING, would they? Nah.)
>
> * Lots of female "friends"
> (Yeah, hold out for the guy that's a loner. They guy that's afraid to
> be near or around women. What a catch.)
>
> * Fear of commitment
> (Basically, 99.99% of men.)
>
Fear is the wrong word to use, since for most players, it is not fear but
rather a simple lack of interest in commitment. Calling it fear is a
woman's way of trying to ego goad the player into settling for her alone.
Odious
Win At Betting wrote:
>
> >> I like the quote about how players eventually get their hearts smashed by
> >a
> >> woman who is as self-absorbed as they are.
> >>
> >> Anti-player is the wave of the future.
> >
> >But don't you think that saying to a girl "I am not a player" will do the
> >opposite ? lol
>
> You don't tell her you're not a player, you tell her you have no respect for
> women who hang with players.
>
And so you'll respect her when she refuses to hang with you? After all
you're clearly lying to her in order to achieve the same thing the player
has been accomplishing.
Odious
Win At Betting wrote:
>
> Once again, Jay shows he takes the low road.
>
This from the fraud who routinely calls women whores, sluts, and cunts
for disagreeing with his lies.
> The "lots of female friends" trait is especially true, and most successful
> "players" get by on high CUPID ratings.
You missed the point, as usual ray. You can't tell the difference
between a cause and a symptom.
> Then again, you're pretty NEW to this aren't you?
Ray, he has more knowledge and real life experience than you'll ever
have, and you know it.
> Got a girlfriend to share with the world yet, Jay?
>
Ray, when are you going to post a picture of you and a chick? In fact,
when are you going to cite any post of any woman EVER defending your
shit? Can you cite even one post in the years you've been spewing your
shit, even one?
If not, you're obviously a total fucking fraud.
Odious
Tigerstyle wrote:
>
> winatb...@aol.com (Win At Betting) wrote in message news:<20020421170540...@mb-mm.aol.com>...
> > http://www.women.com/dating/survive/articles/0,12718,272708_278402,00.html
> >
> > I like the quote about how players eventually get their hearts smashed by a
> > woman who is as self-absorbed as they are.
> >
> > Anti-player is the wave of the future.
> >
> >
> > Ray Gordon, GENIUS
> > http://www.cybersheet.com
>
> I only wish 'anti-Ray' were the wave of the future.
>
Anti-ray is now... just look how successful the ray-free ASF forum is.
> Weren't you just saying a little while ago about how you can't trust
> women and shit tests and some other crap like that?
>
> The author of that article you metioned is a women named Patrizia
> Diluccio.
>
> So which is it Ray are you a:
>
> 1) player
> 2) player-hater
> 3) misogynist
> 4) whatever it takes to further your rant-of-the-day.
>
> Please explain how you can justify "not trusting women" and then turn
> around and tell ol' Patrizia "You go, girlfriend".
>
> BTW everyone, read that article and it is a superficial pile of
> steaming muleshit if I every saw one. Go check it out (but cover your
> noses).
Ray will tell whatever lies he thinks might sell his shit that week. He
doesn't care how blatantly he contradicts himself from week to week.
He'll be screaming that men here sound like fags and care too much about
what women think... then the next day when somebody is stomping his
bullshit, he'll be screaming that we need to get women in here to hear
what they think. He says men can't get married or into LTRs using these
methods, yet when they do, ray changes his tune and attacks them for
having oneitus or being whipped.
He is a liar and a fraud, he'll say anything to trick some newbies into
buying his shit.
Odious
Win At Betting wrote:
>
> >> Got a girlfriend to share with the world yet, Jay?
> >
> >Everyone knows you're my bitch.
>
> Don't kid yourself, Missy.
>
No ray, you're his bitch... I mean he is running a website that is
incredibly successful, primarily because you're not allowed. LOL! And
what makes it better is that every time you whine about it, you drive
more people to his site.
All that's left is for you to start wearing a dog's collar that has
"Jay's Bitch" engraved across the buckle.
Laetitia Casta
"Odious" <Odi...@cox.net> wrote in message news:3CC88F53...@cox.net...
>
>
> Win At Betting wrote:
> >
> >
http://www.women.com/dating/survive/articles/0,12718,272708_278402,00.html
> >
> > I like the quote about how players eventually get their hearts smashed
by a
> > woman who is as self-absorbed as they are.
> >
> > Anti-player is the wave of the future.
Except that players look for the 'type' of girl who will respond to their
advances. Has it ever occured to you that both parties are self absorbed
narcissists? That the players are really just seeking out.... other players?
Odious
Laetitia Casta wrote:
>
> "Odious" <Odi...@cox.net> wrote in message news:3CC88F53...@cox.net...
> >
> >
> > Win At Betting wrote:
> > >
> > >
> http://www.women.com/dating/survive/articles/0,12718,272708_278402,00.html
> > >
> > > I like the quote about how players eventually get their hearts smashed
> by a
> > > woman who is as self-absorbed as they are.
> > >
> > > Anti-player is the wave of the future.
>
> Except that players look for the 'type' of girl who will respond to their
> advances. Has it ever occured to you that both parties are self absorbed
> narcissists? That the players are really just seeking out.... other players?
>
Na, and I don't think players as a group all go for a specific type of
woman. I think there is a lot of variation in the women players go
for... and in women who go for players.
No, the term player reefers to a specific methodology and I seriously
doubt ray even knows what that is... yet he is out here talking about the
anti-player methods. I can tell by his description of these methods that
he has not got a clue.
Mirak
"Odious" <Odi...@cox.net> wrote in message news:3CCCE74D...@cox.net...
You always do that, you always reframe things in a way that can look more
acceptable.
Ross Jeffries always do that too.
Most of the time all you do when you see that you could have wrong is try to
draw the fish.
For me and for other (yes I talk in the name of other persons to show you
what you do) you have no credibility because all you do is insult Ray and
you prove nothing.
This could be Ray or anybody else, when you realise that you don't have
arguments to win the round you insult, and you say "HAHA don't believe this
guy he is stupid, ten years ago he has say things that proves that he is
insane or stupid", but believe me because me I have never give ideas that
could be eroneous to not take the risk to be considered like that.
There is no deep in what you say.
And you will say that I am a Ray suck puppet or that I am him, like you tell
to anybody that don't agree with the way you act.
All I see is a guy who throw insults and who have no arguments.
Many time you don't understand what other want to tell to you because you
don't want. You only want to see the things in your way.
How do you appear for me ? A guy who consider that AFC are asshole losers
that only deserve to have they girlfriend fucked by you.
This is what I conclude sorry, so just try to make me see you the way you
really think you are, if and I hope it's not true.
I am sure you think that you don't care of me, and you have right, but if I
see you like that, it means that I am not the only one.
Odious
I wasn't reframing anything... I am simply pointing out that there is a
specific methodology that the term player reefers to and that players go
for all type of women.
What exactly did I reframe?
> Ross Jeffries always do that too.
> Most of the time all you do when you see that you could have wrong is try to
> draw the fish.
HUH?!?! Draw the fish? What the fuck are you babbling about?
> For me and for other (yes I talk in the name of other persons to show you
> what you do)
No you talk in the name of other people to try and support a position
that you know is weak. If your opinion is not strong enough that it can
stand up without being proped up by your speaking for others, then your
opinion isn't very relevant, is it?
> you have no credibility because all you do is insult Ray and
> you prove nothing.
Yawn... what claim have I made that wasn't sufficiently proven?
I assume you can cite at least one of these claims, since you so matter
of factly make the claim that I prove nothing. So please cite the
unproven claims I've made.
> This could be Ray or anybody else, when you realise that you don't have
> arguments to win the round you insult,
What part of my claim above regarding the nature of players is wrong. GO
ahead and point out what you claim is unproven. It looks to me like
you're trolling, since you're not actually taking issue with any
particular point being raised, and instead are simply trying to attack me
with stawman arguments.
> and you say "HAHA don't believe this
> guy he is stupid, ten years ago he has say things that proves that he is
> insane or stupid",
Funny, you put that in quotes, please cite the post where I made that
statement.
Odd how you claim i do not provide proof for my claims, yet you then turn
around and try to attack the fact that when I make a claim about someone
I back it up with cited posts, often from the very person in question.
Make up your mind, either I do not back up my claims or all I do is back
up my claims... you can't have it both ways.
> but believe me because me I have never give ideas that
> could be eroneous to not take the risk to be considered like that.
> There is no deep in what you say.
Perhaps if you had more than a remdial understanding of the language, or
any degree of real experience, or if you'd been in ASF more than a month
or so, you might be able to appreciate the DEPTH you seem unable to
perceive.
> And you will say that I am a Ray suck puppet or that I am him, like you tell
> to anybody that don't agree with the way you act.
Yawn, no actually as hard as it is to believe, ray is actually far more
articulate than you are. At first i simply assumed this was due to your
linguistic hurdles, but as i read more of your inane crap I'm beginning
to think that you're either just a troll pretending to be an idiot or an
idiot pretending to be a troll.
> All I see is a guy who throw insults and who have no arguments.
I'm sure you see what you want, but the fact is that I've yet to see
anyone put forth an argument i couldn't decimate. Care to take a shot?
If you disagree with something I've said, go for it. I welcome your
debate.
However it is obvious that's not really what you want, as you're not
taking issue with any point or arguing any of my stated positions.
You're simply attacking me and my disposition... which makes me think
you're trolling.
> Many time you don't understand what other want to tell to you because you
> don't want. You only want to see the things in your way.
You assume because I don't agree, that I don't understand... is it so
hard for you to accept that someone thinks you're wrong? Of course I see
things my way, it is called thinking for oneself, you should try it.
> How do you appear for me ?
I don't particularly give a shit, and the fact you assume I do really
tells me quite a bit about your self-importance.
> A guy who consider that AFC are asshole losers
> that only deserve to have they girlfriend fucked by you.
AFCs are losers, that's what the term means. AFC stands for Average
Frustrated Chump. Don't bitch at me because you can't be bothered to
learn the fucking lingo. And yes if the loser AFC can't satisfy his
girlfriend and she's cheating on him because of it, then he absolutely
deserves it. Or more accurately he doesn't deserve to have a girlfriend
in the first place.
If a man can not excite the passions and fulfill the desires of a woman,
and he can't take the time to learn these skills, he does not deserve to
have or keep her. I do not feel bad if she drops his ass to climb into
my bed. I don't apoligize for being more desirable and more skilled than
some AFC loser... especially when the tools are so easy to find and use
that would allow that AFC to stop being a loser.
> This is what I conclude sorry, so just try to make me see you the way you
> really think you are, if and I hope it's not true.
I think my opinions are rather clear, but if you're not sure what I
really think, ask. Because when you assume, you're likely to be wrong.
> I am sure you think that you don't care of me, and you have right, but if I
> see you like that, it means that I am not the only one.
I'm sure you're not the only one who thinks I'm an asshole, so be it.
I'm perfectly comfortable with your holding whatever opinions you want
about me, since you're a completely irrelevant factor in my existence. I
will however correct you when you make asinine statements about my
positions, and present contradictory claims about my arguments.
Mirak
The main goal of her question.
> > Ross Jeffries always do that too.
> > Most of the time all you do when you see that you could have wrong is
try to
> > draw the fish.
>
> HUH?!?! Draw the fish? What the fuck are you babbling about?
It's a french expression.
> > For me and for other (yes I talk in the name of other persons to show
you
> > what you do)
>
> No you talk in the name of other people to try and support a position
> that you know is weak. If your opinion is not strong enough that it can
> stand up without being proped up by your speaking for others, then your
> opinion isn't very relevant, is it?
This is what I try to tell you since a long time that you do.
You finally understood, but you will say that no, you don't do that, but yes
you do it always.
> > you have no credibility because all you do is insult Ray and
> > you prove nothing.
>
> Yawn... what claim have I made that wasn't sufficiently proven?
>
> I assume you can cite at least one of these claims, since you so matter
> of factly make the claim that I prove nothing. So please cite the
> unproven claims I've made.
I don't have read ALL your post on google and I will never do it.
What I say is since I have discover this news group, you throw claims that
maybe you have proven before, but you tell them as they are NOW.
Exemple : If I see you present you to somebody in your asshole mode, with
insults etc, if I don't know you I will say to me, this guy is an asshole.
And this is exactly what happen sorry.
> > This could be Ray or anybody else, when you realise that you don't have
> > arguments to win the round you insult,
>
> What part of my claim above regarding the nature of players is wrong. GO
> ahead and point out what you claim is unproven. It looks to me like
> you're trolling, since you're not actually taking issue with any
> particular point being raised, and instead are simply trying to attack me
> with stawman arguments.
Ok I don't attack you and I have really nothing against you, I just point
the fact that you feed him. You always feed him, and your argument to do
that is that you want to prevent newbies to be tricked. Then after you say
that even a newbie couldn't be tricked by is shit. So be logical. Until you
do things like that you are trolling.
> > and you say "HAHA don't believe this
> > guy he is stupid, ten years ago he has say things that proves that he is
> > insane or stupid",
>
> Funny, you put that in quotes, please cite the post where I made that
> statement.
This is a theatral quote, it's a kind of caricature lol.
> Odd how you claim i do not provide proof for my claims, yet you then turn
> around and try to attack the fact that when I make a claim about someone
> I back it up with cited posts, often from the very person in question.
Yes exemple :
You say that this guy is insane, and your only argument are to cite is post
where he talk of the 11 september 2001, it's not enough for me to qualifie a
person as insane. Then I tell the story (true) of guys who burned another
with gasoline in my town. This guy can be qualified as insane.
Ok it was really insane from him to say things like that, but it's not the
same insanity level.
And even if this guy is insane this is not what authorise you to insult him,
wich clearly play in your defavor.
> Make up your mind, either I do not back up my claims or all I do is back
> up my claims... you can't have it both ways.
>
> > but believe me because me I have never give ideas that
> > could be eroneous to not take the risk to be considered like that.
> > There is no deep in what you say.
>
> Perhaps if you had more than a remdial understanding of the language, or
> any degree of real experience, or if you'd been in ASF more than a month
> or so, you might be able to appreciate the DEPTH you seem unable to
> perceive.
I understand what your say, but I don't think that anybody is playing is
life on this group, at least not me.
This is only a fucking newsgroup !
> > And you will say that I am a Ray suck puppet or that I am him, like you
tell
> > to anybody that don't agree with the way you act.
>
> Yawn, no actually as hard as it is to believe, ray is actually far more
> articulate than you are. At first i simply assumed this was due to your
> linguistic hurdles, but as i read more of your inane crap I'm beginning
> to think that you're either just a troll pretending to be an idiot or an
> idiot pretending to be a troll.
arf, try to write something wich is not in you native language and we will
see how you look like.
> > All I see is a guy who throw insults and who have no arguments.
>
> I'm sure you see what you want, but the fact is that I've yet to see
> anyone put forth an argument i couldn't decimate. Care to take a shot?
> If you disagree with something I've said, go for it. I welcome your
> debate.
The argument is this one : insults are totally useless. (undiret insult or
subtle ok) but saying ASSHOLE is the last resort. You are really often in
the last resort mode lol.
> However it is obvious that's not really what you want, as you're not
> taking issue with any point or arguing any of my stated positions.
> You're simply attacking me and my disposition... which makes me think
> you're trolling.
Exactly, this why I have say before that I consider me as a troll when I
talk to you and try to make you understand that your insults towards guys
Ray or Patty are really lame. It's even more lame that each time you answer
to ten of is post he answer back with twenty post. Do you cultivate trolls
in your garden ? lol
> > Many time you don't understand what other want to tell to you because
you
> > don't want. You only want to see the things in your way.
>
> You assume because I don't agree, that I don't understand... is it so
> hard for you to accept that someone thinks you're wrong? Of course I see
> things my way, it is called thinking for oneself, you should try it.
I think for myself, and I say that you, you always try to think for the
others. (like you do to "prevent newbies to be tricked")
Maybe this is your guru status that allow you to do that ? This message is
also adressed to Ray.
> > How do you appear for me ?
>
> I don't particularly give a shit, and the fact you assume I do really
> tells me quite a bit about your self-importance.
blablabla.
> > A guy who consider that AFC are asshole losers
> > that only deserve to have they girlfriend fucked by you.
>
> AFCs are losers, that's what the term means. AFC stands for Average
> Frustrated Chump. Don't bitch at me because you can't be bothered to
> learn the fucking lingo. And yes if the loser AFC can't satisfy his
> girlfriend and she's cheating on him because of it, then he absolutely
> deserves it. Or more accurately he doesn't deserve to have a girlfriend
> in the first place.
>
> If a man can not excite the passions and fulfill the desires of a woman,
> and he can't take the time to learn these skills, he does not deserve to
> have or keep her. I do not feel bad if she drops his ass to climb into
> my bed. I don't apoligize for being more desirable and more skilled than
> some AFC loser... especially when the tools are so easy to find and use
> that would allow that AFC to stop being a loser.
If this is what make you feel superior ok no problem lol.
> > This is what I conclude sorry, so just try to make me see you the way
you
> > really think you are, if and I hope it's not true.
>
> I think my opinions are rather clear, but if you're not sure what I
> really think, ask. Because when you assume, you're likely to be wrong.
The only opinion of you I see here just appear through Ray or in opposition
with what he say.
I am not here from 10 years, but this is all I see.
You don't have to prove nothing of course but all I see is you troll feeding
of Ray. (not all of course but the most part).
> > I am sure you think that you don't care of me, and you have right, but
if I
> > see you like that, it means that I am not the only one.
>
> I'm sure you're not the only one who thinks I'm an asshole, so be it.
> I'm perfectly comfortable with your holding whatever opinions you want
> about me, since you're a completely irrelevant factor in my existence. I
> will however correct you when you make asinine statements about my
> positions, and present contradictory claims about my arguments.
My only position is that one : please stop feeding Ray.
I just point the fact that you don't use the good tools to shut him up.
We know that you hate is posts and is opinions (right or wrong this is
opinions) and that you prefer that he don't post at all, but even when he
post advices that seems good, you say don't believe him he is a liar, and he
plagiarise my ideas to sell is crap, and again it goes for fifty useless
post of blalblabla. This is trolling.
Good advices are good advices no matter who say them.
If the advice is bad so it's ok.
But it's really ridiculous to attack somebody personnaly with things he has
tell before, when the advice seems good.
This group should be called alt.RayVsOdious.fight
I really don't hate you believe me.
Odious
Mirak wrote:
>
> > Mirak wrote:
> > >
>
> My only position is that one : please stop feeding Ray.
Read the archived of this group and see what happens when I, or other
ignore ray. Hell I was gone from here for almost a year and it didn't
slow ray's spam or trolls down one bit.
Mirak
"Odious" <Odi...@cox.net> wrote in message news:3CD07665...@cox.net...
Yes but he knows you to much and, let the other do maybe, or use other
pseudonyme lol.