How To Assess Credibility of Dating Claims of Online Posters

[curtsilv]

It was pure cringe back then, too, as is anything like it, IMO. It is the entire reason I find the term PUA to be moronic.

Even sadder than that is the fact he is being referenced in threads like this one as an example of what a person thinks game or seduction is, is in itself pathetic.

Still butthurt over being called out for being a dummie in the other thread lol.

 

[curtsilv]

That reminds me of the David D guy whose gimmick was to ask a girl for their email address instead of their phone number....because he was all hip and high tech like that. Can you imagine that line today? "Hey babe, what's your email address?" LOL

A lot of those guys made an ass ton of money though. David D and Neil Strauss in particular. RSD is still pulling the same scam. It's amazing how guliible people are. When the topic is sex, people just can't think rationally about the issue.

Even on this forum, someone like beexcellent, a 50 year old who claims to look late 20's, gets a pass. No one calls her on her bull-sh-t.

No one asks for proof of anything, much less demands it.

 

[devilkingx2]

That reminds me of the David D guy whose gimmick was to ask a girl for their email address instead of their phone number....because he was all hip and high tech like that. Can you imagine that line today? "Hey babe, what's your email address?" LOL

Lmao that would be a bit of a dated method

Nowadays i do actually opt fot a Snapchat over a number though. So maybe it has just evolved

 

[devilkingx2]

Even on this forum, someone like beexcellent, a 50 year old who claims to look late 20's, gets a pass. No one calls her on her bull-sh-t.

?????

There's like half a dozen users that have sh!tting on the female posters down to a science or an art form (I think they're all banned now for a variety of mostly similar reasons though)

BeExcellent specifically has been memed on for being the female version of bigneil (this guy who would boast about how awesome he was 24/7 if he could find a way to fit it into his post)

What are you talking about lmao

 

[devilkingx2]

You obviously did not even look at much less read the study you cited. This is the third time I've pointed this out so obviously facts don't matter to you, but your so-called "study" not only recorded guesstimates of sex partners (completely invalid and unreliable) but doesn't even define sex. It can refer to anything: actual intercourse, oral, or even heavy petting, spooning, kissing or imaginary sex. It's 100% invalid.

It's interesting that you dodged the point that most women wouldn't want to lie upwards and are more likely to exclude things as "not counting", meaning that 7 is a lowball.

It's also interesting that you think that you need scientific methodology for as simple and basic of a question as "how many people have you fvcked?". (Anybody pretending to not know what that means is intentionally fudging their numbers and would lie about it either way)

 

[curtsilv]

It's interesting that you dodged the point that most women wouldn't want to lie upwards and are more likely to exclude things as "not counting", meaning that 7 is a lowball.

It's also interesting that you think that you need scientific methodology for as simple and basic of a question as "how many people have you fvcked?". (Anybody pretending to not know what that means is intentionally fudging their numbers and would lie about it either way)

It's interesting that you didn't even read the study you cited. It's pretty obvious you have no idea how the study was conducted and therefore are clueless about why the results are 100% invalid. You are hellbent on remaining ignorant which is your choice. Stupid is as stupid does.

You don't need "scientific methodology" to know "how many people fvcked." However, you need a clear definition of what fvcking means, and these pseudo scientists have no clue since they never defined it. Besides, you don't even know what scientific methodology even means. You are too dense to have a meaningful discussion with, much less an intelligent one.

 

[curtsilv]

?????

There's like half a dozen users that have sh!tting on the female posters down to a science or an art form (I think they're all banned now for a variety of mostly similar reasons though)

BeExcellent specifically has been memed on for being the female version of bigneil (this guy who would boast about how awesome he was 24/7 if he could find a way to fit it into his post)

What are you talking about lmao

I have yet to see even a single post calling her out as the lying old hag that she is. I'm the only one doing it.

 

[devilkingx2]

I have yet to see even a single post calling her out as the lying old hag that she is. I'm the only one doing it.

That's because Bigneil, Urbanyst, Tenacity and RichardTheFrog are all banned.