17 comments on “Every Gamer Is Trying To Sell You A Scam

  1. I now realize that Paul Elam never should have debated Frost. Why is that? Because Frost has written a game book, and Paul Elam unwittingly gave Frost publicity even though the book was never referenced during the debate.

    yup that was the whole point — salesmanship

    these people are users and losers, not the clever winners they advertise themselves as

    an ongoing and increasing state of apartheid against boys and men across the western world, and we’re supposed to get excited about pickup techniques sold by immature men to even more immature men?

    we already stagger under the sisterhood scam that is the feminist west — yet another scam, designed to “help” young men (and enrich its advocates) is the answer?

    it’s vanity, self-aggrandizement, and self-enrichment . . . nothing to do with m.r.m.

    • I know that your avatar mocks feminazis, but from first glance it’s not apparent. Some people won’t notice the difference and assume you’re an actual skinhead lol.

  2. Seriously? You think it’s about money for them?

    Very few scams would involve sinking large amounts of effort into something, with a very very low chance of seeing a relatively small payoff over a very long timeline.

    You can agree or disagree, sure. But that doesn’t make it a scam. Athol Kay, Roissy, Susan Walsh, and others have nothing in common with guys like Charles Ponzi, Bernie Madoff, Jon Corzine or Ken Lay.

    • Seriously? You think it’s about money for them?

      Fundamentally, it’s about being a cult and self-aggrandizement. The scam of selling books and DVDs is more from their desperation since most gamers are unemployed or seriously underemployed.

      Athol Kay, Roissy, Susan Walsh, and others have nothing in common with guys like Charles Ponzi, Bernie Madoff, Jon Corzine or Ken Lay.

      That’s because Ponzi, Madoff, Corzine, and Lay weren’t in a cult. They also weren’t trying to trick men into bailing out sluts like Susan Walsh is. Just because Ponzi, Madoff, Corzine, and Lay were more successful at their scams than the gamers does not make the gamers more moral than them.

      • I still disagree with your conclusion, but this line of reasoning is a lot more believable. I’m not a blogger, and I haven’t been promiscuous either, but my life experiences tend to match what the various “game” blogs would predict based on my behavior at the time. There were a few times where I would (unintentionally) attract certain girls, but then very quickly destroy any attraction they had towards me.

        The reasons these guys are followed by so many is because their ideas work. When I found Roissy/etc, I could(literally) look back and see his theories in action in my past. To me, “Game” isn’t really about any specific lifestyle; it’s about understanding human behavior.

        From a non-game perspective, my parents’ marriage(and eventual divorce) makes no sense. My brothers’ relationships would make no sense. “Game” theory is popular because it explains what was previously incomprehensible. It is especially effective because men have been taught to behave in ways that are unattractive to women.

        • If you want to talk about popularity, I can find 50 guys who have tried game and think it’s BS as a result for every one of you who thinks “game works”. Most of them aren’t going to spend time on game blogs arguing about it, just as most people don’t go to Scientology centers to argue against Scientology unless they have a strong reason. (In my case it’s because gamers are interfering with the mens rights movement.)

          From a non-game perspective, my parents’ marriage(and eventual divorce) makes no sense. My brothers’ relationships would make no sense.

          There are millions of non-game perspectives so what you are claiming is impossible for that reason alone.

        • I guess we’ll just agree to disagree then. The “game” perspective is popular because game-centric theories match what is observed and other theories don’t.
          I’m not a pickup artist, not an “alpha” by any measure, really. However, every single time a girl has been attracted to me, the situation has been consistent with the game-defined attractive behavior. Every time a girl has stopped being attracted to me, it’s consistent with game-defined unattractive behavior.
          The game oriented theories of human interactions are intuitive as well. Females are attracted to masculinity. Males are attracted to femininity. It’s that simple. It’s consistent, and it matches real world observations.

        • It’s possible that what is the idea of “game” is simply a woman making the best of a situation.
          Getting digits from a girl may simply be to her advantage to put the guy she DOESN’T give her number to, as the one who should fight harder for her affection.
          I don’t see how “game as PUAs present it” enters into it.

          Also …
          No rings for sluts!

        • Dude, there’s far more ex-gamers than gamers.

          Being involved with this shit for like 10 years I’ve personally seen thousands of people go in and out of game. Very few turn into passionate anti-gamers. Most just sheak their head in disbelief that they fell for it, and just move on with their lives.

          I did so too. The only reason I turned to anti-gaming and warning others about it is because gamers started infiltrating another area of life that I care about (the MRA).

          Here’s a good explanation of why more people aren’t speaking up against game:
          http://www.seductionmyth.com/just_prove_it/the-experiment/#comment-354

    • Dude I’ve tackled this crappy notion a billion times before.

      The fact that Roissy doesn’t make money DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT that the cult was invented by money makers.

      Every single thing that Roissy has ever written was a theory invented by commercial PUA marketers. Roissy (or any of the free gamers) have never ever invented a single original theory.

      It’s like as if a student of scientology goes and opens a blog to teach shit he learned at scientology. Just because he’s not charging people, it doesn’t change the fact that the shit he is teaching was originally invented as part of a pyramid scheme. It was invented to make guys addicted to buying more and more seminars and products. (just like in scientology where they get you addicted to more and more levels and courses)

      https://omegavirginrevolt.wordpress.com/2011/09/25/the-pyramid-scheme-problem-in-trying-to-sell-game/

      This was covered here. Seriously, the “X didn’t charge me for retelling the scam’s storyline, therefore it’s not a scam” argument is just plain foolish.

      • The “free gamers” aren’t giving anything away. They’re building publicity and running a loss leader so that they can make money down the road. Athol Kay or Roosh or the rest of them can’t sell books if they are completely unknown. Running a loss leader is a common business practice, and it should surprise no one that we see it here.

        • That’s a good extra clarification. Even when someone like Ellimist says he gets his information for free, therefore it can’t be impacted by a money-scam- he is often talking about people who are selling shit on the side (roosh etc).

          My response to Ellimist is however about the very few who sell absolutely nothing and are 100% free, like Roissy.

          But yes, even 99% of the so-called “free info” out there is only designed to get you addicted, so they can later sell you on something commercial.

        • My response to Ellimist is however about the very few who sell absolutely nothing and are 100% free, like Roissy.

          Even Roissy is supposedly working on a book deal so even he isn’t 100% free.

          But yes, even 99% of the so-called “free info” out there is only designed to get you addicted, so they can later sell you on something commercial.

          The first hit is always free.

  3. The “game” perspective is popular because game-centric theories match what is observed and other theories don’t.

    Ah, the argument from popularity. My personal favorite for sheer ignorance of history and just plain absence of common sense. As if ideas get popular because they match reality! Might wanna pick up a history book one of these days. Heck, open a newspaper.

    However, every single time a girl has been attracted to me, the situation has been consistent with the game-defined attractive behavior. Every time a girl has stopped being attracted to me, it’s consistent with game-defined unattractive behavior.

    Ever heard of confirmation bias? Its this built-in cognitive bias we humans have where we filter out all data that does not fit our script. Its why anecdotal evidence does not really count for much.

    • History is written by the winners. Winners aren’t going to tell you about the underhanded things they did to become the winners.
      If only the best rise to the top … would the state of our politicians and the world be in such squalor?

      PUAs are definitely enablers of women behaving badly, it must be remembered that such women want sexual license to slut around. If in a relationship with a family-oriented/long-term guy, they’d make his life a living hell.

      MGTOW/PUA keeps the cock carousel riders occupied or alone so that they have moved well past marriage age when they decide to start looking for a man …
      since the cock carousel riders consider a man as an accessory and not a human being, which is why they have no problem being with those who are not serious with them … or behave poorly to good men ready to commit.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s