anyone seen deesade?

[WanderingMan]

anyone know why he got banned? when/if he's coming back?

 

[dude99]

I did see his profile was banned. But i don't kno why it was

 

[Roober]

Oh jeez. All the good ones are getting banned... Him and poon were certainly the more extremist red pill writers on here, but overall good stuff...

Who shall take their place?

 

[Juanto]

Poon was banned too?!? And why was deesade banned exactly?

 

[zekko]

I didn't realize deesade had been banned, I figured he had been staying away because he was ticked off about Poon King getting suspended. Although I'll admit it briefly crossed my mind that maybe deesade was a sock puppet for Poon King.

 

[The Duke]

PoonKing and Deesade don't really impress me as individuals, but they both bring solid opinions/perspective to this forum. I try to ignore their insecurities(name calling) and lack of empathy and focus on the good they offer. Just quit replying to them if you don't like what they have to say. Easy as that.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

I noticed this too. Perhaps it was because he responded to a moderator's message insultingly, I know that can get you banned. I enjoyed his posts as well. A bit too logical at times, but he stated bleakly how women are so I gained a lot from him. I wonder if he is ever gonna come back here though. He did seem rather irritated at PK's ban. I don't think he realized though that the atmosphere here at SS isn't like Roosh V forums. We just aren't radical. We're practical. Oh well, his legacy lives on through the wisdom in his posts. Hopefully others can find them as useful as i have.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

Just quit replying to them if you don't like what they have to say. Easy as that.

Exactly. As long as you don't reply to them, they won't insult you, unless a post was so outlandish that feminists would cringe. That's another story.

 

[zekko]

Exactly. As long as you don't reply to them, they won't insult you

You should be able to disagree with someone without being insulted, however. As you stated, their positions were fairly radical. The "red pill" in the Matrix is supposed to represent reality. It isn't supposed to represent taking the most extreme position.

If they wanted to advocate the playboy lifestyle, that is fine. But that's not the same as saying there is never any good reason to be in a relationship. Men should be able to decide for themselves what those reasons are. They said the only reasons to be in a relationship were if you lazy, fearful, or a faggot. I disagreed with that assessment and from time to time felt I had to speak up and say so.

 

[PantyWhisperer]

I enjoy(ed) them both. Hope they let them come back!

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

I try to ignore their insecurities(name calling) and lack of empathy and focus on the good they offer. Just quit replying to them if you don't like what they have to say. Easy as that.

Two skills in life (not just in internet pretend-land) that are EXTREMELY useful:

1) Being able to cut through the nonsense to get the heart of somebody's message. Not getting put off by their delivery.

2) Being able to DELIVER a message without getting butt hurt if people disagree with you. Most people will never take any advice anyhow.

 

[Trainwreck]

Exactly. As long as you don't reply to them, they won't insult you, unless a post was so outlandish that feminists would cringe. That's another story.

False, he stalked my topics and posts like cat and mouse. I repeatedly offered to settle whatever issue he had with me through private chat and he would never accepted. He clearly had a predatory nature so this is the furthest thing from the truth.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

You should be able to disagree with someone without being insulted, however. As you stated, their positions were fairly radical. The "red pill" in the Matrix is supposed to represent reality. It isn't supposed to represent taking the most extreme position.

If they wanted to advocate the playboy lifestyle, that is fine. But that's not the same as saying there is never any good reason to be in a relationship. Men should be able to decide for themselves what those reasons are. They said the only reasons to be in a relationship were if you lazy, fearful, or a faggot. I disagreed with that assessment and from time to time felt I had to speak up and say so.

Yes I see your point. They did say that. Their reasoning was because being a simpering wuss due to having oneitis over some chick means that you are a beta faggot. Why is a man like this instead of being a man and thinking for himself? Its because he was being emotional, therefore being emotional means being a beta faggot, especially since that is the domain of women. Therefore they assumed logic and rationale being the land of men. There weren't any LOGICAL reasons for being in an LTR in their mind. In terms of straight up logic and rationale, that is true. But emotions are oftentimes involved in relationships with women so that cause-effect thinking is flawed. Perhaps that is the one factor they forgot to account for somewhere in their 'equation'.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

False, he stalked my topics and posts like cat and mouse. I repeatedly offered to settle whatever issue he had with me through private chat and he would never accepted. He clearly had a predatory nature so this is the furthest thing from the truth.

Huh. Well he never did that with me. He couldn't really argue with me because I never gave him much of an opening. But if I did disagree with him or deesade or anyone else on here and they refused to understand what I was saying or if they didn't read my responses to other peoplw who asked the same questions, then I would just ignore their posts. I never had much of an issue.

 

[logicallefty]

I noticed this too. Perhaps it was because he responded to a moderator's message insultingly, I know that can get you banned. I enjoyed his posts as well. A bit too logical at times, but he stated bleakly how women are so I gained a lot from him. I wonder if he is ever gonna come back here though. He did seem rather irritated at PK's ban. I don't think he realized though that the atmosphere here at SS isn't like Roosh V forums. We just aren't radical. We're practical. Oh well, his legacy lives on through the wisdom in his posts. Hopefully others can find them as useful as i have.

Deesade's ban at this time will be temporary.

We have a great community here. I can't say enough good about this place and our members. But one area where this community as whole could do a little better IMO is remaining mindful of the fact that this is a PRIVATE site and that nobody here owes anybody anything. There are rules and we are expected to follow them. That also means that when you break the rules and a Moderator messages you about it, consider the Moderator (and the site owner) doing you a favor by giving you a warning before banning. Smarting off and coping the attitude that you are going to organize the next "Women Protest Trump" protest against the Mods will get you nowhere here. Nor will making accusations that the site has gone blue pill and is on a rampage to sensor red pill content. Please, don't waste your keystrokes.

Just follow the rules and be cool, and all will be well. It's pretty simple.

 

[zekko]

There weren't any LOGICAL reasons for being in an LTR in their mind. In terms of straight up logic and rationale, that is true.

I completely disagree that the only reasons to be in a LTR are emotional. I think the reasons for dating multiple women are just as emotional as the reasons for being in a LTR - not "feeling" needy, "feeling" that you have abundance, not "feeling" abandoned when you get stood up, liking the ego boost of thinking you have a harem, the "excitement" of variety.

At my age, oneitis isn't something that has a big hold on me. I and others noted that we liked having the LTR because it saved us time to focus on things that might be more important - hobbies, sports, earning money, working out, whatever. To us, it is logical and practical.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

I completely disagree that the only reasons to be in a LTR are emotional. I think the reasons for dating multiple women are just as emotional as the reasons for being in a LTR - not "feeling" needy, "feeling" that you have abundance, not "feeling" abandoned when you get stood up, liking the ego boost of thinking you have a harem, the "excitement" of variety.

At my age, oneitis isn't something that has a big hold on me. I and others noted that we liked having the LTR because it saved us time to focus on things that might be more important - hobbies, sports, earning money, working out, whatever. To us, it is logical and practical.

I meant solely logical and rational. There are reasons baring both sides, but none for LTRs that have ONLY logic and rationale to them.

 

[zekko]

I meant solely logical and rational. There are reasons baring both sides, but none for LTRs that have ONLY logic and rationale to them.

Eh, still don't think I agree. I guess you are saying that a guy can just screw different women with no emotions involved, but in that case you might as well be jerking off. Even if you're just seeking pleasure, pleasure is an emotion. But no one will call you a faggot for seeking pleasure lol.

 

[logicallefty]

But no one will call you a faggot for seeking pleasure lol.

Noone thats here and able to right now will, anyway.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

Eh, still don't think I agree. I guess you are saying that a guy can just screw different women with no emotions involved, but in that case you might as well be jerking off. Even if you're just seeking pleasure, pleasure is an emotion. But no one will call you a faggot for seeking pleasure lol.

It's a sensation, not an emotion. I wouldn't call pain an emotion. I mean burning yourself on the stove hurts, but doesn't affect my feelings directly.