Post: #51

(08-24-2015 07:03 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  author:

________________


This is Lucas Gittos, the pencil-necked knob-nibbler who wrote that article. Form your own conclusions. Looks like he needs some work on his upper body strength.



You now know all you need to know.

Post: #52

(08-24-2015 06:49 AM)Roosh Wrote:  As my profile rises, you'll see more people fake "attacking" me to get exposure to their own platforms.

Seeing that the op has four posts (two of them in this thread at least as I've seen it so far, 2 pages in ) I'd say that the op is either the person in the video, or the "significant other" of the person making the video.

In any case, I think that the rules need to be revamped to protect the forum from people trying to leech views from us.

(I did not click on the video by the way, I saw the low post count, 0 rep and join date and realized, troll)

Really, newbies to the forum should NOT be posting youtube vids or articles until they have a certain amount of rep + post count + time on the forum. The fact that there are people trying to make a quick buck off of you rubs me the wrong way.

That's really up for you to decide, but I really do think you and Tuth need to revamp/tighten the rules more. ( on the strict side)


Also, the other members here need to realize B.S. when they see it and do their best not to support people like this with clicks/views we need to remain vigilant, and realize that our clicks matter. Just like not giving attention to a chick who's acting up, be very careful about who/what you give your "attention" to on the net, especially on this forum.

Post: #53

(08-24-2015 09:26 AM)Roosh Wrote:  She video blogs with a cat, so I think we know her dating status (single forever).

Post: #54

delete

Post: #55

(08-24-2015 02:45 PM)presidentcarter Wrote:  

Had to quote this. That's pure nightmare fuel right there.

http://www.infinitelooper.com/?v=FlAjjS4...n#/591;603

It's like a trainwreck I can't stop watching.

Post: #56

Or meme fuel for lulz.

Post: #57

(08-24-2015 08:05 PM)CJ_W Wrote:  

(08-24-2015 06:49 AM)Roosh Wrote:  As my profile rises, you'll see more people fake "attacking" me to get exposure to their own platforms.

Seeing that the op has four posts (two of them in this thread at least as I've seen it so far, 2 pages in ) I'd say that the op is either the person in the video, or the "significant other" of the person making the video.

In any case, I think that the rules need to be revamped to protect the forum from people trying to leech views from us.

(I did not click on the video by the way, I saw the low post count, 0 rep and join date and realized, troll)

Really, newbies to the forum should NOT be posting youtube vids or articles until they have a certain amount of rep + post count + time on the forum. The fact that there are people trying to make a quick buck off of you rubs me the wrong way.

That's really up for you to decide, but I really do think you and Tuth need to revamp/tighten the rules more. ( on the strict side)


Also, the other members here need to realize B.S. when they see it and do their best not to support people like this with clicks/views we need to remain vigilant, and realize that our clicks matter. Just like not giving attention to a chick who's acting up, be very careful about who/what you give your "attention" to on the net, especially on this forum.

I have no doubt that Roosh has considered restricting thread creation privileges to a certain category of members (a minimum post requirement), but has a good reason for not doing so.

That being said, times are changing and this may be a good time to re-consider. If there's one thing that newbies struggle with, it is know what is thread worth and what is not. Given that we can expect an influx of new members in the coming months that do not fit into our traditional subset here at the RVF, a stricter thread posting restrictions will help encourage new members to take their time learning about our forum's unique culture before taking on the added responsibility of creating threads.

Of course, I'm confident that Roosh has considered the implication of recent events and has everything under control. I just hope that he and Tuth don't end up too overworked with moderation duties in September.

Post: #58

(08-24-2015 09:37 AM)Aquiles_Baesta_Parada Wrote:  

(08-24-2015 09:26 AM)Roosh Wrote:  Found another one. She's a "comedian" who stopped being a comedian because she felt "uncomfortable" with male comedian sexism (i.e., she wasn't funny). She video blogs with a cat, so I think we know her dating status (single forever).





Forward to 2:40. She is angry that people were against me getting assaulted in Montreal. Her attitude is ugly and foul. Too bad, her appearance gets a WB.

Pathetic, not funny or clever at all and I was more interested in the fucking cat than her nonsense blah blah blah's
and oh yeah, another one that's afraid of being raaaaapeeeeeeeeed!!!
even thou nobody pays any attention to her...
NEXT!

Any guesses on her age?

I am not sure, maybe I am seeing this wrong, but she looks like she dresses as though still in college, but rest of her looks like 'post wall'; late 20s or even early 30s.

Post: #59

Typical attention whoring and this thread and all the other mentions of cries for attention by different people, is giving them exactly what they want. The reason they put those videos online is not because they want to share some idea or want to start a discussion but because they want attention. By replying or stabbing at other people they hope to achieve even more attention by invoking the subject or its audience to mention the source which will inevitably lead to more attention received.

In fact, I just lost by stating one of their major motives: I gave them attention by even spending my time on typing this post. They don't care what kind of attention it is - positive or negative - they just crave it and will use everything in their power to obtain it. The personal gained value of attention for those people is different, but due to them not caring about the type of attention they get - as long as they get it - I wouldn't be surprised if all of those attention whores showed a common defunct in the neural receptors responsible for indicating a rewardable action. Like they are somehow under the assumption that more attention gives them more power and thus a higher chance of survival.