Quote:
Originally Posted by kowalski
How does one draw a line between feeling/being awesome compared to being arrogant?
There is no line, these qualities overlap. They are not mutually exclusive.
|
Of course they are mutually exclusive. For example, I know my best mate is awesome for many different reasons e.g. he is successful and wealthy, he always goes out of his way to help others, giving his time for charity work, etc. BUT he is never arrogant. He doesn’t boast, never looks down on people, he never thinks he is better than others. So agree to disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kowalski
Who are we to judge just because a guy is:
1) outside the PU circle is a chode?
The term chode is not used exclusively to describe people outside of PU. It describes socially lame behaviour whoever it is from. As Tom said it's funny and used for self-ridicule as much as to describe others e.g. "I was being a total chode on Wednesday. I just sat in the corner half the night nursing my beer and convincing myself there were no fit girls in the bar". People who have a problem with such terms need to chill out. It's just for fun.
|
You contradict yourself here. I quote in your previous post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by kowalski
Mr Woo is the man.
All those Mr non-Woo guys are as chode as the day they first learned what PU is.
Peace,
kowalski
|
Hence, the question in the 1st place. Guess, the above post was just for fun too, in which case we should never take your posts seriously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kowalski
2) using canned openers are less socially awesome than the naturals?
Social awesomeness is a term coined by Jynx and I. Therefore, we define the characteristics of what does and doesn't class as social awesomeness. That's how things roll in linguistics.
|
Appreciate your definition of the characteristics of what does and what doesn’t class as social awesomeness. I think it is about time it is being defined as this terms has been toyed around in this forum for a while…!
Quote:
Originally Posted by kowalski
3) an NLP'er is less successful?
Do people think this? I think people believe excellent results can be got using NLP. Tom was bang on again with this one: Those who are not keen usually are so because they think it's a bit creepy.
|
You contradict yourself again. I remember you once you posted this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by kowalski
The whole NLP based seduction thing is morally questionable.
I've hung out with people who use NLP in pick-up and although they talk a good game, have never seen them open a set or get any success from winging.
Peace
|
Hence the post by Sync to defend his NLP background to which you never response.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kowalski
4) less socially awesome because he is involved in online sarging? Or using dating sites?
Again, Jynx and I coined the phrase so we define it's characteristics.
|
Right, so that gives you and whoever follow the terms “socially awesome (whatever that means as no one has come forward with a definition yet)” to judge others who are into canned materials, NLP, online sarging as oppose to your natural methods.
Much Success…