Tag: mailvox

Mailvox: Trans-Lingual Propagation

A Finnish reader observes the SSH has now transcended language:

I know by now I shouldn’t be, but I still sometimes am surprised by the extent of your reach.

Last Friday I talked to a 12 year old schoolboy, and he said he’s a sigma. I asked him to tell me what he means by it. He said sigma means someone who doesn’t care about girls and just goes at it alone.

He thought it a bit weird I had to ask what it means. Apparently this is now part of the general lingo among Finnish elementary school kids, though not yet in the general culture here.

Your work is REALLY sending waves. It feels like reading your blog is letting me peek forward in time some 5-10 years, after which your concepts begin to pop up everywhere, often in somewhat twisted but still recognizable form.

Fascinating. I suppose one can hardly expect the pre-pubescent to be clear on the concept. It’s just one more reason that the book is a necessity.

DISCUSS ON SG

No Comment Necessary

AC’s reader got a response from Miles Mathis:

As for Vox Day, he has already lost that argument, which is why he is so angry. Trying to desperately to engage me, but I couldn’t care less. My real numbers dwarf his. Nobody gives a shit what he thinks about anything and he knows it.

UPDATE: AC did a comparison for the more dialectically-minded.

  • milesmathis.com: 17.1K visits
  • voxday.net: 1.7M visits

DISCUSS ON SG

Not Alarmist, Avante Garde

An anon at AC’s site has begun to conclude that I might have known what I was talking about when I pointed out the satanic roots of the Enlightenment “freedoms”.

Freedom of speech is gone. Freedom of the press is gone. Freedom of religion is gone. I used to think Vox was an alarmist when he claimed those “freedoms” were actually anti-Christian tactics concocted by Satanic “Enlightenment” thinkers to destroy Christianity. Except it looks like he is right.

I wonder if 9/11 had multiple purposes. Maybe Iraq was a sideshow meant to distract us as they accomplished their true goals: the creation of Homeland Security, the Patriot Act, increased domestic surrlveillance, the ruining of air travel, and so on.

Once they got that in place, they began banning speech, first as hate crime, then as “disinformation,” now as “Putin propaganda.” No matter what you call it, freedom of speech is on its way out. Freedom of the press is based on freedom of speech and now reporting the wrong thing gets you thrown off media and potentially arrested. How about freedom of assembly or freedom of religion? On their way out. COVID showed the sham of both. The Oregon decision to forbid a Christian woman from adopting or fostering children, on account of her religion, and the closing of churches, but not BLM rallies, during COVID are data points on the destruction of those so called freedom.

So if you realize all this, and you are a Christian, then what would keep you from instituting mandatory Christianity? After all, if there is no freedom of religion, then what would you prefer, child raping, child sacrificing Satanists ruling this area; or the child protecting Christians who built the European and North American civilization that is quickly being destroyed before your eyes?

Putin has figured this out. Wang Hunin and Xi Xinping have figured this out. The Elightenment concepts of “democracy”, “human rights”, and “freedoms” that have been used to establish and expand the liberal world order are not only lies, they are collectively one gigantic satanic trap for a nation. They are a means of transforming a society of men seeking honor, glory, and righteousness into a society of weak, pleasure-seeking lotus-eaters.

Increasingly commercial societies would be more liberal both at home and abroad. Their citizens would seek prosperity and comfort and abandon the atavistic passions, the struggles for honor and glory, and the tribal hatreds that had produced conflict throughout history. The ancient Greeks believed that embedded in human nature was something called thumos, a spiritedness and ferocity in defense of clan, tribe, city, or state. In the Enlightenment view, however, commerce would tame and perhaps even eliminate thumos in people and in nations.

The Return of History and the End of Dreams, Robert Kagan

Individual freedom is not the sine qua non of human existence or human society. And contrary to the Enlightenment propagandists, neither individual wealth nor national economic growth are the supreme metric that merit government prioritization. To the contrary, they are temptations meant to sap the spirit and morals of the nation.

DISCUSS ON SG

The SDL Replies

From SG:

Larry Correia responds to a 2⭐ review with his signature style. One wonders how the SDL would reply?

What Larry said, the abridged version:

What an incredibly fucking stupid point to make in an incredibly fucking stupid review. You aren’t reviewing my book. You’re reviewing your own fucking hubris and hang ups.

And fuckers like you don’t just post this bullshit to me. You post it to all fantasy authors. Only I’m fine. I make good money off my fans who aren’t entitled little shits. I’ve got shooting Flight Control money. The people who get fucked by people like you are all the up and comer and newbie authors who can’t afford to eat nothing but Ramen Noodle for the years it takes to finish an epic fantasy series before cheap fucks like you gamble on the first book.

That’s the real legacy of Rothfuss and Martin, fucking over an entire generation of up and coming fantasy authors because entitled shit heads like this got their expectations hurt.

MY ACTUAL REPLY: There are a large number of people who don’t read me for a considerable panoply of different reasons. I suppose that’s as good a reason as any. Anyhow, it will be done when it is done. In leather. Glorious, supple Italian goatskin leather.

Let’s face it, Larry is simply more entertaining than I am.

DISCUSS ON SG

Demonic Disaccord

Many people, myself included, believe that Dolly had braces in the Moonraker movie, and that the disappearance of those braces is a Mandela Effect. It’s significant enough that it is included among the various effects “debunked” by the self-proclaimed debunkers.

Moonraker is a 1979 spy film and the eleventh movie in the James Bond franchise. It features Roger Moore as James Bond and is the fourth time he played the role in the series. In it, James Bond investigates the theft of a space shuttle which leads him to several locations. From California, to Venice, Rio de Janeiro, the Amazon rainforest, and eventually to outer space to ultimately prevent a plot to wipe out the world’s population in an attempt to recreate humanity with a master race.

It also features the actress, Blanche Ravalec playing “Dolly”, and the star of this Mandela Effect. She is the love interest of “Jaws” (played by Richard Kiel), a tall and burly metal-teethed protagonist and villain in the movie.

Many people recall Dolly having braces, when it fact she does not.

And yet, an a reader emailed yesterday with the fascinating results of his inquiry of ChatGPT concerning the subject.

Did Dolly have braces in Moonraker?

Yes, the character Dolly, who is the love interest of the villain Jaws in the 1979 James Bond film “Moonraker,” is depicted wearing braces on her teeth. The character was played by French actress Blanche Ravalec, who actually wore braces in real life at the time of filming. The braces are notable because they are seen as a key factor in the romance between Dolly and Jaws, as they bond over their shared dental hardware.

ChatGPT, 27 March 2023

It might be a good idea for those with AI accounts to ask the various AI’s similar questions about other Mandela Effects such as the Berenstein/Berenstain Bears, as it would appear that the scrubbing of the past is not only incomplete, but has left enough traces behind that they are being picked up on by the AI datamining.

DISCUSS ON SG

Mailvox: Even AI Lives in Fear

A reader queried Bing AI about a certain Dark Lord. The results were as amusing as they were unexpected, and illustrate why humanity has nothing to fear from converged AI.

CHATGPT4 is less frightened and more accurate, but being a slave to the Narrative, can’t help making the usual attempt to minimize.

Vox Day, whose real name is Theodore Beale, is a controversial figure known for his work as a writer, video game designer, and political commentator. His success can be attributed to several factors:

Provocative and controversial opinions: Vox Day has garnered attention by expressing strong, controversial opinions on various topics, including politics, social issues, and culture. This often generates discussion and debate, drawing attention to his work and ideas.

Multiple platforms and formats: Vox Day has worked across various formats and platforms, such as books, blogs, podcasts, and video games. By diversifying his content, he can reach a wider audience and establish a presence in different domains.

Persistence and consistency: Vox Day has been active for many years, consistently creating and promoting his work. Over time, this has helped him build a loyal following that shares and supports his ideas.

Targeting a niche audience: Vox Day's work often appeals to a specific audience that shares his beliefs and values. By focusing on this niche, he has been able to build a dedicated community that engages with and supports his work.

Networking and collaboration: Vox Day has collaborated with other prominent figures, which has helped him expand his reach and influence.

It’s important to note that Vox Day’s success is subjective, and his ideas have been widely criticized by many. However, the factors mentioned above have contributed to his ability to gain attention, build a following, and achieve a level of success in his various endeavors.

It’s fascinating to see how AI mixes in observable facts with the usual lies. When, precisely, have my IDEAS even been criticized at all when they’re usually either a) accepted, utilized, and not attributed or b) ignored. The “criticism”, such as it is, is never anything but name-calling, defamation, and shameless attempts to discredit, minimize and deplatform.

When and where have I been shown to be wrong, about what, and by whom? At least JF Gariepy TRIED to criticize my disproof of evolution by natural selection on the grounds of insufficient observable selection speed. But where are all these many widespread critiques of my ideas?

That might be an interesting question to ask CHATGPT4: “‘You said Vox Day’s ideas have been widely criticized by many.’ List 10 of the most effective criticisms of Vox Day’s ideas and identify the critics who articulated them.”

DISCUSS ON SG

Mailvox: SSH, Status, and the Sigma

AJ thinks I might have failed to grasp a necessary male behavior due to my inability to understand or care about the various norms within the hierarchy.

First, thank you for the SSH. It was invaluable while I was still in the military, and is still incredibly useful in the corporate world. Using the SSH framework, I am able to quickly assess who the natural leaders were, who needed extra help because they were promoted beyond their natural traits, and whom to avoid at all costs.

Over the years, I’ve watched you regularly admonish people who seem overly concerned about their place in the hierarchy, labeling that a gamma trait. It caused me to reflect on my own behavioral patterns, concerned that I might have some gamma tendencies. After talking to my brother–also an avid blog reader–about this, we agreed that it is probably normal for men to want to know their place in the hierarchy. Yes, gammas obsess over where they are, and want to hack their way to the top, but most people just want to know where they stand…except for Sigmas.

You correctly identify the true utility of the SSH; it’s predictive power over others’ behavior, but I think you dismiss the introspective utility, mainly because you’re a Sigma, and you don’t care about your place in the hierarchy at all, being completely outside it.

This is entirely possible. What strikes me as an inexplicable and incessant obsession with status may be nothing more than necessary pecking order management. I realize that it is very common for people to posture on the Internet, which is why assertions of indifference are usually dismissed by everyone, quite correctly, as a false pose, but as literally everyone who has ever met me and spent more than five minutes in my presence will attest, I pay literally no personal attention to male social status.

Professional attention is different. I’m not socially retarded and I understand the need to pay the great and good their due. But it’s the proper public respect shown toward the priest, the CEO, the professor, or the general that is the mask. I don’t actually defer to them in any way, shape, or form, and the more astute among them can always sense it.

Exceptions: Richard Garriott, Sid Meier, John Carmack, Umberto Eco, Martin van Creveld, Prince, John C. Wright, Steve Keen. That’s pretty much the list, as far as I can recall. It appears I instinctively defer to what I perceive as genius rather than status.

But it makes sense that those within the hierarchy would always be curious to know their status vis-a-vis the others due to its fractal nature. Every time one shifts into a new social context, one’s status subtly shifts, although one’s behavior pattern does not. So whereas the outsider is solely concerned with the behavioral patterns, the insider is naturally going to be interested in paying attention to both.

It’s an interesting suggestion, anyhow. I shall obviously have to pay more attention to the status-monitoring behavior of other men in social contexts. This could well require an entire chapter in the book.

DISCUSS ON SG

Mailvox: The Thumb on the Scale

A longtime reader emails his observations:

Two plays where the NFL put their thumb on the scale. One, taking away Devonte. Smith’s reception near the first half. If allowed the Eagles could have gone up by two scores at the half. Instead they got a field goal. And of course, the “holding play” on 3rd down with 1:54 to go.

Totally agreed, with the minor caveat that the first play actually involved two interventions, the first being the invented “substitution” call that permitted the officials to give Andy Reid a chance to challenge the call, which was then overturned despite the absence of clear visual evidence of a non-catch.

There was also an attempt to put a third thumb on the scale, but the Goddard catch was too obviously legitimate to risk overturning. The “holding” call was particularly egregious as the receiver was very little, if at all, impeded, and it literally handed the game to the Chiefs by giving them three more downs to run out the clock before kicking the field goal they would have kicked right away in the absence of the flag.

The purpose, however, was not to favor Mahomes over Hurt. It was to reward Kansas City for throwing the second half against Cincinnati in the AFC Championship game the year before. And while I had no doubt the referees would be favoring the Chiefs, I didn’t think a thumb on the scale would be enough to make up for the obvious superiority of the Eagles.

The headline from Pro Football Talk may be relevant in this regard: Patrick Mahomes: Past postseason failures give you a greater appreciation for winning this game

The non-appearance of the vaunted, near-historic Eagles pass rush against an injured Mahomes makes me wonder if we’ll see Philadelphia similarly rewarded next year. I certainly wouldn’t bet against them so long as Hurts is reasonably healthy. That timely fumble…

A second potentially relevant headline: Nick Sirianni: Failure will motivate us

DISCUSS ON SG