The new Daygame Cafe is open for business! Grab yourself a coffee, take a seat and rest your weary Daygame legs! - The Daygame Cafe Management
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Alan: I see on another forum that you like this post on puahate.com: http://www.puahate.com/showpost.php?p=71810&postcount=10
What's messed up is that despite all of this arguing this is exactly the same conclusion that I came to ages ago. I realised it was far simpler to "be myself" instead of acting out other people's idea of who I should be.
The problem that I have with Mode One is that for me direct and honest behaviour has to be free of labels because otherwise it belongs to someone else and is therefore not a core component of who I am. So by labelling myself as "Mode One" I am not being direct and honest. It just becomes another mask that I put on.
Only by not identifying with particular techniques are you free to use all of them. It is basically the central meaning of "formless form"
Be formless then! No one, and especially not me, is "forcing you" to exhibit 'Mode One Behavior.' If using multiple methods and techniques works for you ... do it.
I don't force or obligate anyone to "only" exhibit Mode One Behavior. Just about all of my followers choose to exhibit only Mode One Behavior. Others tend to use a 'mix' of Mode One and Mode Two Behavior.
Do what works for you mate....
on a serious note but if someone says what you do suck or is stupid/dumb or it doesnt work (while I know first hand it does) I just go , Ok cool, and I continue what ever Im doing because i dont have the need to prove myself to them see anyone can say what ever they wantIt's a little different for Alan I reckon because it's about his, ehh, job. He did the research, wrote the book and now has some feeling of obligation to defend it. I completely understand.
It would've been different if he'd just come on the forums (without being invested in the whole community by writing M1) and said "You guys should use direct!" and we went "Go fuck yourself. Indirect ftw!"
Exactly Tony. Again, I'm going to always defend what I believe in, and defend my brand.
Some guys are under the mistaken impression that it is I who "started" this debate and discussion. No. Yad did. Yad took a jab at my methods, techniques, philosophies and principles FIRST.
Then you are contradicting yourself.
You've been arguing that a man can be "direct" non-verbally just as much as he can verbally. And I'm now asking you specifically to explain and describe HOW. I asked you two questions that would give you the opportunity to substantiate your argument(s).
You now won't do that. That is your choice.
But ... then why argue that point?
You've just lost credibility with me on this issue and debate mate.