I agree that for practical purposes and situational events the how/why is irrelevant, much like why a pedophile is a pedophile is irrelevant if you catch him hovering near your child. Nevertheless, removed from the immediate practical applications, the how and why do interest me and I have theorised some general concepts that at least have some experiential and anecdotal evidence to support them. I appreciate that this has probably the same general level of interest for Vox that economic theory has for me. As always, de gustibus...
I’m seeing a lot of references to software types. Fits with my experience, the electrical hardware and mechanical are more focused on getting it correct the first time. Tends to analyze and document their designs as it’s expensive in cost and reputation to recall defective mechanical or hardware defects. Defects also show up early in the factory testing process. The software community is ship it and document it later. Impossible to regression test software without a decent requirements document. If it doesn’t do what’s expected…. Well, that’s a feature not a bug. Our next release will address that issue. It’s complex you wouldn’t understand. Trust us we know what we are doing, we’re experts. They are constantly fixing new problems due to their failure to adequately define the software’s functionality or how it works with the hardware. Hardware engineers mixed with the rf the fewest, the digital ones higher but not software high. I ran into the most gammas in the software and IT fields, mechanical engineers had the fewest. Chemical engineers seemed to have a low gamma count. Physicists surprisingly seemed to have a high gamma count.
Physics being full of gammas is absolutely not a surprise - if an engineer builds a bridge then its pretty obvious if it falls down. If a physicist coujours up a new particle then 'we need a new particle accelerator 100x more powerful than the last one' to disprove it. Also the Copenhagen interpretation of QM is a playground for such people. We've had a 100 years plus of this nonsense. (ex-physicist here).
There are certainly more gammas in software than electrical or mechanical.
I'm not sure how the fast cycle times in software would incentivise gamma behavior?
If I had to guess gammas are attracted to the excessive abstraction in software, the breadth allowing so many subject matter experts, the high value add of an expert, and the complete lack of anything physical.
It also goes back to their origin. Before software it was only electrical and mechanical. No computer science degree. There were mainframe systems, but the majority of their operators of electrical engineering origin . The microprocessor changed the way. Then everyone had to be able to code, no compilers, directly in machine code. Later came compilers. As the field grew the universities created computer science programs. They started dropping real world classes. I ran into CS degreed persons who had zero physics or rf exposure. Trying to get them to understand that a clock running at 3 GHz creates an rf signal, due to being substantially a square wave with even higher harmonics on a strip line or micro strip conductor drew blanks. The old hardware/software interface issue. No clue. They don’t understand that the physical layer within all the protocol and functional layers are governed by the laws of physics.
Sounds about right that they would fester in places lacking direct and immediate consequences. Software types will never worry about concrete and rebar guys gearing up to kick their ass on the job site.
It makes sense to hear that correlated with gammas. My understanding was for many software companies their standard procedure was just that, to put out buggy or incomplete crap and deal with the problems on the back end or next update. This better explains where that practice comes from.
Academic research into learning frequently shows that failure is a necessary component of learning. People who cannot accept failure cannot really learn, and that includes acknowledging when you are proven wrong. One of the reasons I love weightlifting so much is that you cannot assign some intellectual construction on your failures to act like they were successes. If you attempt a lift and fail, you are not strong enough.
With intellectual debates there is a very simple way to save face when you are losing a debate. You say, "Hmm, these are good points and I have not thought about them deeply. I will need to give that some more thought." A gamma cannot do this because the gamma has framed the debate in his mind as a status competition that he will lose if he concedes any points. And since it is purely intellectual, failing to concede means that any debate he wants can be a tie. The gamma becomes stupid because he has no real way of discerning falsehood from truth because he has woven his intellectual positions into his identity and can't ever reject anything he once held a true.
When I heard the quote "It is a bad economist that divorces himself from his wife before he divorces himself from his position." that's when I understood a lot more. Why would you be wedded to a bad idea or concept or metaphor, if you lose nothing, and get more status from admitting fault? Correction is kindness. It's the evil ones who let you learn the wrong thing.
It's much easier to remember the names of the guys and the girls with whom you've had arguments and disagreements, and then they come back and say that they were wrong. That's when you remember that person. That's when they give you a reason to remember them.
Very well put. Thank you. I learned and grew more from my failures than I did from my easy successes. Better yet was learning from the failure of others.
An indecipherable wall of text that looks plausible with an authoritative attitude, but the Gamma would still be wrong.
He might have a correct technical nitpick, but he would be missing the bigger point and making an ass of himself.
EDIT: Status trumps IQ. Sigma calls him a nerd and the girls laugh at Gamma, triggering a melty. HIQ Gamma dreams of the perfect comeback and seethes online.
This brings to mind gamma tendencies whenever an atheist gamma (but I repeat myself) butts into a religious discussion they’re not involved in with their constant cries for “Evidence?”
Stop me if you’re heard this before: you decide to actually engage in good faith and provide evidence for your belief, only for the gamma to just say “lol that’s not evidence.” They don’t understand that THEM NOT BEING CONVINCED isn’t the same as your proffered evidence not meeting the definition of evidence.
Yes, my first time engaging with a gamma on this subject was the last. Now, I just ignore.
EDIT: Typo corrected and further edited for clarity.
That is such a perfect way to put it, I always characterized it as "arguing with a wall." The threshold for evidence is what they deem to be evidence. In essence, they are God and they choose what truth and reality are and are not. They can simply declare you are wrong by disregarding everything you say and substituting with nothing of substance.
"They don’t understand that THEM NOT BEING CONVINCED isn’t the same as evidence not meeting the definition of existence". - This!! You hit the proverbial nail right on the head with that one. Excellent. Brevity is a virtue and yours is greatly appreciated. Superb comment.
It's them admitting their request for evidence was never honest.
Once I said that there is less evidence for dark matter than there is for God, and an atheist gamma spent five hours trying to bully me into recanting. He had absolutely no counter argument. He didn't know anything about dark matter. But he knew I "had" to be wrong.
A similar thing happened when I said I see no particular reason to believe Christmas has pagan origins. I don't hang with the group anymore
It seems like almost the entire astrophysics community has forgotten that dark matter was a placeholder until they could figure out why the math didn’t predict reality. Dr Micheal McCulloch’s Quantized Inertia theory is a beautifully simple explanation.
Something that drives me crazy is that gammas can never seem to maintain frame.
In this instance, vox made a very straightforward argument. But the gammas response was all over the map. The moment vox didn't give into one attack he abandoned it and came from a completely different direction to the point of contradicting himself several times. The one thing he absolutely refuses to do was engage the point on its own merits.
If they maintained frame they would have to concede an error, which to a gamma may as well be the same as admitting that he isn't a king, just an ordinary person like anyone else. Unbearable.
He'll be really sad now that a well-known physicist has said the argument is valid and better than those presented by physicists and mathematicians in 1966.
Some years ago, I wrote something in a discussion forum--though I have completely forgotten what the subject was about. A gamma came back at me with a strawman rebuttal. I patiently rephrased what I wrote, thinking he'd see that he'd misunderstood and correct himself. Instead he aggressively doubled down. I didn't know anything about the SSH at the time, but I did have enough experience to notice these "no-win" relentless patterns with some guys. I figured any third party can read what I wrote and see what's going on. So instead of arguing back at him, I wrote: "You are completely right, and I am completely wrong. Take a victory lap."
He got so infuriated that he'd been robbed of his intellectual conquest that I was taken aback. He followed up with the signature wall-o-text and stalked me for weeks afterward.
I was listening to a lecture yesterday, and the speaker said "a man's mind is like a room full of boxes, and everything has its place. A woman's mind is like a huge pile of spaghetti, with everything idea touching everything other idea"
I think a gamma's mind is like a bowl of mack and cheese. There is no order to it, but no one thought can quite reach more than a couple other thoughts.
Concur, low to no impulse control , loses train of thought quickly, zero to low situational awareness. Only short term memory. Forgets what was said. If written changes interpretation of what is there. High self image far in excess of reality.
The gamma certifies himself and then references himself as some sort of expert on the subject. It’s one of the reasons why verbal debates with them are useless. See also: pedantic, obtuse, straw-man
A Bravo boss talking about why he limited the office Gamma’s involvement in projects: Eric is what I call a ‘joiner.’ He wants to join way too many groups. You’re lucky if the worst he does is leave a project unfinished. You’re lucky if he doesn’t mess up the project or sabotage members. If he could finish even ONE project I’d think about letting him join another.
Not to mention the utter lack of humility. The one I'm most familiar with considers himself an expert because he knows a guy (in literally any field that's currently the subject of discussion). Thus he is practically omniscient.
They are so deluded. Had a similar experience a few years ago with, get this, a gay-catholic-choirboy-PhD-CEO of a biotech company. I was certain he was pulling my leg until he sent me a thesis which he claimed completely debunked the mathematical proof. Instead it proved the point conclusively at which point he flounced and started trying to delete the convo. Thanks for proving that it's a religion to these nuts.
I have had someone claim that believe in evolution, the belief not the actual process, leads to life and refusal to believe in it leads to death.
I've had someone claim it is completely undeniable. I've had someone claim entropy doesn't apply to genetics because survival of the fittest cancels entropy out. I've had someone claim that any amount of change in any population is proof positive evolution must be true.
I used to think that they just needed a bit of help to see the problems. At this point though, it's pretty obvious we are dealing with people at a lower level of awareness
"They also engage relentlessly in what can be described as argumentum ad imaginariam, which is appealing to their own imaginations."
Lord, yes. It's exhausting. There's nothing like engaging in a conversation with someone who, having no knowledge of your area of expertise or personal circumstances, nevertheless knows better than you how to work or live your life. As soon as the conversation heads that way, all you want to do is dive for the exit since there's no talking reality with someone like that.
ummm... there IS a way to make them not only see, but even admit reality, without any verbal prompts from you. I mean it's kinda illegal outside of a martial arts dojo, but it really works, which is why I hate gammas with a passion, it's not that they *can't* see reality, it's that they refuse to. Unless you apply sufficient physical pain, then... lo and behold! Magic! They are suddenly able to see, and think, and do logic! It's truly astonishing. I despise them because they are fundamentally dishonest. The fact they lie to themselves first and foremost does not gather any sympathy with me.
I remember when fistfights and violence became frowned upon in the later years of school. I hated it. A bloodied nose or a swollen lip was the best way to learn that you might have done something wrong. Do you want another one or do you want to think and talk a little about why you got one? It was the most reliable way to get an annoying idiot to shut up. It's as idiotic and dangerous to remove a math teacher's cutting red pen, because of nothing but popularly democratic reasons of hurt feelings.
Reading your blog, Kurgan, and what Vox has written has been great and useful. I don't know if I'm a midwit or not, however, it's dangerous to have one's beliefs untested. And you don't get that everywhere.
Does anyone have experience with diverting a gamma to another like gamma so they can circle around each other like a perpetual motion gamma engine and let the rest of world proceed?
Gammas when directed to each other manage to find their common hatreds and develop Gamma hives.
They are still capable of operating within a hierarchy and organizing according to their interests. The Alpha provides an anchor point they can work together against. While he exists, they can put aside their differences for their shared hate of him.
So no, their inter-personal friction is insufficient to occupy their hatred for the system and its leading symbol.
He truly is amazingly patient when dealing with the gamma. Reminds me of a special Ed teacher working with the hopelessly retarded students. They do it even knowing it won’t make a difference, yet they persist. Wife taught learning disabled, emotionally handicapped and mentally retarded students for over 20 years. Her successes can be counted on one hand. Never stop trying.
Hardly patience. This person is the human on Vox’s alien spaceship experiment table. His brain is being studied for the purposes of understanding about how an inferior mind works.
This is why they're so effective at controlling the narrative. They really think they're right and they just will not fucking stop.
I had an Indian gamma corner me in a pub once after he overheard me say AGW is BS. This is before I knew what a gamma was. He literally hounded me so much with his "facts" I had to tell him to stay at least 2m away or I'll fucking snot him..
To which point he "won" the argument... Which I guess is why so many people just apologise to SJWs
And if you win, but they have hurt feelings, they appeal to the courts or registration body. Local example is the NSW (Australian state) premier "China Bob" Carr trying to sue Winston Peters because the latter said to the Aussie (a) don't come to NZ and tell NZ what to do (b) you are a pawn of China... and (c) here are my sources showing you are a pawn of China.
The Gammas demanded his resignation. Peters replied "this is not my first legal rodeo".
I agree that for practical purposes and situational events the how/why is irrelevant, much like why a pedophile is a pedophile is irrelevant if you catch him hovering near your child. Nevertheless, removed from the immediate practical applications, the how and why do interest me and I have theorised some general concepts that at least have some experiential and anecdotal evidence to support them. I appreciate that this has probably the same general level of interest for Vox that economic theory has for me. As always, de gustibus...
Would like to read on the why/how in Vox's coming SSH book.
see my blog and do a search for SSH using the search me button on the right sidebar.
For all sad words of tongue and pen, The saddest are these, 'Gamma confirmed'.
Gradually, I began to hate them.
I’m seeing a lot of references to software types. Fits with my experience, the electrical hardware and mechanical are more focused on getting it correct the first time. Tends to analyze and document their designs as it’s expensive in cost and reputation to recall defective mechanical or hardware defects. Defects also show up early in the factory testing process. The software community is ship it and document it later. Impossible to regression test software without a decent requirements document. If it doesn’t do what’s expected…. Well, that’s a feature not a bug. Our next release will address that issue. It’s complex you wouldn’t understand. Trust us we know what we are doing, we’re experts. They are constantly fixing new problems due to their failure to adequately define the software’s functionality or how it works with the hardware. Hardware engineers mixed with the rf the fewest, the digital ones higher but not software high. I ran into the most gammas in the software and IT fields, mechanical engineers had the fewest. Chemical engineers seemed to have a low gamma count. Physicists surprisingly seemed to have a high gamma count.
Physics being full of gammas is absolutely not a surprise - if an engineer builds a bridge then its pretty obvious if it falls down. If a physicist coujours up a new particle then 'we need a new particle accelerator 100x more powerful than the last one' to disprove it. Also the Copenhagen interpretation of QM is a playground for such people. We've had a 100 years plus of this nonsense. (ex-physicist here).
There are certainly more gammas in software than electrical or mechanical.
I'm not sure how the fast cycle times in software would incentivise gamma behavior?
If I had to guess gammas are attracted to the excessive abstraction in software, the breadth allowing so many subject matter experts, the high value add of an expert, and the complete lack of anything physical.
"I'm not sure how the fast cycle times in software would incentivise gamma behavior?"
Lower stakes, lower barriers to entry, lower accountability, excess easy money. Need HIQ SMEs, which plays to a Gamma's strengths.
It also goes back to their origin. Before software it was only electrical and mechanical. No computer science degree. There were mainframe systems, but the majority of their operators of electrical engineering origin . The microprocessor changed the way. Then everyone had to be able to code, no compilers, directly in machine code. Later came compilers. As the field grew the universities created computer science programs. They started dropping real world classes. I ran into CS degreed persons who had zero physics or rf exposure. Trying to get them to understand that a clock running at 3 GHz creates an rf signal, due to being substantially a square wave with even higher harmonics on a strip line or micro strip conductor drew blanks. The old hardware/software interface issue. No clue. They don’t understand that the physical layer within all the protocol and functional layers are governed by the laws of physics.
Sounds about right that they would fester in places lacking direct and immediate consequences. Software types will never worry about concrete and rebar guys gearing up to kick their ass on the job site.
It makes sense to hear that correlated with gammas. My understanding was for many software companies their standard procedure was just that, to put out buggy or incomplete crap and deal with the problems on the back end or next update. This better explains where that practice comes from.
Short version: The shorter the cycle between design and accountability the fewer gamma.
Academic research into learning frequently shows that failure is a necessary component of learning. People who cannot accept failure cannot really learn, and that includes acknowledging when you are proven wrong. One of the reasons I love weightlifting so much is that you cannot assign some intellectual construction on your failures to act like they were successes. If you attempt a lift and fail, you are not strong enough.
With intellectual debates there is a very simple way to save face when you are losing a debate. You say, "Hmm, these are good points and I have not thought about them deeply. I will need to give that some more thought." A gamma cannot do this because the gamma has framed the debate in his mind as a status competition that he will lose if he concedes any points. And since it is purely intellectual, failing to concede means that any debate he wants can be a tie. The gamma becomes stupid because he has no real way of discerning falsehood from truth because he has woven his intellectual positions into his identity and can't ever reject anything he once held a true.
Gammas are characteristically immune to growing.
When I heard the quote "It is a bad economist that divorces himself from his wife before he divorces himself from his position." that's when I understood a lot more. Why would you be wedded to a bad idea or concept or metaphor, if you lose nothing, and get more status from admitting fault? Correction is kindness. It's the evil ones who let you learn the wrong thing.
It's much easier to remember the names of the guys and the girls with whom you've had arguments and disagreements, and then they come back and say that they were wrong. That's when you remember that person. That's when they give you a reason to remember them.
Very well put. Thank you. I learned and grew more from my failures than I did from my easy successes. Better yet was learning from the failure of others.
Weights - they are not going to move themselves.
Seems plausible, however trying to get into the mind of a gammas’ why is like trying to pick up a dog turd by its clean end.
Is Vox talking about the Wiz again?
The thing is, there is an obvious IQ difference in there, too.
I wonder what would happen if the SSH rank remained the same, but the IQ difference was inverted?
I think the Gamma would behave the same way but would manage to trick most of the crowd.
An indecipherable wall of text that looks plausible with an authoritative attitude, but the Gamma would still be wrong.
He might have a correct technical nitpick, but he would be missing the bigger point and making an ass of himself.
EDIT: Status trumps IQ. Sigma calls him a nerd and the girls laugh at Gamma, triggering a melty. HIQ Gamma dreams of the perfect comeback and seethes online.
This brings to mind gamma tendencies whenever an atheist gamma (but I repeat myself) butts into a religious discussion they’re not involved in with their constant cries for “Evidence?”
Stop me if you’re heard this before: you decide to actually engage in good faith and provide evidence for your belief, only for the gamma to just say “lol that’s not evidence.” They don’t understand that THEM NOT BEING CONVINCED isn’t the same as your proffered evidence not meeting the definition of evidence.
Yes, my first time engaging with a gamma on this subject was the last. Now, I just ignore.
EDIT: Typo corrected and further edited for clarity.
That is such a perfect way to put it, I always characterized it as "arguing with a wall." The threshold for evidence is what they deem to be evidence. In essence, they are God and they choose what truth and reality are and are not. They can simply declare you are wrong by disregarding everything you say and substituting with nothing of substance.
I wish I had caught on as quickly as you had.
Screenshotted this comment and sent to friends. Well said!
"They don’t understand that THEM NOT BEING CONVINCED isn’t the same as evidence not meeting the definition of existence". - This!! You hit the proverbial nail right on the head with that one. Excellent. Brevity is a virtue and yours is greatly appreciated. Superb comment.
It's them admitting their request for evidence was never honest.
Once I said that there is less evidence for dark matter than there is for God, and an atheist gamma spent five hours trying to bully me into recanting. He had absolutely no counter argument. He didn't know anything about dark matter. But he knew I "had" to be wrong.
A similar thing happened when I said I see no particular reason to believe Christmas has pagan origins. I don't hang with the group anymore
It seems like almost the entire astrophysics community has forgotten that dark matter was a placeholder until they could figure out why the math didn’t predict reality. Dr Micheal McCulloch’s Quantized Inertia theory is a beautifully simple explanation.
The real dark matter is the whatever is the matter with these guys.
Those of you who think you know it all really irritate those of who do.
Professedly by any and all gammas.
Something that drives me crazy is that gammas can never seem to maintain frame.
In this instance, vox made a very straightforward argument. But the gammas response was all over the map. The moment vox didn't give into one attack he abandoned it and came from a completely different direction to the point of contradicting himself several times. The one thing he absolutely refuses to do was engage the point on its own merits.
He panicked.
If they maintained frame they would have to concede an error, which to a gamma may as well be the same as admitting that he isn't a king, just an ordinary person like anyone else. Unbearable.
My goodness what a good comment. This is exactly it.
He'll be really sad now that a well-known physicist has said the argument is valid and better than those presented by physicists and mathematicians in 1966.
Some years ago, I wrote something in a discussion forum--though I have completely forgotten what the subject was about. A gamma came back at me with a strawman rebuttal. I patiently rephrased what I wrote, thinking he'd see that he'd misunderstood and correct himself. Instead he aggressively doubled down. I didn't know anything about the SSH at the time, but I did have enough experience to notice these "no-win" relentless patterns with some guys. I figured any third party can read what I wrote and see what's going on. So instead of arguing back at him, I wrote: "You are completely right, and I am completely wrong. Take a victory lap."
He got so infuriated that he'd been robbed of his intellectual conquest that I was taken aback. He followed up with the signature wall-o-text and stalked me for weeks afterward.
Sounds like a woman
Single mothers have much to answer for, but the plague of gammas unleashed on those of us who try to get things done may just be the worst.
I was listening to a lecture yesterday, and the speaker said "a man's mind is like a room full of boxes, and everything has its place. A woman's mind is like a huge pile of spaghetti, with everything idea touching everything other idea"
I think a gamma's mind is like a bowl of mack and cheese. There is no order to it, but no one thought can quite reach more than a couple other thoughts.
It's chaos done poorly.
Sounds like Mark Gungor’s classic comedy routine about the Nothing Box.
Concur, low to no impulse control , loses train of thought quickly, zero to low situational awareness. Only short term memory. Forgets what was said. If written changes interpretation of what is there. High self image far in excess of reality.
I would just say pride. I've known gammas who hate themselves but they are still arrogant.
Concur, almost extreme arrogant pride. Exhibits defensive behavior.
The gamma certifies himself and then references himself as some sort of expert on the subject. It’s one of the reasons why verbal debates with them are useless. See also: pedantic, obtuse, straw-man
In the work environment they tend to invite themselves to group meetings and insert themselves uninvited into private conversations.
Outside work it’s the same.
A Bravo boss talking about why he limited the office Gamma’s involvement in projects: Eric is what I call a ‘joiner.’ He wants to join way too many groups. You’re lucky if the worst he does is leave a project unfinished. You’re lucky if he doesn’t mess up the project or sabotage members. If he could finish even ONE project I’d think about letting him join another.
Not to mention the utter lack of humility. The one I'm most familiar with considers himself an expert because he knows a guy (in literally any field that's currently the subject of discussion). Thus he is practically omniscient.
They are so deluded. Had a similar experience a few years ago with, get this, a gay-catholic-choirboy-PhD-CEO of a biotech company. I was certain he was pulling my leg until he sent me a thesis which he claimed completely debunked the mathematical proof. Instead it proved the point conclusively at which point he flounced and started trying to delete the convo. Thanks for proving that it's a religion to these nuts.
I have had someone claim that believe in evolution, the belief not the actual process, leads to life and refusal to believe in it leads to death.
I've had someone claim it is completely undeniable. I've had someone claim entropy doesn't apply to genetics because survival of the fittest cancels entropy out. I've had someone claim that any amount of change in any population is proof positive evolution must be true.
I used to think that they just needed a bit of help to see the problems. At this point though, it's pretty obvious we are dealing with people at a lower level of awareness
So like in Peter Pan, where saying "I don't believe in faeries" kills the faeries.
I don't believe in evolution kills the organism.
You may have actually come across the secret king of the gammas with that one.
Seems so
When I believed in evolution, I still couldn't stand these guys because their arguments made no sense.
I look forward to them making the exact same "if evolution true, why can't I fly?" Arguments they love making fun of.
"They also engage relentlessly in what can be described as argumentum ad imaginariam, which is appealing to their own imaginations."
Lord, yes. It's exhausting. There's nothing like engaging in a conversation with someone who, having no knowledge of your area of expertise or personal circumstances, nevertheless knows better than you how to work or live your life. As soon as the conversation heads that way, all you want to do is dive for the exit since there's no talking reality with someone like that.
ummm... there IS a way to make them not only see, but even admit reality, without any verbal prompts from you. I mean it's kinda illegal outside of a martial arts dojo, but it really works, which is why I hate gammas with a passion, it's not that they *can't* see reality, it's that they refuse to. Unless you apply sufficient physical pain, then... lo and behold! Magic! They are suddenly able to see, and think, and do logic! It's truly astonishing. I despise them because they are fundamentally dishonest. The fact they lie to themselves first and foremost does not gather any sympathy with me.
I remember when fistfights and violence became frowned upon in the later years of school. I hated it. A bloodied nose or a swollen lip was the best way to learn that you might have done something wrong. Do you want another one or do you want to think and talk a little about why you got one? It was the most reliable way to get an annoying idiot to shut up. It's as idiotic and dangerous to remove a math teacher's cutting red pen, because of nothing but popularly democratic reasons of hurt feelings.
Reading your blog, Kurgan, and what Vox has written has been great and useful. I don't know if I'm a midwit or not, however, it's dangerous to have one's beliefs untested. And you don't get that everywhere.
you can do a search on my blog using the search me button and keywords if you want to find more thoughts on it.
Does anyone have experience with diverting a gamma to another like gamma so they can circle around each other like a perpetual motion gamma engine and let the rest of world proceed?
Gammas when directed to each other manage to find their common hatreds and develop Gamma hives.
They are still capable of operating within a hierarchy and organizing according to their interests. The Alpha provides an anchor point they can work together against. While he exists, they can put aside their differences for their shared hate of him.
So no, their inter-personal friction is insufficient to occupy their hatred for the system and its leading symbol.
I suspect it'd go something like this:
https://twitter.com/ThebestFigen/status/1742624087371911562?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1742624087371911562%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=
Dueling fingers - hilarious
Gosh, do you think we could harness the hot air to generate power?
Gamma Thunderdome.
Impressively patient sigma.
He truly is amazingly patient when dealing with the gamma. Reminds me of a special Ed teacher working with the hopelessly retarded students. They do it even knowing it won’t make a difference, yet they persist. Wife taught learning disabled, emotionally handicapped and mentally retarded students for over 20 years. Her successes can be counted on one hand. Never stop trying.
Hardly patience. This person is the human on Vox’s alien spaceship experiment table. His brain is being studied for the purposes of understanding about how an inferior mind works.
"It's not inhumane. These are all volunteers."
Ah-mazin'.
The Saturday posts especially. Two weeks we've seen the line from a soap opera voice-over:
Narrator: "Playing the part of Doof this week on 'Hypergamouse' is [ name of Gamma ]."
This is why they're so effective at controlling the narrative. They really think they're right and they just will not fucking stop.
I had an Indian gamma corner me in a pub once after he overheard me say AGW is BS. This is before I knew what a gamma was. He literally hounded me so much with his "facts" I had to tell him to stay at least 2m away or I'll fucking snot him..
To which point he "won" the argument... Which I guess is why so many people just apologise to SJWs
And if you win, but they have hurt feelings, they appeal to the courts or registration body. Local example is the NSW (Australian state) premier "China Bob" Carr trying to sue Winston Peters because the latter said to the Aussie (a) don't come to NZ and tell NZ what to do (b) you are a pawn of China... and (c) here are my sources showing you are a pawn of China.
The Gammas demanded his resignation. Peters replied "this is not my first legal rodeo".
yeah Knob Carr was a classic gamma.
literally every reporter or news person is one. Yes they controll the narrative. Most people still think it was safe and effective