G: Makes claim about a specific subject.The point I'm trying to make here, other than to try to help Gammas see how annoying their characteristically argumentative behavior is to everyone who witnesses it, is to show how readily recognizable this behavior is to others. Gammas seem to think they're being clever and devious by refusing to answer simple and straightforward answers, by hiding their obvious errors behind their own, newly made custom definitions of words, and inaccurately rephrasing the words of others. They also seem to think they're somehow getting away with it, but the fact is that they're not. Everyone sees it. And no one is fooled.
VD: Points out that G doesn’t know what the specific subject actually is.
G: Admits he probably doesn’t know. (Notice he didn’t concede that he didn’t know, just probably and it didn’t stop him from making shit up about it and sticking to it.) Pontificates, claims VD is avoiding an issue, and then restates the same point again (A) a slightly different way, and makes a new point (B).
Another: Try to refute point (B)
G: Calls Another’s point laughable, sticks to point (B)
VD: Demolishes point with historical example (B)
G: Claims VD is denying historical examples. Adds *yawn* snark. Accuses VD of cherry-picking examples. Asks 7 questions only tangentially related to the specific topic. Says there’s even more questions.
Another: Points out that G is missing the big picture.
G: Says he agrees with Another but asks a question trying to undermine Another’s point. Tries to expand (B) with more problems.
VD: Points out G is playing fast and loose with terms (Gamma trait) and will demolish him. Then asks yes/no question.
G: Brings up a completely and totally unrelated topic from 2011(!) which he thinks Vox was wrong about. Dodges yes/no question with qualifier.
VD: Demands the assertion from 2011 be backed up, points out the dodge, and asks again: yes/no.
G: Brings up more details about unrelated 2011 point and how G proved VD was wrong 4 years ago about something and it was “huge”. (Gammas don’t forgive or forget!) Dodges question again, asks VD what exactly is VD asking him to say.
VD: Points out G is wrong, asks another yes/no question about 2011 topic.
VD: Adds more info with relevant quotes.
VD: Responds that he’s trying to get G to simply answer a yes or no question.
G: Admits he paraphrased badly about 2011 topic. (No admittance about being wrong. Me Gamma. No wrong.) Takes three sentences to answer, finally “yes” on the first question.
VD: [At this point I pointed out that G was now denying things he'd already admitted, announced that I'm not interested in playing Pin the Gamma to His Own Words, and dropped it. - Vox]
G: In damage control now. "It's finished, that's cool. We can put it behind us, and here's why I'm still right."
Graduating Gamma author adds: It's kinda like I imagine drug addiction would be, while you are in the middle of it, you don't think that you are doing anything too wrong, or at the very least you can control it while the people around you are looking in pity and anger at your actions. If you notice [another Gamma] did the same thing, they are so scared of being ousted from the herd after an episode they blather on and try to engage on other subjects. They have the need to still be accepted.
Seriously, it's now gotten to the point that I can often correctly identify a Gamma male by his use of a single phrase of five words. I'll let you all guess what it is before I let you in on it, but it is ASTONISHINGLY reliable. If someone uses this particular phrase, or some form of it, the chances are about 9 in 10 that he will very soon begin to exhibit characteristic Gamma behavior of the sort Graduating Gamma has described in detail for us.
UPDATE: Further to the point on Gamma behavior, Dr. Torch simply couldn't let it go.
Vox Day @voxdayHe can call it a win if he likes. He can call me a coward if he likes. He can do whatever he wants, but regardless, he won't be commenting at VP again. This is an important lesson in submission for the Gammas of the world. If you don't learn to submit, then you're eventually going to be destroyed when you run into the wrong Alpha or Sigma, in whatever the relevant context is. Whether that means a physical beating, a firing, or just being silenced on a blog, it's almost always a consequence that could have easily been avoided.
Gamma in action: a witness writes a summary after observing the characteristic behavior of a Gamma male in discourse. http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2015/03/gamma-in-action.html …
@voxday With VD playing role of Gamma male: picks fight, loses, runs away, claims victory.
Vox Day @voxday now
@TorchDr Still at it, gamma boy? Fine, we can Omega you. You're done at VP.
The observable facts are that he picked the fight. Not me. He retreated from his earlier assertion. Not me. And I did not claim victory either, for that matter. I have neither respect nor time for any commenter who insists on behaving in this manner. If you can't answer straightforward answers or admit when you're wrong, you'd better not challenge me. I don't mind being criticized or challenged, but I have no tolerance for the endless Gamma dancing as they desperately try to preserve their self-image.