The 2cd example Vox gives with the guy with the 'Sigma' on his team and how he managed him, Wow did that Resonate!!!
I used to work for a very large company, I got a long extremely well with the local Manager, I didn't treat him nor consider him as a 'Boss'. He was a Friend, someone to work together with to improve things..
But I am afraid I did make things a tad difficult for him at times. I used him, he used me. With all the scum (it floats) in head office, I was one of the very few that could do the difficult jobs where Thought/Skill was required. I loved it. But my patience with these fools was thin and they knew it. I'd actually caused meetings in their domain where I showed up totally prepared, meeting was basically decided before it started. They were instructed to do as I suggested. Which they then proceeded to not do....
If finally all came to an end when the local Manager was promoted, a total gamma (is there anything lower? If there is; he was/is it) was installed in his place. It took him some time but he finally decided to 'show me who was boss'. That was my last day. Also the reason he was demoted shortly after. The company then found out what I did. As they had to try to replace me. I heard all about the escapades, rather enjoyed it. Was the best thing that could have happened, now I work for Me.
As an aside, I also gave the Training Documents I'd made up to the competition that took over some of the tougher work... and I got quite a number of messages from the folks in the Company that knew how badly I was needed. They had to use other then Company email as it was blocked after the 1st time I got an email requesting assistance....
Sigma is a good description of a real type of person, but it's also powerful gamma-bait. An alpha male has to actually show some measure of real-world social success, not merely imagined success. A sigma is easy to rationalize as merely an introverted alpha, equal to the best without the required social proof.
What does one do if one has little or no social success, but remains are absolutely convinced one deserves to be at the top of the heap? Call yourself a sigma, then rationalize ad nauseum. "I don't fit in because I don't play social games, I must be a sigma." "I don't have a girlfriend because I am a sigma and I choose not to waste my time with some chick who will distract me from my higher life mission." If you feel compelled to tell other people that you are a Very Real Sigma, or to explain to others why your social failings are not really your own fault, that's a big tell that you actually care very much about your perceived rank in the social hierarchy. Insistently trying to proclaim your sigma-ness, especially to strangers, is self-defeating.
I'm guessing that writers tend to be gammas. Gammas write what they lack the courage to say in person. They prefer the world of their imagination to the real world.
Schools and corporations are definitely de-motivation factories. I've observed how the most intelligent people are generally at the bottom of these institutions while mediocrity is promoted. Even those with great personalities seem to be missing from the top.
Few that are conclusively legit, but perhaps one in ten are potentially credible. In most cases, even those who may be genuine Sigmas have observably strong Gamma strains in them relating to grandiosity and narcissism. It's pretty obvious if you simply count the self-references and observe the way they always steer the subject to themselves.
A genuine Sigma is much more concerned with NOT being confused with an Alpha and escaping all of the responsibilities involved therein than with status. Whereas most of the "as a Sigma" commenters are clearly just trying to status-signal and talk about themselves, which right there shows you something is off with them.
The other thing they often do is to focus on one particular attribute as opposed to the entire package.
have you had any success with hiring an alpha to run one of your companies? Is that even possible long term since the Alpha will likely always want his own hierarchy to be at the top of? Maybe it works in the short-term but not the long-term?
When gammas are triggered, the thin line between their inner delusions and reality breaks down. It’s where some of the wild incoherence comes from. They’re blurting out some non sequitur to everyone else that makes sense in their elaborate fantasy world.
The rest of the incoherence is just pathological dishonesty.
I remember Shooter being pushed out, and it made no sense, even to a 15 yr old me. He had done a great job - all those titles with 'Jim Shooter Ed. in Chief' - you just got used to it. Marvel was booming with great titles, the flagship comics were all great, the price was cheaper than DC - and then it went down fast.
I hadn't heard this take before, but it makes perfect sense, particularly seeing what happened at Valiant.
This is a great blog, and I've learned a tremendous amount from VD and everyone who posts here. Thanks to all of you.
A few weeks ago I commented about how I'd been using SSH to examine music bands. I was curious to see if their long term cohesion or short term implosion could be foreseen by how their individual members were profiled. I used the example of the alpha-heavy Eagles and how they got derailed by a toxic gamma. I didn't want to post any more until I found a good example of a band history involving sigma's. I also wanted to find one with a really interesting history. I finally did. I'm still working to refine my understandings, so I welcome corrections and clarifications.
Buffalo Springfield:
Stephen Stills-Alpha
Richie Furay- Bravo
Neil Young- Sigma
Bruce Palmer- Sigma
Dewey Martin- Delta
Many young singers headed to Greenwich Village in the mid-60's, hoping to be the next (sigma) Bob Dylan or Joan Baez. This included Stephen Stills and Richie Furay. They joined the Au-Go-Go singers, the in-house band at the Cafe Au-Go-Go (you can hear their record on YouTube). The two hit it off.
Meanwhile, Canadian Neil Young is a struggling singer/songwriter who is making zero headway thanks to his off-putting stage manner and weird voice. Abandoning his solo career, he joins an R&B group called the Mynah Birds, headed by Rick (Superfreak) James. The band is signed to Motown, but unfortunately James is soon arrested for being AWOL from the US Navy.
When the Byrds start a new thing called folk-rock, Stills sees that the musical future lies in LA. He convinces Furay to join him there, though they have no connections or prospects. Having met Neil Young while the Au-Go-Go's were on tour, Stills entices Young to come to LA. Young brings the Mynah Birds' brilliant but erratic bass player Bruce Palmer. Through an agency, they find drummer Dewey Martin, another ex-pat Canadian working as a gun-for-hire in LA. They name themselves after a steam roller parked in the street.
Buffalo Springfield are an immediate hit in the LA music scene and soon score a national hit with "For What It's Worth." But problems are already brewing. Palmer is busted for weed and is deported back to Canada. He sneaks back in, but even then he can't be relied upon to show up for recordings or gigs. Neil Young quits the band, rejoins, quits, rejoins. All the members acknowledge their musical chemistry together, but Young can't put aside the sigma urge for going. Bravo Furay is enraged when Young's indecisiveness kills their chance to be the first rock band to play on the Tonight Show. Young doesn't seem concerned, figuring that audience wouldn't "get it" anyway.
Palmer is cut loose and replaced by session stalwart Jim Messina (bravo). But the band is coming apart anyway and Stills soon puts it out of its misery. Stills, as is well known, goes on to some notoriety with David Crosby and Graham Nash. Young eventually gets a solo career going and joins CSN for brief periods, as much as his sigma patterns will allow.
Furay and Messina team up to form Poco. But there is a problem. They are both bravos, and despite his best intentions, Furay can't lead a band like Stills did. Messina soon departs and hooks up with Kenny Loggins. Poco bass player Randy Meisner quits to form the Eagles. Furay despairs as he sees his former bandmates achieving mega-success while Poco can't seem to make headway. Furay quits his own band and tries to duplicate the CSN formula with JD Souther and Chris Hillman. Then, under the influence of session player Al Perkins, Furay converts to Christianity. He abandons the chase for worldly fame, reunites with his estranged wife, and founds a church in Colorado. He spends the next 45 years as a minister and raises a family, and becomes a pioneer in contemporary Christian music.
The moral of the story: Sometimes your band breaking up is the best thing that could happen to you.
A halfway sharp person who read even a few posts here would quickly pick up on the basics of the SSH. The beauty of the theory is that it explains so much with a handful of rules and observations.
In spite of that, even when the pattern of gamma-posting is distilled down to a few simple tells and made clear enough for a child to get it the gamma can't resist the urge to show you his gamma-posting bonafides.
"Yes, I see quite clearly what you mean about making it about myself. Did I ever tell you about the time I..."
What identifies a gamma most to me is when the comment they make is incohesive. As if they are getting distracted midway through their sentences, or trying to make multiple points at once.
Would you say there is a direct correlation between high status, and selflessness? And vice versa? I know people who demand respect for just existing without actually helping people.
You don’t think a man’s virtues contributes to his status? A man with no virtues is weak and not worthy of imitation. Jesus Christ was the most righteous man to walk the earth, that is why so many people follow him. Just my 2 cents
Applying virtue to the SSH is tricky, because virtue is a higher order value. It's the metaphysical equivalent of "doing your job," which is all that your Alpha and Omega boss cares about, in the end.
Is what you're describing perhaps the rising trend of self-promotion and narcissism that is being baked into our culture? Some psychologists have suggested that we are seeing more (non-clinical) narcissism. It's the new social currency. Maybe we forgive it more of high-status people?
That could be what I’m seeing. I’m 22 and socialize with guys older and younger than me. Everyone wants to be the top dog but it comes with a lot of responsibilities. I generally take the role of a delta in social situations, and I know an Alpha when I see one, but a lot of guys my age are delusional in their rank.
Regrettably, I am old enough to remember when humility was a virtue, it now seems to be a liability. I suppose a whole book could be written about how that changed.
You bring up a very solid point about them wanting the status without considering the responsibilities. I prefer the Biblical path to the top, which is unsurprisingly, the reverse of that:
In my limited experience, when I have ended up as top dog in a group it has been through quietly taking on the things no one else wanted to do, and serving the needs of others without measuring reward. Sooner or later, you end up on top because nobody else showed up to serve. Of course I have had the experience of a flashier person claiming top dog status, and those charismatic people can do that and hold it for a while, but it usually fades.
But the rank and file people who remember your service and kindness to them will follow you anyway, despite a more conspicuous "leader".
I shoulder the responsibilities as best I can, and let the status worry about itself. Sounds like you are doing the same.
This sounds like you are describing yourself as a "stealth Alpha". You don't seem to understand what "top dog" brings to the table. Those "flashy" guys are Alphas and they are incredible at making things fall into place so that people like you that "shoulder the responsibilities" aka Deltas, can do your job without a care.
My husband befriended an Alpha before we were married and his whole life fell into place after meeting this guy. Too many details to recount here,, but a delta does not provide direction and inspiration necessary to get things up off the ground. Basically you wouldn't have a job without Alphas.
Yes you summed that up perfectly, I’ve personally noticed that the more I give to people the more they rely on me and that automatically brings more status. My original question was framed around one of Vox’s points about the Godfather, and that a good alpha takes care of his people, and that is why he is placed in his position. But it seems I have been looking at it wrong. Thank you for your insight
Something about VD blogs seems to attract the Gammas-in-X-clothing en masse.
Because amongst dozens if not hundreds of replies to this fun tweet & conversation about Choose Your Own Adventures**, I don't think I saw a single one that said ~ "I always figured out the perfect path through to a Good Ending first time with every new book" or similar... which is quite surprising considering this was Twitter:
The Internet attracts them. I see them all over the place. The only reason they don't all call themselves sigmas and alphas is because many in other places reject the categories entirely.
I think there are more gammas around us than we realize and that there is something here (and VP) that triggers them more.
A possible set of reasons:
1) VP and SG are blogs that don't conform to social expectations, nor do they pay the "required" tribute to mainstream thinking. Gammas often play the role of policeman, so there is attraction #1.
2) Both VP and SG explore new concepts and challenge commonly held notions. Gammas also seem to enjoy pontificating and being perceived as experts. Their flowery language doesn't fool anyone; it's clear they don't know as much as they pretend to. An opportunity to preen their vocabulary = attraction #2.
The above two factors are present in many other internet forums, I can attest to that. The correctors, the 'ackshually' crowd, and the preening pontificators are there, but one thing is a bit different here:
3) Our host, along with others here tend to call out this behavior - effectively. This is what takes the above precursor gamma action and more thoroughly exposes the behavior. The false premise that he builds his frame on is now exposed as being flimsy, and the gamma response to challenge is on full display.
The weird thing is that the gamma is not always wrong. Often I can see a fair amount of truth in their points. And I can see that they are often highly intelligent. On other forums, I have even seen where they are more correct than many other commenters.
My view only: The gamma fails in understanding how to engage. They appear to have poor impulses along with a lack of control over those impulses. They also have a terrible understanding of conversational strategy. They don't know what the weapons are, they don't understand the battlefield, and they don't try to get inside the mind of the opponent.
In my experience, people who are accustomed to deceiving others, be they women, sociopaths, satanists, or Gammas, hate and fear those who they know see through them. But whereas most deceivers are self-defensive enough to avoid such individuals, the Gamma's pride and Delusion Bubble convinces him that no one is on to him.
Also, my public presentation can be hard to distinguish from Gamma grandiosity. They simply don't believe that my attributes and accomplishments could possibly be real. So, they think they're just playing along with the game, which is why they react with such anger when they are identified, exposed, and banished.
From what we can learn from the descriptions given, Sigmas are the type of leaders that an organization in crisis needs...and, unless they completely take it over and reform it - for example, Putin in Russia and Octavian in Rome - they will be ejected from it with little gratitude once their job is done.
It's a good thing they don't seem to mind that too much. But, still, it's their cross to bear.
Oh Wow.
The 2cd example Vox gives with the guy with the 'Sigma' on his team and how he managed him, Wow did that Resonate!!!
I used to work for a very large company, I got a long extremely well with the local Manager, I didn't treat him nor consider him as a 'Boss'. He was a Friend, someone to work together with to improve things..
But I am afraid I did make things a tad difficult for him at times. I used him, he used me. With all the scum (it floats) in head office, I was one of the very few that could do the difficult jobs where Thought/Skill was required. I loved it. But my patience with these fools was thin and they knew it. I'd actually caused meetings in their domain where I showed up totally prepared, meeting was basically decided before it started. They were instructed to do as I suggested. Which they then proceeded to not do....
If finally all came to an end when the local Manager was promoted, a total gamma (is there anything lower? If there is; he was/is it) was installed in his place. It took him some time but he finally decided to 'show me who was boss'. That was my last day. Also the reason he was demoted shortly after. The company then found out what I did. As they had to try to replace me. I heard all about the escapades, rather enjoyed it. Was the best thing that could have happened, now I work for Me.
As an aside, I also gave the Training Documents I'd made up to the competition that took over some of the tougher work... and I got quite a number of messages from the folks in the Company that knew how badly I was needed. They had to use other then Company email as it was blocked after the 1st time I got an email requesting assistance....
Sigma is a good description of a real type of person, but it's also powerful gamma-bait. An alpha male has to actually show some measure of real-world social success, not merely imagined success. A sigma is easy to rationalize as merely an introverted alpha, equal to the best without the required social proof.
What does one do if one has little or no social success, but remains are absolutely convinced one deserves to be at the top of the heap? Call yourself a sigma, then rationalize ad nauseum. "I don't fit in because I don't play social games, I must be a sigma." "I don't have a girlfriend because I am a sigma and I choose not to waste my time with some chick who will distract me from my higher life mission." If you feel compelled to tell other people that you are a Very Real Sigma, or to explain to others why your social failings are not really your own fault, that's a big tell that you actually care very much about your perceived rank in the social hierarchy. Insistently trying to proclaim your sigma-ness, especially to strangers, is self-defeating.
I'm guessing that writers tend to be gammas. Gammas write what they lack the courage to say in person. They prefer the world of their imagination to the real world.
Schools and corporations are definitely de-motivation factories. I've observed how the most intelligent people are generally at the bottom of these institutions while mediocrity is promoted. Even those with great personalities seem to be missing from the top.
Great week! Happy Easter to Vox and participants. To conclude
"I am Sigma."
- Gamma
Have you ever gotten an “as a sigma..” or “I’m a sigma and….” Comment/Email that turned out to be legit ?
Few that are conclusively legit, but perhaps one in ten are potentially credible. In most cases, even those who may be genuine Sigmas have observably strong Gamma strains in them relating to grandiosity and narcissism. It's pretty obvious if you simply count the self-references and observe the way they always steer the subject to themselves.
A genuine Sigma is much more concerned with NOT being confused with an Alpha and escaping all of the responsibilities involved therein than with status. Whereas most of the "as a Sigma" commenters are clearly just trying to status-signal and talk about themselves, which right there shows you something is off with them.
The other thing they often do is to focus on one particular attribute as opposed to the entire package.
have you had any success with hiring an alpha to run one of your companies? Is that even possible long term since the Alpha will likely always want his own hierarchy to be at the top of? Maybe it works in the short-term but not the long-term?
but ... what about ME?!?!?
When gammas are triggered, the thin line between their inner delusions and reality breaks down. It’s where some of the wild incoherence comes from. They’re blurting out some non sequitur to everyone else that makes sense in their elaborate fantasy world.
The rest of the incoherence is just pathological dishonesty.
In response to your opening paragraph, I completely agree. This line from the Mumford & Sons song I Gave You All seems to capture it:
"If I had an enemy greater than my apathy, I could have won."
I remember Shooter being pushed out, and it made no sense, even to a 15 yr old me. He had done a great job - all those titles with 'Jim Shooter Ed. in Chief' - you just got used to it. Marvel was booming with great titles, the flagship comics were all great, the price was cheaper than DC - and then it went down fast.
I hadn't heard this take before, but it makes perfect sense, particularly seeing what happened at Valiant.
This is a great blog, and I've learned a tremendous amount from VD and everyone who posts here. Thanks to all of you.
A few weeks ago I commented about how I'd been using SSH to examine music bands. I was curious to see if their long term cohesion or short term implosion could be foreseen by how their individual members were profiled. I used the example of the alpha-heavy Eagles and how they got derailed by a toxic gamma. I didn't want to post any more until I found a good example of a band history involving sigma's. I also wanted to find one with a really interesting history. I finally did. I'm still working to refine my understandings, so I welcome corrections and clarifications.
Buffalo Springfield:
Stephen Stills-Alpha
Richie Furay- Bravo
Neil Young- Sigma
Bruce Palmer- Sigma
Dewey Martin- Delta
Many young singers headed to Greenwich Village in the mid-60's, hoping to be the next (sigma) Bob Dylan or Joan Baez. This included Stephen Stills and Richie Furay. They joined the Au-Go-Go singers, the in-house band at the Cafe Au-Go-Go (you can hear their record on YouTube). The two hit it off.
Meanwhile, Canadian Neil Young is a struggling singer/songwriter who is making zero headway thanks to his off-putting stage manner and weird voice. Abandoning his solo career, he joins an R&B group called the Mynah Birds, headed by Rick (Superfreak) James. The band is signed to Motown, but unfortunately James is soon arrested for being AWOL from the US Navy.
When the Byrds start a new thing called folk-rock, Stills sees that the musical future lies in LA. He convinces Furay to join him there, though they have no connections or prospects. Having met Neil Young while the Au-Go-Go's were on tour, Stills entices Young to come to LA. Young brings the Mynah Birds' brilliant but erratic bass player Bruce Palmer. Through an agency, they find drummer Dewey Martin, another ex-pat Canadian working as a gun-for-hire in LA. They name themselves after a steam roller parked in the street.
Buffalo Springfield are an immediate hit in the LA music scene and soon score a national hit with "For What It's Worth." But problems are already brewing. Palmer is busted for weed and is deported back to Canada. He sneaks back in, but even then he can't be relied upon to show up for recordings or gigs. Neil Young quits the band, rejoins, quits, rejoins. All the members acknowledge their musical chemistry together, but Young can't put aside the sigma urge for going. Bravo Furay is enraged when Young's indecisiveness kills their chance to be the first rock band to play on the Tonight Show. Young doesn't seem concerned, figuring that audience wouldn't "get it" anyway.
Palmer is cut loose and replaced by session stalwart Jim Messina (bravo). But the band is coming apart anyway and Stills soon puts it out of its misery. Stills, as is well known, goes on to some notoriety with David Crosby and Graham Nash. Young eventually gets a solo career going and joins CSN for brief periods, as much as his sigma patterns will allow.
Furay and Messina team up to form Poco. But there is a problem. They are both bravos, and despite his best intentions, Furay can't lead a band like Stills did. Messina soon departs and hooks up with Kenny Loggins. Poco bass player Randy Meisner quits to form the Eagles. Furay despairs as he sees his former bandmates achieving mega-success while Poco can't seem to make headway. Furay quits his own band and tries to duplicate the CSN formula with JD Souther and Chris Hillman. Then, under the influence of session player Al Perkins, Furay converts to Christianity. He abandons the chase for worldly fame, reunites with his estranged wife, and founds a church in Colorado. He spends the next 45 years as a minister and raises a family, and becomes a pioneer in contemporary Christian music.
The moral of the story: Sometimes your band breaking up is the best thing that could happen to you.
Nice! Can you do the Beatles and Fleetwood Mac next?
I've tried doing both of those. But I am not comfortably sure about Lennon or Lindsey Buckingham.
A halfway sharp person who read even a few posts here would quickly pick up on the basics of the SSH. The beauty of the theory is that it explains so much with a handful of rules and observations.
In spite of that, even when the pattern of gamma-posting is distilled down to a few simple tells and made clear enough for a child to get it the gamma can't resist the urge to show you his gamma-posting bonafides.
"Yes, I see quite clearly what you mean about making it about myself. Did I ever tell you about the time I..."
What identifies a gamma most to me is when the comment they make is incohesive. As if they are getting distracted midway through their sentences, or trying to make multiple points at once.
Incoherence, grandiosity, and the assumption of authority are the three most obvious tells.
Would you say there is a direct correlation between high status, and selflessness? And vice versa? I know people who demand respect for just existing without actually helping people.
Virtue doesn't make one high status. It only makes one better adjusted within whatever status one finds himself in.
You don’t think a man’s virtues contributes to his status? A man with no virtues is weak and not worthy of imitation. Jesus Christ was the most righteous man to walk the earth, that is why so many people follow him. Just my 2 cents
That's absurd. Most of the highest-status people are wicked. Never make the mistake of confusing the SSH with either morality or your personal values.
Ahh I understand now
It's possible for a man's virtue to contribute to his status, or to allow him to achieve his potential, but virtue cannot make stays or potential.
But this is not a bad thing. Cultivating virtue is good no matter your status, even if it doesn't change your state in life.
Applying virtue to the SSH is tricky, because virtue is a higher order value. It's the metaphysical equivalent of "doing your job," which is all that your Alpha and Omega boss cares about, in the end.
Exactly.
virtue is far more important to happiness than status. But status looks sexier, so some people want to sell virtue using status.
Seems like an imprudent move to me tbh
I agree with that, thanks for your insight
No.
I would say probably not. I know plenty of selfless low-status people.
That makes sense, especially sense Deltas are the average guy and they take pride in their compentecy.
Is what you're describing perhaps the rising trend of self-promotion and narcissism that is being baked into our culture? Some psychologists have suggested that we are seeing more (non-clinical) narcissism. It's the new social currency. Maybe we forgive it more of high-status people?
The new disease:
Cloutoholism
That could be what I’m seeing. I’m 22 and socialize with guys older and younger than me. Everyone wants to be the top dog but it comes with a lot of responsibilities. I generally take the role of a delta in social situations, and I know an Alpha when I see one, but a lot of guys my age are delusional in their rank.
Great point.
Regrettably, I am old enough to remember when humility was a virtue, it now seems to be a liability. I suppose a whole book could be written about how that changed.
You bring up a very solid point about them wanting the status without considering the responsibilities. I prefer the Biblical path to the top, which is unsurprisingly, the reverse of that:
In my limited experience, when I have ended up as top dog in a group it has been through quietly taking on the things no one else wanted to do, and serving the needs of others without measuring reward. Sooner or later, you end up on top because nobody else showed up to serve. Of course I have had the experience of a flashier person claiming top dog status, and those charismatic people can do that and hold it for a while, but it usually fades.
But the rank and file people who remember your service and kindness to them will follow you anyway, despite a more conspicuous "leader".
I shoulder the responsibilities as best I can, and let the status worry about itself. Sounds like you are doing the same.
This sounds like you are describing yourself as a "stealth Alpha". You don't seem to understand what "top dog" brings to the table. Those "flashy" guys are Alphas and they are incredible at making things fall into place so that people like you that "shoulder the responsibilities" aka Deltas, can do your job without a care.
My husband befriended an Alpha before we were married and his whole life fell into place after meeting this guy. Too many details to recount here,, but a delta does not provide direction and inspiration necessary to get things up off the ground. Basically you wouldn't have a job without Alphas.
Yes you summed that up perfectly, I’ve personally noticed that the more I give to people the more they rely on me and that automatically brings more status. My original question was framed around one of Vox’s points about the Godfather, and that a good alpha takes care of his people, and that is why he is placed in his position. But it seems I have been looking at it wrong. Thank you for your insight
Something about VD blogs seems to attract the Gammas-in-X-clothing en masse.
Because amongst dozens if not hundreds of replies to this fun tweet & conversation about Choose Your Own Adventures**, I don't think I saw a single one that said ~ "I always figured out the perfect path through to a Good Ending first time with every new book" or similar... which is quite surprising considering this was Twitter:
https://twitter.com/IAmCaseStephens/status/1774291040356409470
Maybe on Twitter they feel at home so no need for stolen valor, but in VDland they desire that deception-based "win"?
** neary 200 titles in the original series...
https://gamebooks.org/Series/30/Show
...also, Edward Packard is still alive, age 93, still writing: https://edwardpackard.com/
The Internet attracts them. I see them all over the place. The only reason they don't all call themselves sigmas and alphas is because many in other places reject the categories entirely.
It gets even funnier... because "Gamma" is so clearly unflattering, some of them invented the "Zeta" rank to describe themselves.
Mexican gangsters?
Not quite… do a YouTube search for “zeta male”, if you care to…
The second most reliable identifying mark of the gamma. Being fake, cringe and sgl.
I think there are more gammas around us than we realize and that there is something here (and VP) that triggers them more.
A possible set of reasons:
1) VP and SG are blogs that don't conform to social expectations, nor do they pay the "required" tribute to mainstream thinking. Gammas often play the role of policeman, so there is attraction #1.
2) Both VP and SG explore new concepts and challenge commonly held notions. Gammas also seem to enjoy pontificating and being perceived as experts. Their flowery language doesn't fool anyone; it's clear they don't know as much as they pretend to. An opportunity to preen their vocabulary = attraction #2.
The above two factors are present in many other internet forums, I can attest to that. The correctors, the 'ackshually' crowd, and the preening pontificators are there, but one thing is a bit different here:
3) Our host, along with others here tend to call out this behavior - effectively. This is what takes the above precursor gamma action and more thoroughly exposes the behavior. The false premise that he builds his frame on is now exposed as being flimsy, and the gamma response to challenge is on full display.
The weird thing is that the gamma is not always wrong. Often I can see a fair amount of truth in their points. And I can see that they are often highly intelligent. On other forums, I have even seen where they are more correct than many other commenters.
My view only: The gamma fails in understanding how to engage. They appear to have poor impulses along with a lack of control over those impulses. They also have a terrible understanding of conversational strategy. They don't know what the weapons are, they don't understand the battlefield, and they don't try to get inside the mind of the opponent.
Any space which challenges a gamma's self image will trigger them in a similar way.
You see the same patterns among the atheist comments in a apologetics space, or lolbertarian comments in a breadtube space.
In my experience, people who are accustomed to deceiving others, be they women, sociopaths, satanists, or Gammas, hate and fear those who they know see through them. But whereas most deceivers are self-defensive enough to avoid such individuals, the Gamma's pride and Delusion Bubble convinces him that no one is on to him.
Also, my public presentation can be hard to distinguish from Gamma grandiosity. They simply don't believe that my attributes and accomplishments could possibly be real. So, they think they're just playing along with the game, which is why they react with such anger when they are identified, exposed, and banished.
From what we can learn from the descriptions given, Sigmas are the type of leaders that an organization in crisis needs...and, unless they completely take it over and reform it - for example, Putin in Russia and Octavian in Rome - they will be ejected from it with little gratitude once their job is done.
It's a good thing they don't seem to mind that too much. But, still, it's their cross to bear.