ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Thursday, February 19, 2015

Identifying Gamma males

A recovering ex-Gamma helpfully provides a list of behavioral attributes:
  • When you are having an argument with someone and it appears you are wrong, the most common belief and defense is that the other person simply doesn’t understand what you are saying.
  • When discussing matters with someone and you think you are maybe, possibly, being shown to be wrong, you start to get snarky, crack lame jokes, and immediately try to change the subject.
  • If someone holds an opinion contrary to yours, and you don’t think you have a good defense immediately to hand, you start to look for unrelated ways to disqualify the other person as being less than knowledgeable about the subject, even going so far as to disqualify them as being a good person or sometimes even a person at all.
  • Definitions are tenuous for you and words can be redefined at leisure during a discussion. If someone quotes the dictionary and it disagrees with your definition they are arguing unfairly and the dictionary is wrong.
The rest of the list is at Alpha Game. I'm mostly interested to note how often we see this very sort of behavior from trolls and pinkshirts, which tends to confirm the more casual observations of their low socio-sexual status. See the recent post, A Rabbit Visits, and note the similarities even though this was sent to me several days ago.

Keep in mind that this is a former Gamma explaining his previous mindset, it's not an outsider's interpretation.

Labels:

300 Comments:

1 – 200 of 300 Newer› Newest»
Anonymous DrTorch February 19, 2015 9:40 AM  

It's kind of depressing reading that list. A desperate cry for attention and affirmation, "I'm a casual fan of Scalzi..."

Also worth noting that this is exactly what one sees in bureaucracies. Petty bureaucrats who'd rather hold up the works rather than simply admit they're wrong and fix an issue.

Also worth noting is that despots of all scales recognize how to manipulate these gammas in order to build, entrench and protect their power base.

Blogger JartStar February 19, 2015 9:52 AM  

Nearly everyone had done one or more of those things on the list as we are all fallen, but the key is to avoid consistently doing those things. A Gamma's ego is huge and incredibly fragile, and a loss of face is almost a loss of personhood for them.

Anonymous Eowyn February 19, 2015 9:53 AM  

Have been following the gamma series with interest. I do hope it helps someone, somewhere, because reading about gammas from a former gamma's point of view, I can't help but feel pity. They're like dwarves in the Narnia Chronicle's The Last Battle; refusing to see what's in front of their faces because of their pride.

Anonymous Crude February 19, 2015 10:00 AM  

The rest of the list is at Alpha Game. I'm mostly interested to note how often we see this very sort of behavior from trolls and pinkshirts, which tends to confirm the more casual observations of their low socio-sexual status.

Then what should we think of their leaders and ringleaders? It can't be gammas all the way down, can it?

Anonymous Eric Ashley February 19, 2015 10:00 AM  

For me, its almost a NO on all these. The only one that is maybe is arguement by dictionary, which is frequently a lame arguement, often contra to the observed facts.

If everyone calls a rose a rise, it doesn't matter much what Webster says.

Also, dictionaries have poor logic, and are politically influenced at times. I remember one arguement that spun on a definition of Philosophy. I held by the common understanding, and my foe, evidently went by the cheating def in Wikipedia. I used the dictionary eventually to corrobrate my instincts were right.

Wikipedia being of course a more blatant example of corruption that Websters.

But then I used?? to be an Omega, I guess. And I was taught by my brother that the purpose of arguement is to get to the truth.

Blogger Vincent Castrillo February 19, 2015 10:16 AM  

Ex-gamma ....blah blah points 1-4.

Basically he describes the modern liberal.

Blogger Brad Andrews February 19, 2015 10:18 AM  

I suspect the aspect of "the other person just doesn't understand" is one of projection. That is often true in life, but it is often not fruitful at all to try to make someone understand as they won't do so if they don't want to do so.

This is a double-edged item, as many people really do not understand. The response to that lack of understanding would be more important than the existence of the belief.

Do you seek to understand why the other party is having trouble with your point or do you just push it harder to get your point through? Stop pushing if their position ends up just being one of not wanting to understand. You are wasting everyone's time.

Blogger JartStar February 19, 2015 10:21 AM  

It can't be gammas all the way down, can it?

Yes.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 10:22 AM  

" . . . because of their pride."

I think the pride can also be a cover for the deep-seeded insecurity lurking beneath the surface. Such an insatiable need to be accepted by everyone. Their security seems to lie in what others think of them or how they believe they are perceived by others.

In other words, since they do not adhere to any real principles or beliefs about much of anything, they must constantly keep a wary eye on the school of fish which is their only metric for determining the correctness of their direction and for calculating and affirming their position, a position which is constantly in flux.

They are truly storm-tossed waves of the sea blown here and there by every wind. They are like someone who looks at his face in a mirror and, and despite all of the glaring blemishes, is content to walk away, immediately forgetting what he looks like, convinced that the mirror is faulty and unable to concede that he may not be the fairest in the land.

The first step is always a brutally honest assessment and admission of one's present condition, spiritually or otherwise. If there is no problem, then there is nothing to fix.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 10:25 AM  

I suspect the aspect of "the other person just doesn't understand" is one of projection.

Yup. The "You're not tall enough for this ride" disqualification.

Blogger Krul February 19, 2015 10:26 AM  

Is it just me, or has the definition of "gamma" changed somewhat over time? It seems like what used to mean "a guy whose success with women is below average" now means having a catalogue of specific, mildly neurotic tendencies.

Not saying it's wrong, mind you. Only, I wonder whether the quirks of particular gammas - the ex-Gamma and Scalzi - have been extrapolated to the whole group, or whether the label was only intended to refer to men with those quirks in the first place.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey February 19, 2015 10:32 AM  

Here's another one:

• When you consider yourself a member of something called 'The Ilk'.

Blogger Edward Isaacs February 19, 2015 10:34 AM  

I am, currently, entirely and thoroughly gamma. That being said:

>In the past year you can’t recall a single serious online discussion you were wrong about anything.

I'm often wrong.

>When you are having an argument with someone and it appears you are wrong, the most common belief and defense is the other person simply doesn’t understand what you are saying.

Pretty much.

>If someone holds an opinion contrary to yours, and you don’t think you have a good defense immediately to hand you start to look for unrelated ways to disqualify the other person as at least knowledgeable about the subject, and even going so far as to disqualify them as a good person or even a person at all.

I try very hard to keep intellectual arguments on the intellectual level.

>Definitions are tenuous for you and words can be redefined at leisure during a discussion. If someone quotes the dictionary and it disagrees with your definition they are arguing unfairly and the dictionary is wrong.

I try to resolve arguments by laying down clear and unambiguous definitions. Sometimes I do get frustrated when someone tries to go to the dictionary to define a philosophical term of art, but I don't think that's quite the same thing.

>When finally shown you are wrong about something it is devastating, you remember it for months or years, avoid that place or people, and consider your time there a failure as a person.

Nah. I psychologically buffer against thoughts like these by reassuring myself that the fact that I'm able to change my opinion as a result of reasoned argument is a plus that outweighs any short-term losses in individual arguments.

>You can’t even take a mild ribbing about anything outside of a few harmless topics from other guys

Pretty much true. Or, if it's important for me to maintain good personal relations with that person, I'll just internalize the criticism (like, I'll say to myself: yeah, that's true, I really am a self-righteous prick (for example)), and just sort of feed the negative self-image I have, and justify this move by thinking that I can flip these negatives to positives through exercising the virtue of humility.

>In contrast you’ll sit idly by as a woman openly mocks you as you are just being “nice”.

I wouldn't do this, because I dislike women too much. I can get very angry at women very quickly.

>Now that you think about it, in this last year or two you can recall several women cracking jokes at your expense

I don't see enough women for this to happen to me, I guess.

>The thought of being at the center of a comedy roast fills you with dread.

Yeah, but then again, there's that quiet little voice deep on the inside that always tells me humility is the only path to true freedom.

>You think width of knowledge is more important than depth of knowledge.

Who thinks this?

>You are an expert on everything and always ready to give your opinion even when you aren’t sure—then again a Gamma is always sure of his knowledge so you probably give your opinion on most everything all of the time.

The only things I don't give my opinion on are things that I actually do know enough about to know that I don't know enough about them to where my opinion on them should matter. On everything else, I'm always the smartest person in the room (so I habitually think).

>If someone says they aren’t interested in your opinion you take it as a personal slight

It really does grate.

>If someone tells a story you immediately have to follow up that story with one of your own.... If you don’t have a good story you’ll say something snarky afterwards to diminish the other story.

I never get out, so I don't have any stories. Sarcasm is never far from my lips though.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey February 19, 2015 10:36 AM  

Vox trolling his own readers. Awesome! This made my morning.

Blogger Joshua Dyal February 19, 2015 10:41 AM  

Yup. The "You're not tall enough for this ride" disqualification.

It's one thing to throw this out there as a disqualifier. It's another to use it after you've already explained and the stubborn idiot still refuses to get it. It has its place.

Blogger hank.jim February 19, 2015 10:46 AM  

I guess I'm always wrong because I'd rather be right. I'm right because I say so. The thing about right or wrong is the result of being wrong still won't change my mind and I still won't do as you say. So perhaps the best way to deal with it isn't with the "gamma" style response, but let's agree to disagree.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 10:50 AM  

"I'm right because I say so."

Then the rest of your statement follows.

" . . . let's agree to disagree."

Still smells like a Gamma to me . . .

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 10:51 AM  

"The thing about right or wrong is the result of being wrong still won't change my mind and I still won't do as you say."

That is because your real interest lies elsewhere.

Blogger Guitar Man February 19, 2015 10:51 AM  

I look at that list and think how exhausting it must be for the gamma to maintain his gamma. A former youth leader of mine has every one of those tendencies. He went off the deep end, and some of the Facebook arguments were so tedious as a result. He typically clashed with any of my ilk friends. While it made for humorous fodder, I ultimately pulled the plug on FB for other reasons.

Anonymous 43rd Virginia Cavalry February 19, 2015 10:52 AM  

Another sign: You own a Porsche. You go to the race track. You insist that there must be something wrong with the clock.

Blogger hank.jim February 19, 2015 10:53 AM  

"Still smells like a Gamma to me . . . "

Yes because I already said "I'm always wrong because I'd rather be right."

Blogger hank.jim February 19, 2015 10:53 AM  

"That is because your real interest lies elsewhere."

Like in being right.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 10:55 AM  

@hank.jim

I was speaking to the "agree to disagree" comment, which is still a Gamma response.

Anonymous totenhenchen February 19, 2015 10:58 AM  

Indeed. The problem with being King of Fools is that you're still a fool.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 10:59 AM  

"Like in being right"

Of course. No doubt. How does always "being right" benefit you when your position is never open to challenge? It seems to me there is only One who is "always right", after all.

Blogger hank.jim February 19, 2015 11:00 AM  

@Rabbi B.

"I was speaking to the "agree to disagree" comment, which is still a Gamma response"

Not necessarily. It doesn't follow any examples from above. You only worked my comments from above, the origin ("I'm right because I say so."), then developed your conclusion. Nice try.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 11:00 AM  

you've already explained and the stubborn idiot still refuses to get it.

You make the point for me. Stubbornness is not lack of intellect.

It's a very gamma play on your part to say "I've explained it to you, but your stubborn insistence to the contrary means you are too dumb to understand."

It's just one more DISQUALIFY.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 11:02 AM  

A challenge either affords you the opportunity to re-evaluate your position and make it "right" if it is demonstrated to be faulty or reaffirm the "rightness" of your positon it if it is truly otherwise. Either way a win-win. After which you can be "always right" if that is your only objective.

Anonymous cheddarman February 19, 2015 11:05 AM  

I wonder how much gamma behavior relates to lack of strong male figure involved in the formative years of a young man.

i dont see how a boy could grow into anything other than an alpha, beta or delta with a dad actively involved in their life, who wants to see their son be a man. They would refine the boys character to remove the gamma


Being a member of the warren is a substitute for masculinity, as opposed to being a member of the tribe of men.

Blogger Krul February 19, 2015 11:09 AM  

I Gotsta Get Paid

Blogger Brad Andrews February 19, 2015 11:09 AM  

So perhaps the best way to deal with it isn't with the "gamma" style response, but let's agree to disagree.

That often seems wimpy to me, and a way to give in to the SJWs. I would just avoid them, but I won't allow their idiocy. Another balance issue.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 11:11 AM  

"I wonder how much gamma behavior relates to lack of strong male figure involved in the formative years of a young man'

I would say absolutely critical.

"Being a member of the warren is a substitute for masculinity . . ."

And their own identity . . . always unsure of who they are and what they believe, constantly looking to the warren for affirmation and approval. Fathers seem to be where young men naturally look for this . . when there is not father to look to .... well ...

(How much more when there is no Heavenly Father to look to either . . .)

Great insight Cheddarman . . .

Anonymous VD February 19, 2015 11:11 AM  

Yup. The "You're not tall enough for this ride" disqualification.

No, Porky. That is absolutely incorrect. It is not projection to inform someone that they are intellectually incapable of understanding something once they have demonstrated as much. That doesn't even make any sense to claim it is projection. If someone is 5 standard deviations less intelligent than you are, there are a number of thing you CANNOT explain to them.

Furthermore, as Aristotle said, there are some people who are incapable of changing their mind no matter what information they are provided. It is not "projection" to correctly identify the rhetorically limited.

Sometimes the failure to communicate is the fault of the communicator. But often, it is the fault of the communicatee, who is incapable of understanding the information or grasping the logic.

I simply don't understand why you think snarking and trying to misapply various concepts is ever going to pass notice here.

Blogger GK Chesterton February 19, 2015 11:12 AM  

Definitions are tenuous for you and words can be redefined at leisure during a discussion. If someone quotes the dictionary and it disagrees with your definition they are arguing unfairly and the dictionary is wrong.

I'm not sure about that,or is the list supposed to be merely indicators? I've seen many betas that engage in heavy dictionary mocking as well as disqualification. I suggest we may be seeing what someone up thread noted as a conflation between rabbit behavior and gammas.

Anonymous cheddarman February 19, 2015 11:12 AM  

Rabbi B,

I am just channeling the wisdom written down by your peeps in the Bible, but thanks.

sincerely

cheddarman

OpenID cailcorishev February 19, 2015 11:17 AM  

I'd say "we'll have to agree to disagree" is usually a passive-aggressive attempt to exit the argument while you might still appear to have some points, because you're getting beaten. It's a way to look like you're taking the high road, while getting the last word.

There are certainly times I lose interest in an argument and don't bother to continue even though I haven't changed my mind, but in that case, I just stop arguing. I don't try to declare a stalemate, and the guy willing to continue gets the last word. I suppose maybe, if I were arguing with a good friend or someone I respected highly, and it had been going on for a while, I might say something just so he'd know why I stopped responding. But to random people online? Nah, there it's just trying to take your ball and go home because the other team is kicking the crap out of it.

Blogger Edward Isaacs February 19, 2015 11:22 AM  

While I am fishing for attention, Re strong male figures:

I was raised alone by my grandfather, who was a machinist. He was a strong male in many senses, not least the literal i.e. physical. However he was antisocial, self-isolated from his family, machiavellian and paranoid to the core, and quite controlling of me (in the sense of overprotective). For several years in my teens we were isolated from basically everyone, I was "homeschooled" (read: left alone to learn what I wanted from the local library with very little guidance or supervision), and we passed the evenings playing video games together.

All of the relationships I had with women who might have been mother figures to me when I was a child turned out badly.

Now my grandfather is dead, and I spend more time daydreaming about being controlled by a man again than about potentially leading a family. I don't think I'm gay, either... honestly I don't know what the fuck is going on.

But gather from that what you will.

Blogger hank.jim February 19, 2015 11:38 AM  

"I'd say "we'll have to agree to disagree" is usually a passive-aggressive attempt to exit the argument while you might still appear to have some points, because you're getting beaten"

Maybe there is a true stalemate because the argument over facts relies on a "subjective" opinion on who won. If you think you won, you haven't. I don't concede I've lost.

Anonymous grey enlightenment February 19, 2015 11:40 AM  

Gamma Male: in other words, a typical Democratic voter

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 11:40 AM  

If someone is 5 standard deviations less intelligent than you are, there are a number of thing you CANNOT explain to them.

Meh. Most of the time you have no idea what the IQ of the other person is. You've even thrown this canard at me before without knowing my IQ. While not stellar, it's certainly not 5 SD below your super intelligence.


Furthermore, as Aristotle said, there are some people who are incapable of changing their mind no matter what information they are provided. It is not "projection" to correctly identify the rhetorically limited.

Which is a different argument than saying someone is not intelligent enough. Misapplication.

I simply don't understand why you think snarking and trying to misapply various concepts is ever going to pass notice here.

Says the guy who just misapplied his own concept above.

See, this is the problem when you play the rhetoric game - or as I call it: trying to out rabbit the rabbits.

By deciding to answer rabbits in the same manner in which they address you, you must - a consilio speak like a rabbit.

Which is fine and quite hilarious when you have truth on your side. But when you attempt to DISQUALIFY based on a mere guess at the other person's IQ qualifications - then you just sound like a rabbit.

Rhetoric without truth is just rhetoric.

Anonymous Sevron February 19, 2015 11:44 AM  

I used to be horribly, deeply gamma. But I suffered a series of ego-destroying blows within a short time frame that sort of killed the old me, or it at least felt like a death.
- My dog died that had been with me since 5th grade.
- My girlfriend (who was my first) dumped me and started fucking lots of other guys. I also discovered she was fucking lots of other guys while we were together. This was while she was also pushing marriage, and I did in fact ask to to marry me and she accepted, although it was right at the end, there was no ring, and we did not announce it to our families. I was 25 at the end. We had been together for two years.
- I lost my job at a tech startup. This was not my fault, the company's technology wasn't panning out and they had to let people go. But I had a lot of my self invested in being an R&D Engineer at a Tech Start Up, by God. The economy was not good at that time, and I had to move to a small town hours away for work.
- My older brother, and only sibling, moved out of the state for his dream job. It was like when he left for college, but a thousand times worse because he was never coming back and I was never going to join him.

I was not very gamma-y in the sense I needed to belong to a group, and in any case I had very few friends and was poor at making new ones. I was pretty angry at the world for not recognizing me and giving a shit about me, though. I still cry buckets when watching Lilo and Stitch at the scene where Stitch is in the rain, crying out "I'm lost." I have a good amount of friends now, I'm not an insufferable asshole to be around, and found a good woman to marry, but I still feel that past me sometimes.

Anonymous Soga February 19, 2015 11:49 AM  

I think another good sign you're a gamma is that, much like women, you take to the comments section to turn a blog post into talking about yourself unsolicited and/or you take generalizations personally, as though the speaker was speaking directly about you.

Anonymous VD February 19, 2015 11:53 AM  

Most of the time you have no idea what the IQ of the other person is.

That's not true. I can correctly place a person's IQ in their standard deviation most of the time after interacting with them.


Which is a different argument than saying someone is not intelligent enough. Misapplication.


It's not a misapplication, it is an extension. To be rhetorically limited is certainly a form of not being intellectually tall enough. It doesn't refer only to IQ. It can also refer to highly intelligent people who render themselves functionally unintelligent for one reason or another.

Says the guy who just misapplied his own concept above.

I did not misapply the concept. And speaking of misapplication, your entire point here is shady. The Ex-Gamma wrote: "If someone holds an opinion contrary to yours, and you don’t think you have a good defense immediately to hand, you start to look for unrelated ways to disqualify the other person as being less than knowledgeable about the subject."

I NEVER use "You're not tall enough for this ride" in lieu of a good defense. I use it when I know that there is no point in explaining something to a midwit or a troll because he's never going to get it, or admit to getting it even when he does.

See, this is the problem when you play the rhetoric game - or as I call it: trying to out rabbit the rabbits.

That's ridiculous. Per Aristotle and experience, they CANNOT grasp dialectic. One either has to use rhetoric or ignore them. Rhetoric is not intrinsically rabbit. One can speak lapine without being a rabbit.

You're like a walking, talking example of what the ex-gamma is describing here.

Anonymous Curlytop February 19, 2015 11:54 AM  

I've been around here a long time, yet I'm struck at how many of those characteristics describe a woman's thought processes.

There's a reason women scorn Gamma males: they mirror back a woman's most unflattering traits. And NO ONE likes to see the worst of themselves reflected back to them.

Blogger JartStar February 19, 2015 11:57 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 12:04 PM  

" . . . you take generalizations personally, as though the speaker was speaking directly about you."

Another excellent point. Gammas are the sun. An ancient proclivity that dates back to the Garden. The adversary was able to convince Eve that it was all about her. Flattering to gain advantage is a mighty powerful weapon.

Maybe we could add 'Eve-wife-of-Adam' to the Hultgreen-Curie Syndrome . . .

OpenID cailcorishev February 19, 2015 12:09 PM  

I've been around here a long time, yet I'm struck at how many of those characteristics describe a woman's thought processes.

Yes. I said this at AG, but it's not too far off to define "gamma" as "effeminate male." If a man tends to think and act like a woman -- especially if he's proud of how in touch he is with his feminine side -- he's a gamma.

Blogger Doom February 19, 2015 12:10 PM  

Actually, gamma men and general population of women share much in common... at least headstrong women. This is exactly their method. Some of my women were like that. I retrained them, brought them to obedience, but that was boring with those types, so then left them. I found that women like that can always be tamed. But as such, become boring for a man living outside of societal norms.

I must assume that such men are stuck between the feminine and the masculine, for whatever reason. Feminists, of a sort. Bleh.

Blogger Krul February 19, 2015 12:12 PM  

Rabbi B - Maybe we could add 'Eve-wife-of-Adam' to the Hultgreen-Curie Syndrome .

I think Lilith would be a better candidate.

Blogger Rek. February 19, 2015 12:20 PM  

"Yes. I said this at AG, but it's not too far off to define "gamma" as "effeminate male." If a man tends to think and act like a woman -- especially if he's proud of how in touch he is with his feminine side -- he's a gamma."

Very true, cail. I remember myself acting so much in line with the feminine imperative, trying to appease my inadequacy, avoiding any form of conflict to the extent that I would let others disrespect me, that girls would consider me one of the girls. At the time it really hurt me but I didn't know any better. I had been trained into following the Doxa.

Blogger Student in Blue February 19, 2015 12:21 PM  

@cailcorishev
Yes. I said this at AG, but it's not too far off to define "gamma" as "effeminate male." If a man tends to think and act like a woman -- especially if he's proud of how in touch he is with his feminine side -- he's a gamma.

Continuing this thought, from my own experiences in the gamma trench, there is a much higher percentage of transsexuals in the gamma class. I believe there is no coincidence here.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 12:25 PM  

That's not true. I can correctly place a person's IQ in their standard deviation most of the time after interacting with them.

Then you failed in my case.

To be rhetorically limited is certainly a form of not being intellectually tall enough. It doesn't refer only to IQ. It can also refer to highly intelligent people who render themselves functionally unintelligent for one reason or another.

Didn't know that. Ok. But that's an even less empirically justifiable judgement.

I NEVER use "You're not tall enough for this ride" in lieu of a good defense.

I wasn't speaking to the ex-gamma's opinion. I was speaking to Brad Andrews' take on the matter.

My argument is not that rhetoric should not be used in lieu of a good defense. My argument is that if you use rhetoric without truth you sound exactly like a projecting rabbit.

That's ridiculous. Per Aristotle and experience, they CANNOT grasp dialectic. One either has to use rhetoric or ignore them.

I'm not arguing against rhetoric. I'm arguing against rhetoric sans truth.

You're like a walking, talking example of what the ex-gamma is describing here.

Yet you are the one who failed to grasp my argument. Or...did you actually grasp my argument...but attempt to rabitt-rhetorically twist it ...because you think I'm too dumb to get the dialectic? Who knows?? It looks the same no matter how you look at it.

Yet another problem with the rabbit-rhetoric game: the temptation to assume that because you find the other guy irritating he must be some gamma rabbit.

I know why I am irritating. And it's not because I desire the comfort of a warren of SJW's.

Blogger Bodichi February 19, 2015 12:32 PM  

@Student in Blue,

The Gamma trench, a hellish world of self induced pain. The worst part of that trench is looking back and knowing you dug every square inch of it, knowing you wallowed in the feces that you placed there. Knowing that you could have climbed out when ever you wanted, there was nothing keeping you there.

How I hate that trench.

Blogger Josh February 19, 2015 12:36 PM  

Then you failed in my case.

Has vox ever publicly estimated your IQ?

Blogger Student in Blue February 19, 2015 12:44 PM  

@Bodichi
How I hate that trench.

I'm amusedly reminded (albeit darkly) of what's referred to as "the trench" by fans of Dota and League of Legends. For those not in the know, the trench is vaguely defined as some range in matchmaking rating where your allies are awful and a terrible burden, passive-aggressively disrupting team cohesion, and it's always everyone else's fault that you're stuck "in the trench".

Much in the same way as the matchmaking trench is a soulsucking horror, so too is the gamma trench. So too is the wallowing and the knowledge once you are past that only you yourself kept you there.

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus February 19, 2015 12:46 PM  

In the past year you can’t recall a single serious online discussion you were wrong about anything.

In the past two years you can’t recall one discussion with any friends or family in which you were wrong about anything.


So there's a fine line between being a gamma and being overly self-confident? Thought that was an alpha trait?

OpenID cailcorishev February 19, 2015 12:47 PM  

Has vox ever publicly estimated your IQ?

I'll take the under.

Blogger Bodichi February 19, 2015 12:50 PM  

@Student in Blue

There is no one that anyone can ever hate as much as they hate their former (gamma) self, once they learn the truth. Sure, different people have drastic effects on your life, but the responsibility always rests on your shoulders.

If there were such things as time machines, there would be no end to the beatings I would inflict upon my former self.

Blogger Student in Blue February 19, 2015 12:54 PM  

@Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
So there's a fine line between being a gamma and being overly self-confident? Thought that was an alpha trait?

Someone overly self-confident is bound to butt heads with friends and family over something that they may not know that much about, and lead to them being wrong. The alpha trait instead (as I understand) is just to not give a shit about being proven wrong, fix it and move on. The self-confidence here is battletested.

In contrast, someone who is gamma will avoid any conflicts that he might not win, and will rewrite history in his head if things don't go according to plan, hence the "can't recall one discussion". The "self-confidence" here is always paperthin.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 12:56 PM  

@Josh

I've been told not tall enough, sure. Of course, now I am informed that this has absolutely nothing to do with a person's intelligence so I'm not even sure that it was an insult.

Anonymous Viidad February 19, 2015 12:56 PM  

You know, some of these "gamma" tells are quite similar to INTJ traits.

The difference, perhaps, is that INTJs are not lying to themselves when they believe their opinions to be correct. The personality is often marked by a deep study of topics, not a cursory "I know it 'cause everybody knows it" flippancy.

Blogger Vox February 19, 2015 1:02 PM  

Then you failed in my case.

Cite where I estimated your IQ or admit that you were wrong.

Didn't know that. Ok. But that's an even less empirically justifiable judgement.

No, it's not. Smart people do observably stupid things and behave in observably stupid ways on a regular basis. I have written frequently about "functional stupidity".

I wasn't speaking to the ex-gamma's opinion. I was speaking to Brad Andrews' take on the matter.

Bullshit you were, Gamma boy. You knew perfectly well what you were doing. You're always looking to take a snarky little shot. If you were only speaking to Andrews's take, you wouldn't have mentioned one of my frequently used phrases. Sweet Roissy, but you are contemptible!

Do you not realize that even the gammas here look at you and say, "man, at least I'm not as bad as HIM"?

My argument is not that rhetoric should not be used in lieu of a good defense. My argument is that if you use rhetoric without truth you sound exactly like a projecting rabbit.

No, you don't. You are simply looking to call names in an entirely unoriginal manner. You're entirely transparent, Porky. And seeing you appeal to truth is amusing. You're one of the least honest, most pretentious commenters here.

Yet another problem with the rabbit-rhetoric game: the temptation to assume that because you find the other guy irritating he must be some gamma rabbit.

It's not a temptation. I find plenty of people annoying who are not Gammas. Hell, I tend to find Alphas annoying too. But you are an annoying Gamma. Your behavior on this post is an example of Gamma snark, Gamma pretense, Gamma inability to admit being wrong, and Gamma delusion.

You STILL haven't admitted you were wrong about the clever political brilliance of ObamaCare despite every prediction you made about it being wrong.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 1:02 PM  

"The worst part of that trench is looking back and knowing you dug every square inch of it, knowing you wallowed in the feces that you placed there . . "

There is an interesting Biblical parallel to what you're saying here which I find instructive:

When a person is afflicted with a skin condition and is commanded to show himself to the priest for an evaluation of his condition, the priest will declare him unclean and isolate him from the rest of the community.

The interesting part is this: the metzorah (the afflicted person who was initially declared to be unclean by the priest) is not declared clean until every inch of his body is covered by the tsara'at (skin affliction). At this point, when he is afflicted from head to toe, the metzorah is declared clean. Seems paradoxical.

The spiritual lesson here is that as long as there are patches of good on which we can focus our attention, we see no reason to change. We just keep pointing out to ourselves and others how good we are. (Never mind that are best deeds are compared to menstrual rags). It is not until we make an honest assessment of the COMPLETE wretchedness of our condition that the healing process can begin and we can be declared clean.

Some people have sat in their diapers for so long, they are the only ones who can't smell anything.

Blogger Student in Blue February 19, 2015 1:02 PM  

@Bodichi
There is no one that anyone can ever hate as much as they hate their former (gamma) self, once they learn the truth. Sure, different people have drastic effects on your life, but the responsibility always rests on your shoulders.

On the contrary, the disgust and anger that reformed gammas have for their old self is tempered by the fact that they now know the truth and that that period is at an end. The anger is great, but time heals all wounds.

The bitter omega, however, still remains firmly in the grips of delusion and his rage increases without end, because he is tormented by inconvenient truths conflicting with what he thinks life is. He lives almost entirely in his hate, because that is the only thing that keeps his view of reality functional. The scab keeps getting picked at, in other words.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 1:05 PM  

It's like walking into someone's house who asks you if you can tell that they have cats . . . No, but I can tell you have a box of shit in your house somewhere.

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus February 19, 2015 1:06 PM  

Someone overly self-confident is bound to butt heads with friends and family over something that they may not know that much about, and lead to them being wrong. The alpha trait instead (as I understand) is just to not give a shit about being proven wrong, fix it and move on. The self-confidence here is battletested.

In contrast, someone who is gamma will avoid any conflicts that he might not win, and will rewrite history in his head if things don't go according to plan, hence the "can't recall one discussion". The "self-confidence" here is always paperthin.


Oh okay, I see the distinction being made.

Of course, I was right all along, and can't recall really differing from this to begin with. (j/k)

Blogger Vox February 19, 2015 1:08 PM  

Of course, now I am informed that this has absolutely nothing to do with a person's intelligence so I'm not even sure that it was an insult.

Two more gamma lies. Let me be more clear. You are a disgusting, contemptible intellectual joke of a gamma male. I do not consider you an intellectual peer nor do I consider you an equal. I despise you and people like you because you are dishonest snakes whose word is worthless, whose pretensions are transparent, and whose delusions are self-defeating.

The worst thing is, you don't have to be this way. All you have to do is stop lying to yourself. Then you will be able to stop lying to the rest of us. Listen to Bodichi if you won't listen to me.

Blogger Bodichi February 19, 2015 1:11 PM  

@Student in Blue

Are you saying that only Omega's have regret that they wallowed in their own filth? I have been on too many forums where man after man has said "if I only knew then what I know now." Are all of them Omega's, even if they have made good choices and changed their lives? I don't think they are, nor do I think a healthy amount of regret is wrong. Why shouldn't a man regret years of his life wasted, with negative mental equity?The regret can keep the former Gamma from repeating mistakes, by keeping the wounds fresh in their mind.

Anonymous Athor Pel February 19, 2015 1:16 PM  

I was going to put some other comment in here but I changed my mind.

It's people like Porky that reaffirm my lack of faith in the human species.

Thank you Porky. For reminding me to rely on God and disabusing me of any faith in humanity's wisdom or humility.

Your ability to consistently put up comments that add no substance to the thread but still manage to put a light on yourself all while inserting something like fingernails on a chalkboard into the consciousness of those that read your words is very impressive.

My theory, you didn't get beat up enough as a kid for being mouthy and/or you father never disciplined you enough so as to instill a seed of humility.

Anonymous cheddarman February 19, 2015 1:19 PM  

Porky,

You go the sour in sweet and sour pork down pat.
You gotta let the Ilk love you, man.
you kinda remind me of the Eagles song "Desperado"


Desperado, why don't you come to your senses?
You been out ridin' fences for so long now
Oh, you're a hard one
I know that you got your reasons
These things that are pleasin' you
Can hurt you somehow

Don't you draw the queen of diamonds, boy
She'll beat you if she's able
You know the queen of hearts is always your best bet

Now it seems to me, some fine things
Have been laid upon your table
But you only want the ones that you can't get

Desperado, oh, you ain't gettin' no younger
Your pain and your hunger, they're drivin' you home
And freedom, oh freedom well, that's just some people talkin'
Your prison is walking through this world all alone

Don't your feet get cold in the winter time?
The sky won't snow and the sun won't shine
It's hard to tell the night time from the day
You're losin' all your highs and lows
Ain't it funny how the feeling goes away?

Desperado, why don't you come to your senses?
Come down from your fences, open the gate
It may be rainin', but there's a rainbow above you
You better let somebody love you, before it's too late



Anonymous Viidad February 19, 2015 1:21 PM  

"You better let somebody love you, before it's too late "

I hear Scalzi's giving out pudgy, clammy, twinkie-scented cross-dressed man-hugs.

Anonymous cheddarman February 19, 2015 1:24 PM  

Viidad,

phileo man, phileo!

you know like John the disciple leaning on Jesus chest at the last supper kinda love.

Anonymous Viidad February 19, 2015 1:34 PM  

Oh. You were talking about real love.

I retract.

Blogger olaf snowlaf February 19, 2015 1:34 PM  

"If someone holds an opinion contrary to yours, and you don’t think you have a good defense immediately to hand, you start to look for unrelated ways to disqualify the other person as being less than knowledgeable about the subject, even going so far as to disqualify them as being a good person or sometimes even a person at all."

This one rings true in so many ways. In my work I come across educated idiots that claim knowledge with no basis in real world experience. Practically speaking they often try to refute empirical evidence and go out of their way to show how you of such lowly education could not have produced the results you did. The ironic part of it all is when they are continuously proven wrong they stick to the meme of "your a magician" because of their own lack of knowledge. The truth will show them for what they are.

Anonymous RedJack February 19, 2015 1:46 PM  

Viidad,

You brought up a good point. I have been tested multiple times, and I am a strong INTJ. I will state my argument, defend it, and lock horns with those who challenge me. I will, however, when proven wrong sit down and review my argument, assumptions, and facts and adjust them accordingly. Gamma's will not do that. They will never concede the point, and if they can't win on the facts they will make it personal.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 1:47 PM  

A colleague of mine was relating a story to me of a minister who had counseled a woman in his office about some issues she was having. After one of their last meetings, the woman inexplicably stopped attending, began talking down this particular minister to anyone who would listen, and could never bring herself to say a kind word to the minister whenever she saw him.

Many years later, the minister happened to run into this woman and was able to speak to her long enough in an attempt to understand what had caused her such animosity all those years ago.

She explained to the minister that the last time she was in his office he had called her a slut and a whore. The minister began to chuckle, and explained to her that as she was leaving his office that day, he had asked her to "Shut the door."

At first the woman seemed genuinely embarrassed and taken aback, but just momentarily. She eventually contended that that was not what the minister had said but was just his feeble attempt to cover his tracks.

She had believed her perception of things for so long, that when confronted with a reasonable explanation what had really happened all those years ago, she just couldn't bring herself to change her position and understanding. Kind of like a person who has lost a limb and experiences phantom pains in the missing limb from time to time.

Anonymous The Dude February 19, 2015 1:51 PM  

@Cheddarman

I really fucking hate The Eagles, man!

Blogger Josh February 19, 2015 1:59 PM  

Oh. You were talking about real love.

I retract.


What is love?
Baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more

Baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 2:01 PM  

Cite where I estimated your IQ or admit that you were wrong.

Well, now that you've informed me it can mean anything from not intelligent enough to highly intelligent to functionally unintelligent to rhetorically challenged - I must admit I might have not gotten your gist. Argument retracted.


Bullshit you were, Gamma boy. You knew perfectly well what you were doing. You're always looking to take a snarky little shot. If you were only speaking to Andrews's take, you wouldn't have mentioned one of my frequently used phrases. Sweet Roissy, but you are contemptible!

Wow. Solipsism much?

It's a totally ubiquitous phrase around here used by lots of ilk and frankly, the entire freaking blogosphere - but sure.... it's all about you, princess.

But you are an annoying Gamma. Your behavior on this post is an example of Gamma snark, Gamma pretense, Gamma inability to admit being wrong, and Gamma delusion.

Sorry, but you're wrong. When I gauge myself using your own standards at AG my traits fall mostly in delta, with a few scoops of sigma thrown in. I have no desire to be part of a warren either here or in rabbitopia, and I have no desire to tear down anything you have built. I really don't care if I'm liked or not, and as an individualist I find the notion of safety in numbers stupid. You'll never accept this as true, but I really do admire and appreciate you, I think what you are doing with CH is amazing, and I learn from you. You've even changed my mind about some things over the years.

So....I mean, because of your preconceptions and your Capt. Ahabian disdain for the cursed rabbits, you fail at even the most basic personality assessment of me. Why, then, should I take any of your criticisms to heart when you sound as irrational and emotion driven and just-plain-wrong as any rabbit I've ever talked to?

You STILL haven't admitted you were wrong about the clever political brilliance of ObamaCare despite every prediction you made about it being wrong.

You mean the time I predicted the ACA website would be functioning reasonable well by December 2013 and on Dec 1st it was officially announced that the website was now functioning reasonably well?

Hehe...you've got a lot of nerve calling me delusional.

Blogger Josh February 19, 2015 2:04 PM  

When I gauge myself using your own standards at AG my traits fall mostly in delta, with a few scoops of sigma thrown in.

There isn't a delta with a dash of sigma.

That's called gamma.

Anonymous jay c February 19, 2015 2:04 PM  

Damn, Porky. If that didn't hurt, you might want to see a doctor.

As a charter member of the Ex-Gamma chapter of the Dread Ilk, let me add my own two cents: the defining characteristic of the Gamma is fear. My experience is much like what Edward Isaac described above. Objectively, I knew that I was smarter than most others, but I always had a nagging suspicion that it was an illusion. I usually steered clear of anything I didn't think I was good at because I didn't want anyone else to see me for the fake I really was. I latched onto a girl who was absolutely the wrong choice for me because she was easy to be with and less qualified than me in every observable way. I irrationally magnified my capabilities in those areas in which I was only justified in being reasonably confident, leading me to do show off my non-existent expertise in all sorts of areas. When my ignorance was exposed, I'd retreat into false humility.

The turning point for me only came when I began to realize that

1) the only person I was fooling was me
2) I really am good at some things
3) I really do suck at others
4) It's ok to suck at most things. Most people do.
5) God knows exactly who I am, what I am capable of, and who I am to become. He has a work for me to do, and I can be confident that I have the resources required to do the work or that I will have them when the time is right.
6) If the resources God has given me make me good at something else, that's gravy. If not, no big deal.

You can't grow effectively into something better until you know what you are and aren't. Only when I came to terms with who I was did I begin to respect that person and to become something more.

(If you disagree, that's ok. You probably just don't get it. We'll have to agree to disagree. /sarcasm)

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 2:13 PM  

My theory, you didn't get beat up enough as a kid for being mouthy and/or you father never disciplined you enough so as to instill a seed of humility.

Golly, Athor, it's like you have a window into my very soul!

Please spank me.

Blogger Student in Blue February 19, 2015 2:15 PM  

@Bodichi
Are you saying that only Omega's have regret that they wallowed in their own filth?

Absolutely not.

I read the line "There is no one that anyone can ever hate as much as they hate their former (gamma) self, once they learn the truth." as meaning that no one else hates themselves as much as a reformed gamma.

If that was not your intent, then that would be my mistake and render any further reply to the rest of your post moot.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 2:18 PM  

"God knows exactly who I am, what I am capable of, and who I am to become. He has a work for me to do, and I can be confident that I have the resources required to do the work or that I will have them when the time is right . . . You can't grow effectively into something better until you know what you are and aren't. Only when I came to terms with who I was did I begin to respect that person and to become something more."

"Coming to terms with who I was ..." If this doesn't just cut to the heart if the matter, I don't know what else does ...

Porky, I hope you're paying attention ...

Blogger Vox February 19, 2015 2:19 PM  

Wow. Solipsism much? It's a totally ubiquitous phrase around here used by lots of ilk and frankly, the entire freaking blogosphere - but sure.... it's all about you, princess.

Give it up, Porky. Everyone sees right through you. Being disingenuous in these circumstances doesn't look clever, it looks stupid.

When I gauge myself using your own standards at AG my traits fall mostly in delta, with a few scoops of sigma thrown in.... Why, then, should I take any of your criticisms to heart when you sound as irrational and emotion driven and just-plain-wrong as any rabbit I've ever talked to?

Clearly someone's gauge is off. Perhaps you should try asking everyone else here if I sound " irrational and emotion driven and just-plain-wrong". Because while I may be wrong, I am neither irrational nor emotion-driven. Which strongly suggests that you're a gamma still trying to throw out words you think will hurt at someone who does not care at all.

You mean the time I predicted the ACA website would be functioning reasonable well by December 2013 and on Dec 1st it was officially announced that the website was now functioning reasonably well? Hehe...you've got a lot of nerve calling me delusional.

You are delusional. You're also dishonest. Again. Your prediction involved considerably more than that and it was completely wrong. Your whole "Porky is a political wise man, the only one perspicacious enough to perceive the brilliance of the Democrats act" was not predicated on "the ACA website functioning reasonably well". It was supposed to be a big trap that would destroy all the foolish critics of Obama.

You're not fooling me. You're not fooling anyone. Why are you even trying?

Blogger Vox February 19, 2015 2:24 PM  

Golly, Athor, it's like you have a window into my very soul! Please spank me.

"When discussing matters with someone and you think you are maybe, possibly, being shown to be wrong, you start to get snarky, crack lame jokes, and immediately try to change the subject."

Lawsy, how could anyone possibly think this man might be of the Gamma persuasion?

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 2:27 PM  

Golly, Athor, it's like you have a window into my very soul! Please spank me.

"When discussing matters with someone and you think you are maybe, possibly, being shown to be wrong, you start to get snarky, crack lame jokes, and immediately try to change the subject."

Cringe-worthy . . .

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 2:29 PM  

There isn't a delta with a dash of sigma.

That's called gamma.


I have almost no gamma traits. I don't despise women and I don't pedestalize them either. And I have zero rabbit traits. I can say with confidence that I'm not a gamma rabbit. I'm pretty normal, with a normal history and pretty normal relationships over the years with absolutely no desire to be part of a warren.

Sorry to disappoint, but maybe not everybody who occasionally criticizes the ilk is a gamma rabbit.



Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 2:32 PM  

Your prediction involved considerably more than that and it was completely wrong.

Delusion. Go revisit the thread.

Blogger Student in Blue February 19, 2015 2:34 PM  

I have almost no gamma traits. I don't despise women[...]
I'm rather sure that despising women is the omega's shtick, not the gamma.

I don't have much to add to this, just wanted to bring this up.

Anonymous Stilicho February 19, 2015 2:34 PM  

Au contraire, he's fooling himself and that's his target audience.

Anonymous Axe Head February 19, 2015 2:39 PM  

Vox trolling his own readers. Awesome! This made my morning.

It's like shooting fish in a barrel.

Blogger Desiderius February 19, 2015 2:40 PM  

"Great insight Cheddarman . . ."

Agreed. If there is a comment that merits its own post, it would be that one.

Anonymous Axe Head February 19, 2015 2:40 PM  

Vox trolling his own readers. Awesome! This made my morning.

But it needed to be done.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 2:41 PM  

Honest question, Porky ... I'm truly curious ...

Is there anything in the thread which you would honestly concede? Is there nothing that's been said which gives you pause and causes you take stock of yourself, even if it is just one thing? All of us are dust and clay at the end of the day ... are we not?

Anonymous Axe Head February 19, 2015 2:42 PM  

Vox trolling his own readers. Awesome! This made my morning.

But then, posted anywhere it would be trolling the readers. Such are the days we live in.

Blogger Desiderius February 19, 2015 2:43 PM  

"Then you failed in my case.

Has vox ever publicly estimated your IQ?"

He did mine, and was off by a couple SD's.

I wouldn't look to a sigma for that particular talent.

Anonymous kh123 February 19, 2015 2:46 PM  

...No, really, the Belomor was intended to be too shallow for most commercial vessels. It was Great Leader's ingenious plan to thwart capitalist nay-sayers into merely thinking that the whole project was never going to be completed due to shoddy prep, primitive tools, and a body count the Nazis would've wet their pants over. All of this only served to draw in those western fools even further, until they finally had egg on their fat, bourgeois faces once those locks received their first ship. Because that was the plan ALL ALONG.

~Yours truly;
Demosthenes

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 2:47 PM  

Cringe-worthy . . .

Internet psychoanalysis sessions are not for the faint of heart, Reb.

I was having a breakthrough moment.

Blogger Josh February 19, 2015 2:49 PM  

I have almost no gamma traits. I don't despise women and I don't pedestalize them either. And I have zero rabbit traits. I can say with confidence that I'm not a gamma rabbit. I'm pretty normal, with a normal history and pretty normal relationships over the years with absolutely no desire to be part of a warren.

Sorry to disappoint, but maybe not everybody who occasionally criticizes the ilk is a gamma rabbit.


You're confusing gamma with rabbit.

Blogger Josh February 19, 2015 2:51 PM  

Also porky:

"Gammas often like to think they are sigmas, failing to understand that sigmas are not social rejects, they are at the top of the social hierarchy despite their refusal to play by its rules. "

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 2:52 PM  

"Internet psychoanalysis sessions are not for the faint of heart, Reb."

Yeah . . . I thought it was character analysis. I am clearly way out of my depth here. Thanks for the insight.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 2:57 PM  

Is there anything in the thread which you would honestly concede? Is there nothing that's been said which gives you pause and causes you take stock of yourself, even if it is just one thing? All of us are dust and clay at the end of the day ... are we not?

Been there, done that, Rabbi. I think when I got my heart broke by a girl at 19 was when the gamma left me. From then on I determined that I would run the show from now on, that girls were not worth pedastalizing. Coming to Christ a few years later confirmed this in me.

What has gotten lost in the poopstorm on this thread is that my initial comment was actually about taking stock of ourselves, and the realization that unless we ground our criticisms in truth we can appear to be equivalent to rabbits. As Brad said, it's a double edged sword. But it is truth which is the leverage that allows rhetoric to succeed.

Apparently, this is a message that some don't want to hear.

Anonymous Holmwood February 19, 2015 3:04 PM  

Perhaps you should try asking everyone else here if I sound " irrational and emotion driven and just-plain-wrong". Because while I may be wrong, I am neither irrational nor emotion-driven.

I'll play; why not. Vox often comes off as almost Vulcan when he asserts something. E.g., he has no difficulty with the assertion that he could be wrong, could be an inferior writer to X, etc.

For a skilled-polemicist he's generally remarkably even-handed and polite until given cause for offense, where he can become a fantastic trolling asshole.

(Moreover, he seems to work harder to educate himself on topics where he admittedly lacks knowledge than most people I've ever met).

Now, as in the past, he does come off as being influenced by an emotion, though I wouldn't call it driven. That emotion is irritation, and I can't really blame him if you have been an ongoing commenter here and today's comment-behavior is typical for you.

"It's about you princess" coupled with insistence that you're not snarking? Yeah, right. I can read the thought bubble all the way from here. "Vox is snarking too".

Nope. He's being hella rude and offensive. He's kicking you in the goolies with a size 13 boot named irritation, and hitting you over the head with a shovel named logic. I think that's a bit assholic of him, but he's being very direct and very much the antithesis of gamma. He is largely rationally on point with his criticism.

So, emotional? Yeah, detectable, compared to Vulcan Vox. Driven by same? Nope. Irrational? Nope. Just plain wrong? Probably about a lot of topics, though in virtually every case where I've disagreed with Vox, a closer examination reveals that at the very least he has something worth considering, and at most, I might be just plain wrong.

This is not a fight that is going your way. It's revealing a great deal about you that you probably do not wish to expose so publicly.

Blogger Corvinus February 19, 2015 3:04 PM  

Sorry, but you're wrong. When I gauge myself using your own standards at AG my traits fall mostly in delta, with a few scoops of sigma thrown in. I have no desire to be part of a warren either here or in rabbitopia, and I have no desire to tear down anything you have built. I really don't care if I'm liked or not, and as an individualist I find the notion of safety in numbers stupid. You'll never accept this as true, but I really do admire and appreciate you, I think what you are doing with CH is amazing, and I learn from you. You've even changed my mind about some things over the years.

Not all Gammas are rabbits. You may not be a rabbit, but you are most certainly a Gamma.

Blogger Nate February 19, 2015 3:07 PM  

' One can speak lapine without being a rabbit.'

indeed sir.

I may know what GDP is and how to calculate it... but I am not a keynesian.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 3:08 PM  

Yeah . . . I thought it was character analysis.

Hmm. Offhand theorizing on the internet about my supposed weak, undisciplinarian father is... character analysis.

I just changed my opinion about you Rabbi. Used to think well of you. Now I see you are just another herd animal that moos when the rest of the herd moos.

Anonymous a. dictionary February 19, 2015 3:14 PM  

Gamma is pronounced "faggot"

Blogger Josh February 19, 2015 3:14 PM  

I just changed my opinion about you Rabbi. Used to think well of you. Now I see you are just another herd animal that moos when the rest of the herd moos.

OH NOES

Blogger Bodichi February 19, 2015 3:18 PM  

@Student in Blue

I really think we are just splitting hairs here and agree far more than we disagree. I did mean the reformed gamma hates himself more than anything, but as you said that temporary spike in hate is softened with time and corrective actions.

I do not believe the Omega can hate as much (although at this point arguing just how much a sub group can hate is a silly exercise, and I am more than willing to go either way) because the hate never causes him to correct, as you said it is a balm.

Blogger Nate February 19, 2015 3:19 PM  

Tell us Porky... what did you search at Tumblr that eventually lead you here?

Blogger Student in Blue February 19, 2015 3:20 PM  

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 3:21 PM  

"Been there, done that, Rabbi."

I wasn't asking about where you have been, I was more interested in where you think you are?

Blogger Nate February 19, 2015 3:22 PM  

"Gamma is pronounced "faggot""

No mate that's Lambda

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 3:22 PM  

"Offhand theorizing on the internet about my supposed weak, undisciplinarian father is... character analysis."

Where did I ever do that?

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 3:26 PM  

@Josh,

I've been through the whole red pill stuff already. I didn't say I was a sigma. I simply have a few of the traits. Don't care much for social mores, mostly.

But think about it.... VD was clearly wrong about the ACA website. I was clearly right (to the very day, mind you.) Yet until I admit that I was wrong and the ACA website is still crashing regularly (which would be a lie, obviously) I must be labelled a gamma.

Can you understand why I think so little of the ilk's prowess in these matters and why it appears there may be more than a little projection going on?

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 3:27 PM  

"Now I see you are just another herd animal that moos when the rest of the herd moos.'

If that means expressing even a modicum of genuine concern about yourself in an attempt to better understand where you're coming from then . . . mooooooooo.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 3:28 PM  

Sorry, Rabbi. I thought you were running cover for Author Pel's putrid pop-psychoanalysis about my father. I was mistaken about you.

Blogger Vox February 19, 2015 3:29 PM  

Vox: "Your prediction involved considerably more than that and it was completely wrong."

Porky: "Delusion. Go revisit the thread."


--------
Saturday, November 02, 2013
Mailvox: Porky predicts Obamacare

I find Porky's political wise man act to be a little tedious, so I'm going to make sure I don't forget this prediction by posting it here. Porky wrote:

Are you incapable of seeing that the Obamacare rollout was a planned failure? Do you not understand the progressive tactic of lowered expectations?

The website will be functioning reasonably well by December (I suspect they've had the fix all along) at which time Obama will announce his glorious Christmas gift to humanity is "not perfect, but it's improving every day and children and pregnant women are safe now." The argument will have been successfully shifted from "should there even be socialized medicine" to "how can we make socialized medicine work."

Mission accomplished. Another brilliant progressive tactic made possible by the type of foolishness we see in the OP.


So, Porky predicts there will be no delayed implementations, the Obamacare site registrations will be working smoothly within 30 days, and Obama will make a public announcement to that effect. If he's correct, I will congratulate him and take his predictions more seriously in the future. If he's not, we'll be able to safely dismiss his particular brand of political conspiracy theory.
------

December 31, 2013

More than 2 million people have enrolled in a private health insurance plan under the Affordable Care Act through December, the Department of Health and Human Services said Tuesday. That's far short of the 3.3 million the Obama administration had hoped would sign up by the end of 2013, but it represents a big pickup from initial enrollment numbers stuck in the gutter because of a faulty federal website rollout. The approximate 2.1 million figure comes from both state and federal exchanges.


You were wrong on all counts but one, Porky. No planned failure. No lowered expectations. No big Obama speech. There were delayed implementations. They didn't have the fix all along. They ended up 39 percent short of the revised 2013 target and by the end of 2014 were still 500k short of their target for 9 months prior. It wasn't the brilliant progressive tactic you wrongly claimed it was. The argument hasn't shifted to making socialized medicine work.

You are a liar who tries to rewrite history. You went 1 for 6, 1 for 7 if we count your suspicions, and you tried to pass it off as going 1 for 1. And that is why you are contemptible.

Anonymous Noah B. February 19, 2015 3:30 PM  

It's not that I think I'm never wrong in internet debates, I just have a lousy memory for some things.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 3:30 PM  

Tell us Porky... what did you search at Tumblr that eventually lead you here?

Brazilian fartporn?

Blogger Student in Blue February 19, 2015 3:30 PM  

@Bodichi
I do not believe the Omega can hate as much (although at this point arguing just how much a sub group can hate is a silly exercise, and I am more than willing to go either way) because the hate never causes him to correct, as you said it is a balm.
Indeed, we're just splitting hairs at this point. But splitting hairs is a technical chore that relieves the tedium of the day, so I'm more than happy to partake of it.

Really though, my main reason for holding the position I do are cases like Elliot Rodger, the omega who had built up so much hate he snapped and slaughtered people. I simply cannot imagine any sort of self-loathing of a reformed gamma that would lead to that result, so I can only conclude that the hate of the omega is greater.

Anonymous Soga February 19, 2015 3:35 PM  

Porky: "LOOK AT ME, I'M TRYING HARD TO NOT CARE ABOUT WHAT YOU GUYS THINK OF ME!"

Meanwhile, the Sigma shrugs, logs off, turns to his gorgeous girl and smacks her on the ass.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 3:37 PM  

@Porky

A person's character is far much easier to assess and often concerns me more than the Freudian or Jungian state of someone's psyche. The nature of everyone's character is revealed to a certain degree here in the comments section. I mean, even a fool is thought to be wise if he can manage to keep his mouth shut. It's the moment he opens his mouth and removes all doubt that he gets himself into trouble.

Blogger Vox February 19, 2015 3:38 PM  

But think about it.... VD was clearly wrong about the ACA website. I was clearly right (to the very day, mind you.) Yet until I admit that I was wrong and the ACA website is still crashing regularly (which would be a lie, obviously) I must be labelled a gamma.

You are a gamma. Clearly. You STILL are trying to pretend you weren't wrong when you were wrong about nearly everything. The ACA site was not the main point, the main point was its dysfunctionality being a political trap proving the brilliance of Democrats and the foolishness of their critics on the right, a theme you had regularly harped upon to such an extent that I made a point of posting that particular iteration. Which I did because I knew you were a deceptive little snake who would try to spin it in the future.

And it paid off, because you did exactly what I knew you would do.

Blogger Bodichi February 19, 2015 3:38 PM  

@Student in Blue

Fine lets split some hairs! The hate of the gamma at his former self can lead him to do things no one else thought he could do. Construction is unarguably more difficult that destruction. As such using that hate to fuel construction means the fuel is more powerful in the one doing the building not the one doing the destroying. Elliot Rodger was a pampered dandy who literally had every material comfort and advantage. To a poor, white trash, gamma, with a pathetic blue pill, feminine primacy father, his whining and his rampage both come off as pathetic.

Now clearly I am engaging in some me, me, me here, but

Blogger Vox February 19, 2015 3:42 PM  

Note this comment from that very thread:

With Porky its always the same. The Left is run by super evil super geniuses and everything they do works and nothing ever goes wrong it was always part of their super evil plan. He's a moron.

Anonymous Noah B. February 19, 2015 3:43 PM  

"Meanwhile, the Sigma shrugs, logs off, turns to his gorgeous girl and smacks her on the ass."

So it was you who hacked my webcam.

Blogger Nate February 19, 2015 3:43 PM  

' Meanwhile, the Sigma shrugs, logs off, turns to his gorgeous girl and smacks her on the ass."

more like.. Sigma doesn't notice because he's getting a BJ


Blogger Nate February 19, 2015 3:47 PM  

"With Porky its always the same. The Left is run by super evil super geniuses and everything they do works and nothing ever goes wrong it was always part of their super evil plan. He's a moron."

wait was that me? it sounds like me but the lack of ellipses is startling.

Anonymous ApolloK February 19, 2015 3:49 PM  

Are these posts deliberately planned with inbuilt demonstrations? I just want to say, sincerely, thank you to all the posters. Porky for being Exhibit A and all the ex-gammas for eloquently describing the process. It puts my own ongoing "recovery" in perspective and is very enlightening. I really think it takes God, man can't do it on his own.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 3:50 PM  

Let's put the Obamacare nonsense to bed, shall we?

My prediction entailed three things:

The website will be functioning reasonably well by December

It was. And still is.

"The Obama administration said on Sunday that it had met its goal for improving HealthCare.gov so that the website now “will work smoothly for the vast majority of users.”"

“The site is now stable and operating at its intended capacity, with greatly improved performance,” he said."



Obama will announce his glorious Christmas gift to humanity is "not perfect, but it's improving every day and children and pregnant women are safe now."

He did.

"All told, millions of Americans, despite the problems with the website, are now poised to be covered by quality affordable health insurance come New Year’s Day.

Now, this holiday season there are mothers and fathers and entrepreneurs and workers who have something new to celebrate: the security of knowing that when the unexpected or misfortune strikes, hardship no longer has to. And you add that all up and what it means is: We head into next year with an economy that’s stronger than it was when we started the year."

Barack Obama, Dec 20th, 2013


Ok, it wasn't verbatim, but you didn't think I expected Obama to actually mention Christmas in a speech now did you?

The argument will have been successfully shifted from "should there even be socialized medicine" to "how can we make socialized medicine work."

It has. I haven't heard of any serious talk about repealing Obamacare lately, have you?

The rest of the stuff VD mentions were not predictions at all, (as in "I suspect they had the fix along" and "progressive tactic of lowered expectations").

That's 3 for 3. But for some reason I am a gamma for not admitting I was wrong about something I was right about.

I'll leave it up to the reader to decide who is deluded here.

Blogger Desiderius February 19, 2015 3:51 PM  

"Apparently, this is a message that some don't want to hear."

This is the gamma part. If he didn't want to hear that message, he probably wouldn't have created a post about it upon which this thread is based.

The occasion of meeting (and batting down) a challenge from another man is not the time for self-examination. It is a natural thing for men to challenge one another to see where they fall in the hierarchy; it is the failing of the gamma that he is unable, or unwilling, to then accept the results. Hence, incessant ankle-biting. Conflict avoidance is more omega.

Blogger Nate February 19, 2015 3:52 PM  

Actually one of the most gamma things about Porky is the way he throws snark and pretends to be rejecting the group... when in reality... the group has rejected him.

Much like like that Laguna Beach Fogey idiot... he insults the group and rants about how different and special he is and how he'd never be associated with it...

But he keeps showing up.

Blogger Student in Blue February 19, 2015 3:55 PM  

@Bodichi
Now clearly I am engaging in some me, me, me here, but

Did you accidentally a word?

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 3:55 PM  

"But he keeps showing up."

Fueled by the insatiable hope of being accepted by said group. Until he is accepted, he considers himself superior to the said group.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 3:56 PM  

And it paid off, because you did exactly what I knew you would do.

Actually the trap was laid at the end of the original thread, VD. I'm a little surprised that you stepped in it, actually, as I had laid down the documentation pretty convincingly. Maybe emotion got the best of you today.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 4:01 PM  

Fueled by the insatiable hope of being accepted by said group. Until he is accepted, he considers himself superior to the said group.

I'm here because I like it here, Rabbi.

Blogger Bodichi February 19, 2015 4:02 PM  

@SIB

Operator error. ....

"but this appears to be the case with many other reformed gammas who have used their regret as "tackling fuel" to steal a phrase from the water boy."

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 4:03 PM  

"I'm here because I like it here, Rabbi."

What makes you think I was talking about you? Cripes.

Anonymous VD February 19, 2015 4:09 PM  

That's 3 for 3. But for some reason I am a gamma for not admitting I was wrong about something I was right about. I'll leave it up to the reader to decide who is deluded here.

No, that's still one for six. You're still spinning madly away. And you're a Gamma because you are a liar, a self-deceiver, and a snarky little ret-conner. But yes, let's do precisely that and leave it up to the readers to decide.

Blogger Nate February 19, 2015 4:09 PM  

"Actually the trap was laid at the end of the original thread, VD. I'm a little surprised that you stepped in it, actually, as I had laid down the documentation pretty convincingly. Maybe emotion got the best of you today."


/facepalm

Blogger Josh February 19, 2015 4:10 PM  

What makes you think I was talking about you? Cripes.

Because gamma. It's always about them.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 4:10 PM  

@Porky

I think you're hear because you like yourself, and the greatest crime that can be perpetrated against you is 'not being liked' by some of of the folks here - especially the ones you respect the most.

BTW when I am addressing you I will try to remember to begin my comment with @Porky ...

Blogger Nate February 19, 2015 4:11 PM  

"It has. I haven't heard of any serious talk about repealing Obamacare lately, have you?"

Yes we have you fucking retard. That's what the midterms were about. And the republicans kicked ass by running on exactly that.

You delusional little cunt.

Blogger Corvinus February 19, 2015 4:11 PM  

It has. I haven't heard of any serious talk about repealing Obamacare lately, have you?

It couldn't possibly be because (at least until the election last year) Harry Reid would block it, or that Obama would veto it. Oh no, of course not.

Even progtards are now howling about how it's making life more difficult for them in re taxes etc., and even Chuckie Schumer said it was a mistake to ram Obamacare through.

IOW, Obamacare is the Democrats' Iraq War, and even Schumer has admitted as such.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 4:12 PM  

@Porky

Incidentally, did you or did you not change your opinion about me twice over the course of just one thread?

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 4:18 PM  

Incidentally, did you or did you not change your opinion about me twice over the course of just one thread?

I did post that I was mistaken in my criticism, Rabbi.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 4:21 PM  

I think you're hear because you like yourself, and the greatest crime that can be perpetrated against you is 'not being liked' by some of of the folks here - especially the ones you respect the most.

If I want a Joel Osteen sermon I can google it. Thanks, though.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 4:23 PM  

That's what the midterms were about. And the republicans kicked ass by running on exactly that.

I said seriously...

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 4:23 PM  

"I did post that I was mistaken in my criticism, Rabbi."

The point is lost on you, then.

Blogger Josh February 19, 2015 4:26 PM  

I think you're hear because you like yourself, and the greatest crime that can be perpetrated against you is 'not being liked' by some of of the folks here - especially the ones you respect the most.

He's good enough, he's smart enough, and doggone it, people like him...

Anonymous Crude February 19, 2015 4:32 PM  

Porky doesn't believe half of what he's saying, nor does he give a shit if he's correct. He wants to press people's buttons, and nothing more.

Arguing effectively, even convincingly, that he's wrong doesn't work. In fact, it gives him an opportunity to just try and kick up shit in a transparent attempt to dodge it, and give the impression he thinks he's succeeded. Which will frustrate most people, which is precisely why he's doing it.

Just pointing out the obvious here.

Blogger Student in Blue February 19, 2015 4:34 PM  

@Bodichi
Now clearly I am engaging in some me, me, me here, but this appears to be the case with many other reformed gammas who have used their regret as "tackling fuel" to steal a phrase from the water boy.

Now, the medulla oblongata...

Tackling fuel is great and all, but is it homicidal rampage fuel? The argument I'm trying to make here is simply comparative, not denying that one of them exists.

Now in regards to construction vs destruction... it seems ridiculous to compare the two. For an example, a rich billionaire in a fit of pique over a small slight constructs an automotive factory. In contrast, a poor man in a fit of rage destroys his car, and with it, his only method of getting to work, getting a different job, and there's no way he'll afford another one anytime soon, and he knows this.

Since the rich man constructed more and construction is more difficult, does he hate more than the poor man?

And yes, Elliot Rodger was spoiled silly, and he had no right to complain from a material point of things, but isn't that just demonstrative to the power of the truth? That despite all the nice material things, if life doesn't make sense, it's frankly intolerable?

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 4:38 PM  

@Porky

Do I really have to spell it out for you? I am just one anonymous bovine who is part of the herd mooing here along with everyone else in the group, right? You didn't like what you perceived was the sound of my 'mooing', felt rejected by me and the herd, and publicly declared to me and the rest of the herd that your previously favorable opinion of me had changed for the worse. I called you on your BS - and your opinion changed back to favorable ... AS IF ANYBODY HERE REALLY CARES.

Bcaaaaaaauuuuuse ..... you think I am like you and therefore assumed that I would lose inordinate amounts of sleep worrying that some anonymous commenter at VP no longer held me in high esteem, while all the while secretly hoping that the rest of the herd might experience some sort of epiphany and follow your lead.

I, therefore, hereby, declare, that not only have you won this thread, but you have OWNED it and you can most certainly revel to your heart's content in the distinction of illustrating the OP more vividly than anyone here could have possibly imagined.

Well done. Bravo!

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 4:42 PM  

"Porky doesn't believe half of what he's saying, nor does he give a shit if he's correct. He wants to press people's buttons, and nothing more."

No, I don't think so. He is genuinely reacting to being challenged and, do I dare say it, DISLIKED.

Anonymous Noah B. February 19, 2015 4:45 PM  

"On the contrary, the disgust and anger that reformed gammas have for their old self is tempered by the fact that they now know the truth and that that period is at an end. The anger is great, but time heals all wounds."

Oh, I don't know. I can't help but feel some regret for having been a fool in the past and put women on pedestals that they didn't deserve, but I don't harbor any anger at my younger self. What's the point? We make mistakes all the time, and it's learning from them that matters.

Blogger Student in Blue February 19, 2015 4:46 PM  

I'll leave it up to the reader to decide who is deluded here.

As a reader, here's my two cents.

If you squint at it, and stretch the letters to the legal extent of the definition, then Porky was correct. If you're actually following the spirit of the argument and not just playing lawyer games with the words, that it was planned all along and a brilliant move and Republicans will fall for the trap and get burned... from what I've seen that hasn't happened and Porky is wrong.

For one, I believe in holding to the spirit of an argument, rather than relying on "gotchas" from word selection.

Anonymous Crude February 19, 2015 4:46 PM  

No, I don't think so. He is genuinely reacting to being challenged and, do I dare say it, DISLIKED.

Could well be. I think otherwise, but I'm far from infallible. He just gives off the obvious whiff of button-presser, with little else to him. Getting him to react may well be him getting the impression he's about to lose his playground.

Blogger Student in Blue February 19, 2015 4:47 PM  

Should be:
*I, for one, believe in holding [...]

Anonymous Noah B. February 19, 2015 4:50 PM  

The essence of what Porky was predicting wasn't just that Obama was going to tell yet another lie. Where would be the insight in that? No, he was claiming that Obamacare was actually going to succeed and that Obama would be taking credit for a genuine victory rather than an imagined one.

Blogger IM2L844 February 19, 2015 4:51 PM  

I'm here because I like it here, Rabbi.

¿Por qué

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 4:51 PM  

No, that's still one for six. You're still spinning madly away.

Dude, when I said in parentheses:

"(I suspect they had the fix all along)"

it wasn't a prediction. It was an opinion.

Now a year and a half later VD shows up and tries to pass it off as a failed prediction.

That's the definition of spinning madly.

Blogger Nate February 19, 2015 4:52 PM  

"I said seriously..."

Keep hissing little gamma.

Blogger Corvinus February 19, 2015 4:55 PM  

As a reader, here's my two cents.

If you squint at it, and stretch the letters to the legal extent of the definition, then Porky was correct. If you're actually following the spirit of the argument and not just playing lawyer games with the words, that it was planned all along and a brilliant move and Republicans will fall for the trap and get burned... from what I've seen that hasn't happened and Porky is wrong.

For one, I believe in holding to the spirit of an argument, rather than relying on "gotchas" from word selection.


@Student in Blue
Bingo. This is exactly why bureaucrats tend to be Gammas (or women).

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 4:57 PM  

He just gives off the obvious whiff of button-presser, with little else to him.

Hey, whaddya know...it's Crude engaging in more spurious internet speculation.

Getting him to react may well be him getting the impression he's about to lose his playground.

It's as simple as VD saying "Porky, please leave."



Blogger Markku February 19, 2015 5:03 PM  

It's as simple as VD saying "Porky, please leave."

Wait a minute.

Wait. Just. A. Minute.

I've heard that before.

Anonymous Noah B. February 19, 2015 5:03 PM  

It's as simple as VD saying "Porky, please leave."

So this is like a gay internet version of Ella Enchanted.

Blogger luagha February 19, 2015 5:03 PM  


If the ACA website is working reasonably well, why did my brother have to spend many hours on the phone over several weeks to get his information entered and working properly this past season?

Blogger Corvinus February 19, 2015 5:12 PM  

If the ACA website is working reasonably well, why did my brother have to spend many hours on the phone over several weeks to get his information entered and working properly this past season?

It isn't. It's just that Porky stated his BS in such a way that he can spin it as correct. To bureaucrats, the frustration and time it took to enroll simply doesn't matter, just the number of enrollments.

But if the government is forcing you to do something, of course the number of enrollments won't matter. It's like saying that the Census is a success because it managed to count 60% of the population.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 5:13 PM  

If the ACA website is working reasonably well, why did my brother...

Nobody cares about your personal anecdotes you solipsistic gamma.

Blogger Josh February 19, 2015 5:19 PM  

Nobody cares about your personal anecdotes you solipsistic gamma.

I did laugh.

Blogger Markku February 19, 2015 5:20 PM  

Josh... Do you feel a disturbance? As if something ominous is taking place?

Blogger Krul February 19, 2015 5:21 PM  

Markku - Wait a minute.

Wait. Just. A. Minute.

I've heard that before.


What is it, boy? What do you smell?

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 5:28 PM  

Stay! Stay, boy!

Now hold on....VD specifically promised to warn me before he unleashed the Markku on me.

Blogger Markku February 19, 2015 5:31 PM  

It calls itself Porky.

But why does it smell fishy?

Blogger Crude February 19, 2015 5:47 PM  

Where would be the insight in that? No, he was claiming that Obamacare was actually going to succeed and that Obama would be taking credit for a genuine victory rather than an imagined one.

Yep. And even now, it's a disaster. Not just a disaster, but one that has to be further crippled to prevent revolt even in 'very blue' areas.

But again, it means little. Prove he was hilariously wrong, and his response isn't "How can I salvage the image I was right?" but "How can I work people up regardless?" Go ahead, eviscerate him. Show he's said stupid things, show he was wrong over and over. That means little. Now, can he piss people off in the process, cause some reaction? Well that's what keeps a Porky squealin'. He'll let you crucify him over and over, so long as he thinks he can dictate the mood of the crowd.

Take away his crowd and it's poutin' time.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 5:50 PM  

"It calls itself Porky. But why does it smell fishy?"

Crickets, crickets, crickets . . .


Blogger luagha February 19, 2015 5:51 PM  

Denying empirical evidence. Classic gamma.

How ya gonna convince someone out of something they seen with their own eyes?

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 5:57 PM  

"How ya gonna convince someone out of something they seen with their own eyes?"

Yes, personal experience trumps any argument and the truth be damned!

Anonymous zen0 February 19, 2015 5:59 PM  

@ Josh

> I did laugh.

Enabler.

Blogger luagha February 19, 2015 6:23 PM  

Not what I said, Rabbi B.

Whenever you are discoursing with someone who has personal empirical evidence, it's an uphill challenge to convince them out of it.

You can have as many statistics as you want on how seat belts save lives and alter outcomes, but if you talk to the one guy who wasn't wearing his seat belt when he got T-boned on the driver's side and just slid into the passenger's seat unharmed, you'll never convince him.

Of course, Porky didn't even try that route.

Blogger Rabbi B February 19, 2015 6:34 PM  

"You can have as many statistics as you want on how seat belts save lives and alter outcomes, but if you talk to the one guy who wasn't wearing his seat belt when he got T-boned on the driver's side and just slid into the passenger's seat unharmed, you'll never convince him."

But isn't this one guy's experience (sliding into the passenger's seat unharmed) one of the main reasons he remains unconvinced of your argument, in spite of statistics which may demonstrate otherwise?

I simply equated 'seeing with your own eyes' with 'personal experience'.

Blogger Markku February 19, 2015 6:41 PM  

It has. I haven't heard of any serious talk about repealing Obamacare lately, have you?

Maybe you have your fingers in your ears, then?

From this month. Repeat: THIS MONTH.

House votes - again - to repeal Obamacare

Also from the article:

"This latest vote marked the 67th time the House has voted to entirely repeal, defund or change some provisions of President Barack Obama's signature health care law."

Blogger Markku February 19, 2015 6:48 PM  

And how much have they accomplished with their devilish scheme? How many Republicans have they deceived by lowering their expectations by deliberately sabotaging their own project, and then effortlessly exceeding said lowered expectations?

"three House GOP freshmen opposing it"

Blogger Vox February 19, 2015 6:51 PM  

It has. I haven't heard of any serious talk about repealing Obamacare lately, have you?

Maybe you have your fingers in your ears, then?

From this month. Repeat: THIS MONTH.

House votes - again - to repeal Obamacare


(laughs) G-G-Gamma delusion....

Blogger Ben Cohen February 19, 2015 6:53 PM  

I suffered from many of these gamma weaknesses until I started reading great books such as "Meditations" by Marcus Aurelius and Ecclesiastes by King Solomon and submitting to the superior men on this blog as well as following Victor Pride and Mike from Danger & Play. Just like any other skill it takes practice to become humble and stoic. Accepting you position in this world can be scary but it is the first step in self improvement, I believe. The gamma has so much rage because the gamma is a control freak, narcissistic, and believes the world should cater to his every whim, which is the opposite of humility. Just my 2 cents.

Blogger Nate February 19, 2015 6:58 PM  

"Maybe you have your fingers in your ears, then?

From this month. Repeat: THIS MONTH.

House votes - again - to repeal Obamacare"

Please people... merely voting to repeal something in the house of representatives doesn't show you're serious about it!

Blogger Markku February 19, 2015 7:09 PM  

Well, yeah, let those who have never voted to repeal something in the house of representatives after a couple too many beers, cast the first stone.

Anonymous Randomatos February 19, 2015 7:58 PM  

@Porky
I should know better than to feed the troll, but...
Do you retain the capacity to objectively read anything? Try the following statements:
1. If premise A is correct, then consequence B will naturally follow.
2. Consequence B did not follow/pan out as it was stated in statement 1.
3. This indicates that A was a flawed premise.
If A then B. No B, therefore no A.

Vox accurately called you out on several attributes that you don't like in yourself.
You appear to have silently admitted the snarking charge, but persist in refusing to acknowledge the simple fact that you have made, do make, and continue to make logical errors, erroneous claims, and shirk mental integrity.
You got called out on the B to your A not occurring in the manner you predicted. You immediately claim that your B wasn't really B (as written in bloody English), but actually a nuanced function of the shadows of B and a previously unstated C), plus your A wasn't really just A, it was actually A plus imagined C hints.
Rather than admitting that you were wrong, and revising your models, and growing in mental and social stature, you insist that you were really right all along, the written word and the rest of the world are somehow too stupid to see that you alone are the sole arbiter of what reality is.
Regardless of how you evaluate your own sexual status, your self-demonstrated social status is hardcore Gamma.

Blogger Markku February 19, 2015 8:01 PM  

Well, since Randomatos went there, then I'll have to add:

with a few scoops of sigma thrown in

And I have a few scoops of John Holmes in my pants.

Nope. It doesn't work like that.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 8:33 PM  

House votes - again - to repeal Obamacare

Well, shit. It's meaningless votes, to be sure, but it is indeed a narrative. Point Vox.

Oh well, in the words of Meatloaf: 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

@Randomatos: Vox accurately called you out on several attributes that you don't like in yourself. (ie:snarking)

I like snark. Furthermore, VD snarks even better than I do. From a recent Rabbit post:

"So brave. And he wants to see all of you obviously mentally-ill individuals locked up in asylums. That's a totally new and different position for the Left, isn't it?

Regardless of how you evaluate your own sexual status, your self-demonstrated social status is hardcore Gamma.

Well, thanks internet man. Of course, you didn't know me in my college days.


And I have a few scoops of John Holmes in my pants.

Nope. It doesn't work like that.


It actually does! Well... it used to.











Blogger Markku February 19, 2015 8:39 PM  

It actually does! Well... it used to.

I'm sorry to hear old age has caught up on you.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 8:52 PM  

I'm sorry to hear old age has caught up on you.

Plumbing works fine, thanks.

Are you guys gonna disinvite me or what? This place is damned addicting.

Blogger Markku February 19, 2015 8:54 PM  

You haven't broken any rules to my knowledge, so no, there is no reason to at this point.

Mind you, it is not a question of either being invited or being disinvited. The overwhelming majority of commenters are simply there.

Blogger Markku February 19, 2015 9:01 PM  

After all, a libertarian utopia is only that much more charming with a few village idiots roaming around.

Anonymous ApolloK February 19, 2015 9:10 PM  

It's like that one barn cat that keeps getting in your way, to be kicked aside, because it's getting some attention. You don't really want to hurt it but wouldn't mind if it got stuck in the feed mixer.

Anonymous Porky February 19, 2015 9:11 PM  

Best blog on the planet!

Anonymous Shut Up, Porky February 19, 2015 9:27 PM  

Best blog on the planet!

Disingenous Suckhole.

Anonymous Clay February 19, 2015 9:28 PM  

ALERT! Doctor Strangelove is on TCM...but, sadly it's almost over......

1 – 200 of 300 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts