Post: #26

Tut,

I saw your profile over there.

Are you a professional writer? What type of consulting do you do?

Post: #27

Upon first reading the title of the thread, I thought that it was going to be about the Lord of the Rings movie.

Post: #28

I`m really enjoying ROK.
Keep up the great work!

Post: #29

I am loving Return of Kings.

It is updated with new articles several times a week and covers a wide variety of subjects. It is like a "Red Pill" version of a mainstream online magazine.

Post: #30

Great website. Wide range of topics. Only problem is the speed of loading due to feminist lurkers.

Post: #31

The only problem now with ROK is that there are far fewer comments on the articles due to the new comment system that Roosh implemented.

I wonder if there are now just fewer people visiting the site or if there are just not as many people commenting anymore?

Either way, the number of comments on articles is way down.

Post: #32

Less comments because it requires you to enter an email address. Lots of people, especially haters, don't like that.

Post: #33

I have it bookmarked and I read everyday. I like the variety and quantity but the quality is hit or miss at times depending on the author. I don't agree with everything and some stuff seems repetitive but it isn't stopping me from reading. I also read the comments and leave a note or two.

Post: #34

(03-03-2013 08:15 PM)Roosh Wrote:  Less comments because it requires you to enter an email address. Lots of people, especially haters, don't like that.

Damn. I've noticed this too. It's a shame because..I've gotten a lot of great intel from the comment section over the years(Rok and the Rooshv.com).There's old posts that I check periodically just because of the comments. I'm probably not the only one who does this too.

Post: #35

A bit too much external locust of control in regards to frame. Some descent articles here and there that aren't political.

Nexxtlevelup.com is currently the most solid in terms of game, workout and frame. ROK is a bit too political for me.

Post: #36

I think ROK's gotten a lot better over the past couple months. The articles are stronger and the focus is tighter. There's a good variety of viewpoints, and if something isn't your bag you can just skip to the next article.

Some writers are stronger than others, of course, but that's going to be true on any site. I'm loving Roosh's posts on Thucydides.

Post: #37

I look at it everyday and read the comments of articles I am interested in. Some post have helped real life and others are food for thought.

I like it because there is a steady stream of articles but not so much that I can not keep up.

Post: #38

ROK is pretty awesome as a whole. There were a few articles I didn't care for (one of them being that bodybuilding vs building your body article).

"Functional strength" is a stupid concept. Plenty of guys out there building their "functional strength" and they talk shit about guys who spend hours in the gym bodybuilding. The functional strength crowd merely rationalize their lackluster physiques. You can't get big without being a lot stronger than the next guy, even if they have a lot of "pump" to them.

The only functional strength you should be concerned about it a physique that will help you get laid. We don't exactly work in the fields or the salt mines anymore.

Post: #39

I like it. my only complaint is a bit of nitpicking in google when you see the tagline - For masculine men. If you capitalize the two M's in there you could make it more dynamic, so the tag line would real - For Masculine Men. I know its petty but stuff like that stands out to me.

Post: #40

I generally like ROK, but I have a feeling reading around half the pieces that the author doesn't have too much real-life experience. I have some obvious examples in mind, but I think the more serious guys will know what I am thinking of.

I might be totally off, but I get that vibe. I never get that vibe from Heartiste. But I generally don't read too many blogs.

The other half I quite enjoy. I like references and credentials, and I don't see a whole lot of either.

Post: #41

Great site. I favor some podcast and video section: an archive with a selection videos you can download for on-the-go, including a selection Roosh's videos

Post: #42

I don't check it as much now as I did. I think the quality of the articles has gone down, and IMO it seems like articles are being accepted in order to meet the 15 posts per week, as opposed to being accepted because they are worth reading.

Before I felt the majority of articles were good and worh reading, now I feel only a handful are. I still enjoy the site, but not as much as before.

Post: #43

I have to say I'm not a fan or ROK. This will sound weird, but it is too much red pill, with more and more articles about obscure conflicts with feminism, some seriously conspiratorial stuff, and too much "XYZ list of ZYX stuff"-typed articles. At first it started as a reality-based variation of Men's Health or something, with news and solid game advice and red-pill data bundled in-between, but now it seems like it's gone somewhere strange and has too many articles per week. It isn't bad, it's just... fringe, rather than mainstream like it looked from the first impression.

My impression is that it will scare off any newcomers and turn into an echo chamber if it continues this way.

Post: #44

I agree that we've had a lot of bad guest posters, but that's because we're growing right now and we are being generous enough to give lots of people a try. Once we get a solid stable the quality will stabilize.

Growing pains.

Post: #45

(03-04-2013 03:39 PM)Samseau Wrote:  I agree that we've had a lot of bad guest posters, but that's because we're growing right now and we are being generous enough to give lots of people a try. Once we get a solid stable the quality will stabilize.

Growing pains.

What is the vetting process?

WIA

Post: #46

(03-04-2013 04:32 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 03:39 PM)Samseau Wrote:  I agree that we've had a lot of bad guest posters, but that's because we're growing right now and we are being generous enough to give lots of people a try. Once we get a solid stable the quality will stabilize.

Growing pains.

What is the vetting process?

WIA

What we're doing right now. First me and Roosh read the article, and if has even a little bit of potential we clean it up and post it to the site.

Then we see reader reactions, page view counts, comment counts, etc, and go from there.

This site is three months old. We're still feeling things out. I can tell you, however, that we're going to be more selective going forward. I think Roosh is happy with most of his writers and we're going to be using March to push for strictly quality (as opposed to quantity).

And I'm sure in March we'll get a few things wrong, but what can we do about it? This type of site has never been done before.

Post: #47

To make a game analogy:

Each article is an approach. How do you get good at game? Make tons of approaches. Will most of them suck? Absolutely. Will you improve with enough attempts? Unquestionably. Will the shitty approaches suck ass? You betcha.

Will the finished product look extremely good? Yep. And will everyone wonder, "Wow, how did his game get so good?"

By making a ton of shitty approaches that failed miserably, that's how.

To make a body building analogy:

Men go through "bulk" and "cut" phases. We've done a ton of bulking, but now we're kinda fat and cumbersome. Now it's time to tone up the site and reveal that chiseled interior.

Post: #48

Yeah I have found ROK hit-or-miss, but it doesn't bother me too much. I still check out articles even if they aren't posted by my favorite contributors. Props to David, by the way, for providing citations in Does Alcohol Affect Muscle Growth?

Post: #49

Feedback is always useful. If we keep hearing the same thing here or in the comments, it's probably something to look into.

Post: #50

Another critique is that I don't know who a lot of the writers are. I'm interested in Paleo, and have been reading a bit about it. Today I see there is an article up about Paleo, but I don't know who "Spaniard" is, so I don't know if I should take him seriously or not. I think having 1-2 writers in each area is a better way to go. That way we will get to know who the writers are and if they are to be taken seriously or not. 1-2 experts tackling each niche is much better than having so many random writers writing about different subjects.