I don't know if we're talking about the same guy. Actually, it doesn't really matter, because most of them are selling essentially the same thing. I've always thought that the "secret techniques" are placebos and that the real benefit they gave was the impetus to get guys talking to girls.

It can't be that simple. I talk to women easily enough, but I can't see that I ever spark any romantic interest.

I also treat women with respect, so I can't see that that makes any difference either.

It's very possible that I'm doing something else subtly wrong, but since I refuse to play the kind of games that "players" practice, their advice is of no value to me.

I've read books that touch on "social price" factors, and I think I understand whom I should be interested in, and who should be interested in me, but that theoretical level of understanding is not apparently of any use in the world I inhabit.

It's all quite baffling.

GDP - call me sometime I'll talk to you for a bit and tell you how to "fix it". <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Nah seriously - I've helped a couple of guys out.

Big Guy - I'm sure we are talking about the same guy, but I've put his equations through my processes and come up with a theory behind the madness. Yes he gets the guys approaching and talking to the ladies, but more importantly he gets the guys talking to the ladies in a way that sparks interest. He advocates interesting small talk, not the usual 20 questions that most people use to get to know someone.

I just had a conversation with a guy friend of mine last night who told me that he has a new love interest, but he switched off from her phone conversation to talk to me because he can't let go because I'm so "special". I asked him "what is so special". He said the same thing that I've heard from two other guys recently, that he feels comfortable around me.

I don't play (many) games, I'm extremely considerate, I talk about a variety of things - usually finding something that the guy will have an interest in, I'm good at reading body language so a guy doesn't even have to say anything before I know if he is uncomfortable and I steer away from any bumps.

I get disappointed because it is hard to find a guy that is as intelligent as I am, has a good disposition, and respects women.

V.

I dunno... to me, genuine self-improvement, and self-confidence, along with BEING yourself is the only way. As the article mentioned, and as I've observed from others and from myelf, selling yourself (price misrepresentation?) by putting on an act, playing games, saying things you don't mean, or doing things you don't wanna do... is never good.

There's nothing wrong with "being nice". A difference between "nice guys" and "bad boys"... is that confidence... it's him standing in a room full of girls thinking he has his choice of any one that he wants. But WE ALL should have this attitude. WE ALL have our choice of any one we want, even though some of us feel like we have a lesser quality of choices to choose from, or the ones that would choose US are lesser quality.

sunny-

I assume your handle refers to a town in Cali?

I think that the information is just that...information. It can be used for good or for bad. I agree, however, that David's stuff leans toward conquering as many women as possible, and keeping them "in rotation" so to speak. But I believe the techniques can be used by nice guys, such as myself, to learn how to properly approach women that would have seemed heretofore "untouchable".

Most of the people that truly get to know me well, think I am one of the best, most caring people that they know...but getting past the defensive walls that people, including myself, erect, can be difficult. So I am going to implement this program in order to set myself apart from the masses during the initial stages of contact, not to burn through as many women in as short of a time as possible. In fact, I have been out of the dating scene more or less my entire adult life, so dating multiple people is a completely foreign concept to me.

Knowledge is power...but the power can be used to further the darkness or the light...it is our choice.

Deep, huh?

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />


TM

Being the typical "nice" guy, I can attest that this does work sometimes - but only temporarily. Yeah, the hot chicks are initially intrigued by the nice guy who is sweet and polite and is not trying to get into their pants. And they like the stability and trust that such nice guys instill. But I believe that in the end, a typical woman who likes the bad boys will not be happy with a nice guy (got that BigGuy? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />).. She'll get bored.

I agree with Check - there is no sense in trying to hype up your price, unelss all you want is to get laid <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />. But if you are looking for a longterm relationship, then boning up on some glib phrases, or some ways to figuratively smack the woman around to show her that you are in charge, are not a longterm solution, since they are not your traits. Better to look for someone who truly appreciates your true qualities, not the ones you pulled out of a book <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.

AGG

[color:"blue"]AGG,

Have to insert my opinion here. I think the hot chick is temporarily attracted to the nice guy that "seems" like a bad boy because of david's tricks. The real trick though is what happens later.

There has to be a balance kept - let's say between giver and taker, and david's ideas can keep those "wussies" he describes from giving it all until mr. wussie gets disgusted with all the giving for nothing and starts getting frustrated.

I guarantee you that most women eventually will tire of a guy that has no opinion, bends over backwards for them, and won't make a decision for fear of offending her.

On the other hand the women that are attracted to bad boys immediately start to try and change the bad boy into a good boy. I don't know many women who really enjoy being treated like crap for years and years and then dumped when their biological clock starts to chime in and the "M" word starts making it's way into the conversation.

So eventually the bad boy either settles down or the woman moves on to greener pastures?

My point here is that everyone (most everyone) hypes up their price in the initial stages of dating. That is why people recommend dating past the infatuation stage so that you can really learn the "real" person behind the facade. I don't think that this is a "bait and switch" tactic if you are an earnest man trying to improve your attractiveness in an effort to forge a real relationship.

This is just simply increasing your odds.

V.[/color]

Sunny - Now my curiosity is really piqued. The guy I'm thinking about teaches NLP. I think there are several guys who do that now, but I think he was the original. The whole concept of NLP is something I find incredibly fascinating. I'm not a strict adherent to the faith, but I do believe I have some natural abilities I've been able to enhance.

So smart guys are either grouchy or chauvinists? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Faith - "even though some of us feel like we have a lesser quality of choices to choose from" It's all about what you are willing to settle for. You believe you deserve less, you're going to get less. You believe you deserve more, you're going to get more. It's the result of subtle body language that emanates from your attitude.

TM - Multiple dating inherently increases your social price. Simple supply & demand.

AGG - But I believe that in the end, a typical woman who likes the bad boys will not be happy with a nice guy (got that BigGuy? ).. She'll get bored. Haha!! We talked about that last night. She's not bored yet! I asked her what makes me different and she couldn't quite put her finger on it. Her typical life cycle for "nice guys" is 3 months, so I've got a few more weeks.

I agree. That's the attitude I was referring to. You mentioned that 80% of the women out there were "out of your league"... so I wasn't sure what you meant by that. If you think they're out of your league, then they are.

I guarantee you that most women eventually will tire of a guy that has no opinion, bends over backwards for them, and won't make a decision for fear of offending her.


I guarantee you that most women eventually will tire of a guy that has no opinion, bends over backwards for them, and won't make a decision for fear of offending her.


I guarantee you that most women eventually will tire of a guy that has no opinion, bends over backwards for them, and won't make a decision for fear of offending her.

Something that should be burned in to every nice guy's brain.

This is the entire reason I went from multiple to singular. The single most important lesson I've learned is that making a decision that I know will hurt her feelings is not the end of the world. I don't intentionally try to hurt her feelings, and I always take her feelings into consideration, but ultimately I have learned to do that which I want to do, simply because it is what I want to do.

What I thought was the most interesting point in the article, insofar as applying it to one's own personal life, was that social price is a model for the fact that we make decisions on romantic partners based on imperfect information. Where solid information is consistently lacking, we have these other methods for making decisions. So to my mind it's worth remembering that fact and using it to check our own decisions for soundness -- "are my evaluations on this one based on real information, or are there social price type constructs affecting my decision? If the latter, how can I replace them with real information and make a better decision?"

Actually, I was trying to be funny. But I was also trying to point out how "leagues" are an indication of social price.

Personally, I don't put much stock in "leagues", per se. Mostly, I think it's a way for beautiful people with low self esteem to feel better about themselves. As for myself, I know I have a lot to offer. Not that I have an overly inflated view of myself, but rather I am self-actualized.

[edit: That still sounds pretty snotty of me, doesn't it? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> ]

you must have read my mind

That's encouraging <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />


Ditto

Ha! So you're saying I don't have a lot to offer? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Or, I don't know I have a lot to offer? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Or, it's snotty to admit I have a lot to offer? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Or, it's snotty to say I am self-actualized? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

It's really not snotty. That's a great attitude. But when you first made the 80%/league comment, I really wasn't sure what you meant (which league, if you cared, etc), but I tend to *believe* what people say on here, and take things at face value, if they don't make it obvious that it's a joke. Maybe I'm too naive, or ignorant to some "jokes".... I dunno.

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I have to say "I am self-actualized" sounds downright funny to me. Various dictionaries say self-actualized means one's potential is fulfilled, and for the life of me I can't think of anything more boring than hanging out with someone who's never going to be more than they are now because they've already fulfilled all the potential they've got. The next thought that crosses my mind is their potential must have been pretty limited in the first place if they've managed to fulfill it all...

Ok, enough gigglefest. You might want to consider rephrasing how you express that thought. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

We were posting at the same time.

I was more miffed at the joke/non-joke thing than your self-confidence. Your first post gave the impression that you felt that 80% of women were out of your reach. Then all of a sudden you say you're joking and that you think you're great and you don't care about the 80% "league-type"...

You are right, these are the two extremes (wussies and jerks), and most women presumably want something in the middle.

But because there are different women, they might want to settle closer to one side or the other of the two extremes. I have dated women who adored my "niceness" and did not see my wanting to POJA with them as a sign of bending over backwards. I have also dated women who wanted a guy who would not consult them but just decide and act.

My nature is to try to POJA, which is why the latter category of women would be wrong for me. So no little trick or a new way of talking would fundamentally change that fact. Some women like to be equals, some want to be in charge, some want to be led. I prefer the "wanna be equals" women; but many women out there would consider that to be "wuss" behavior. Which is fine, I know to stay away from those women.

I know the type of women who like the bad boys, I dated some of them. It was a lot of fun <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />, but not longterm stuff. I am convinced that a nice guy cannot have a good longterm relationship with such a woman, nor should he try.

AGG

Bud, I cringed a while back when you first mentioned that your GF likes the bad boys but is intrigued by you... Yeah, 3 months sounds about right, and I suspect that in the end she will see you for the nice guy that you are, multiple dating under your belt or not. And that is OK, it is all part of learning, but if you did all this multiple dating and learning, why on earth did you decide to become exclusive with a "bad boy" woman?? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

AGG