Quote from B on April 15, 2023, 1:16 am

Former mistake I used to make: not allowing the (work, personal, whatever) relationship to develop freely without pressure

I see now the mistake I made in this case here (which I posted about more than a year ago):

Quote from Bel on December 18, 2021, 6:45 pm

I had invoiced this client for work (I invoiced somewhat late in this case), and then I receive this email:

“Hi, I am requesting your help on a follow-up of […]

Note: if it should be necessary, for this little consultancy, to have to pay “extra” fees with respect to the fees we already paid for the activities you performed in the past, no problem: avoiding that problems repeat themselves is more important to us...”.

...

I provided the assistance, as it was quick, and said nothing was due. This escalated into another similar request, ending with:

"I much appreciated your availability, but I want to restate our full availability to consider this activity subject to your normal fees: also because we may have other small interactions in the future (which may become, if it interest you, a normal professional assistance in favor of our company as your normal "habitual" client)".

Which I addressed again for free, specifying that if other assistance were necessary, I was glad to help and suggested a written agreement to better arrange how to proceed. Then I never heard from them again.

My mistake consisted of not allowing the relationship with this client to develop freely and without pressure, and instead trying to force a written agreement (a binding relationship).

The reason why the client disappeared was not - as I thought - that I asked to be paid while he wanted me to work for free.

The reason was that the client didn't fully trust me yet and I jumped the gun forcing a contract, instead of being indifferent to his times.

It's really like it is with women: if you try to force things to happen within your timeline, you're usually out. If on the other hand you are indifferent to whether things happen soon or not, the game totally changes, and it is the other side that starts pushing for things to happen.

It's like people have this tendency to test others by delaying things a bit, to see if there is a real interest in them - and if the other is really confident. And then if they see there is real interest, they start pushing for more. I believe it's an innate mechanism, below consciousness.

I was listening to a podcast about women lately and the speaker was saying that many attractive women unconsciously test men by not replying or disappearing in the initial stages for three/four days, to see if the man starts blowing their phone up.

I find this was also true for me on dates: there always was a moment where the woman turned cold after two dates, like she was absent, and it took a long time for me to realize it was an unconscious test to see if I would "go insecure".

Most of these things work precisely because they are honest signals, difficult to fake.

EDIT: Btw, I believe I may be currently possibly erring on the other side of the scale, that of tending to communicate disinterest by distancing myself more.

But I also believe this is a much less impactful "mistake" in any area of life than the opposite one.

Quote from B on April 15, 2023, 2:47 pm

After studying TPM and PU, I've so far thrown away probably between 25 and 50% of my former wardrobe.

The interesting thing is that I already had several clothing pieces that were good and high-power, but I tended not to use them. I suspect the real reason is that, subconsciously, I didn't identify with a person who would wear them.

However, this reason was hidden behind more than one rationalization.

Now, sometimes I wear something I have, and I immediately think "how is it possible that I have walked around in this stuff so far!".

And I throw it out.

There is one very good "test" about good clothing that consists of seeing if street hustlers tend to target you. If it happens more than once, IMO most likely something one wears is not good.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on April 15, 2023, 6:44 pm

Quote from Bel on April 15, 2023, 1:16 am

Former mistake I used to make: not allowing the (work, personal, whatever) relationship to develop freely without pressure

(...)

I was listening to a podcast about women lately and the speaker was saying that many attractive women unconsciously test men by not replying or disappearing in the initial stages for three/four days, to see if the man starts blowing their phone up.

I was checking a friend's conversation with a lady recently.

After a few days of radio silence that she didn't reply, she resumed the convo and agreed to a date.

I commented to my friend "if you had texted again after her non reply, this would have likely ended there for good".

I personally wouldn't make it an "iron rule" as it's always about the specific situation and people, but it's a good rule of thumb.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on April 15, 2023, 6:49 pm

Quote from Bel on April 15, 2023, 2:47 pm

After studying TPM and PU, I've so far thrown away probably between 25 and 50% of my former wardrobe.

The interesting thing is that I already had several clothing pieces that were good and high-power, but I tended not to use them. I suspect the real reason is that, subconsciously, I didn't identify with a person who would wear them.

However, this reason was hidden behind more than one rationalization.

Now, sometimes I wear something I have, and I immediately think "how is it possible that I have walked around in this stuff so far!".

And I throw it out.

There is one very good "test" about good clothing that consists of seeing if street hustlers tend to target you. If it happens more than once, IMO most likely something one wears is not good.

Such an interesting reflection, Bel.

One may think clothes may be the easiest thing to change, independently from everything else.

But even there, sometimes, one must first address the foundations of personal self-development.

Quote from B on April 16, 2023, 1:43 am

Some random clothes I found were “off” as man:

- small pocket umbrellas (this feels still unreal to me, but Bella confirmed that carrying a small pocket umbrella in hand feels off for a man);

- any worn out clothing;

- shirts with pockets;

- ties with more than two colors;

- t-shirts with long sleeves (short sleeved t-shirts are ok);

- “college-feel” jackets;

- anything with a hood (probably subcommunicates being “too young”).

Quote from B on April 16, 2023, 5:00 pm

I am really infuriated by these dynamics of (some) waiters and servers trying to power move on me in front of my partner Bella, which only today I fully grasp.

Really, really infuriated.

If there is a next time at these places, I guess they'll be in for a big surprise in my reaction - all in frame control and power dynamics, of course.

And, from now on - whenever a waiter (or waitress) starts playing the moves - I'll immediately go meta and shut him down. This stops now.

EDIT: As per Lucio's answer, best to go high power and remain under cover in this case. Next time dialing up power and warmth down.

Quote from B on April 16, 2023, 6:03 pm

A resource I've found focused on reading and intepreting body language (mainly facial micro-expressions and covert intentions): https://www.bodylanguagesuccess.com/

It's mainly focused on microexpressions - ie those fleeting moments where people show their real emotions behind the mask.

Quote from John Freeman on April 16, 2023, 8:12 pm

Quote from Bel on April 15, 2023, 2:47 pm

After studying TPM and PU, I've so far thrown away probably between 25 and 50% of my former wardrobe.

Important decision, Kudos to you! I think it's also an important mental self-signaling: it's a loud "I'm changing NOW!" that one is shouting at oneself. A positive anger for change of course. As in: "this was my former self, I'm building my new self now!"

Quote from B on April 17, 2023, 10:44 pm

Stopping free work with a client

Background: this is a client which I got to know before-TPM, and she was (then) able to manipulate me into providing some free legal suggestions/ light free phone consultations. She once tried to draft herself a complex legal agreement and tried to have me "approve it".

One month ago, she resurfaced. And I met her again, for an initial verbal consultation, and also provided some first answers, on a new, complex inheritance matter.

I told her no fee was due for the initial consultation, and I added that, if she wanted me to assist her in further study, negotiations, or in concluding a settlement agreement with the counterparty, I would provide her a fee quote based on the value of the matter.

The idea was to give her an initial orientation on the matter, but not perform any material work unless she was willing to pay. (However, I probably provided her more than the "gist", I now realize. I went too far in my initial answers, as proven by her text here below.)

One month went by after our meeting, and I didn't hear from her anymore. Now I received a text message from her, out of the blue:

Client: Good day attorney, forgive me but I'm in a delicate phase in this matter, I hope to reach the right compromise ... in the meantime could you remind me - to avoid mistakes - if my counterparty must speak of "lien" or "encumbrance"? What was the term for her case? I remember the first... Thank you and forgive me! :)

My feeling is that this question is absurd - it deals with a detail that does not make sense to pinpoint, unless the client is trying to write the settlement agreement herself and is trying to "fool me" into providing the right "terminology" for free.

But, apart from this, I could not answer a text like this even if I wanted: it is a very complex matter and I cannot assume professional responsibility via text, nor for free (imagine if she makes a mistake, or if the matter is not as we spoke, and then my professional liability will be called into question in the future because I "gave her the wrong legal advice". A very dangerous client.)

So I now need to both refuse the question, and subcommunicate that I didn't provide any legal advice so far, but only a general orientation (which is true, btw) - thus I did not and do not accept any professional liability.

So this is the answer I'm thinking of sending in one/two days:

Me: Good day Ms. ..., I hope all is well.

It is impossible for me to provide answers or assume professional liability on matters so complex and delicate via text or phone; but as anticipated, if you wish to entrust me with the legal assistance in relation to this matter, I will gladly provide you a fee quote for the activities we discussed. Kind regards

My gut tells me she is a client that is better to lose - never once she paid me, and I've been providing too many "free legal phone calls" so far.

One alternative could be to call her and ask her if she is writing the agreement herself - but I don't like this alternative, as it would both surface her manipulativeness too much, and leave me with no written trace of refusing to assist unless she engages me.

EDIT: added the words "or assume professional liability" in my proposed text, as I fear that - if I do not - she will get the feeling that, after providing her many initial answers, I'm now refusing to answer on a "single word doubt" (and thus that I am highly unreasonable).