Please or Register to create posts and topics.

YouTube channels to learn from

PreviousPage 2 of 4Next
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on February 23, 2021, 3:49 am


In the past, I used to follow a Facebook channel, then a YouTube channel called "Real Violence for Knowledge".

I liked it a lot, but it slowed down with the content.

Then I discovered a much bigger and more famous channel called "Active Self-Protection".

The guy has tons of videos and I subscribed.

He's great at marketing and his vids are a mix of edgy type of entertainment, educational, and various paid promotions.
I learned a lot from him, but I also recognized some mistakes here and there.
Sometimes he misses opportunities for using collaborative frames in de-escalation, and I don't think he's Machiavellian enough when it comes to the use of force.

I used to watch his videos daily and I now catch up every week to watch all his videos.

Matthew Whitewood has reacted to this post.
Matthew Whitewood
Quote from John Freeman on February 23, 2021, 8:56 am

I used to watch his videos daily and I now catch up every week to watch all his videos.

Power dynamics and self-defense at 360° :).

What do you think of his videos/commentary?

Matthew Whitewood has reacted to this post.
Matthew Whitewood
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

I think that he's:

  1. Religious: when he talks about Jesus/Christ or spiritual fitness. I don't mind as he's not being aggressive with it.
  2. Using reality-based thinking: from the cases, he's using his reason, psychology and laws of physics to find solutions.
  3. Considering the whole spectrum of self-defense: from fleeing to de-escalation, to self-defense unarmed or armed.
  4. Using case-based learning: this goes hand-in-hand with reality-based thinking. It shows how many situations actually fall within a small number of different cases
  5. Showing principles: he shows when they work and when they don't.
  6. Using a recurrent vocabulary: he has a whole terminology that he uses. Some he created, some already existed. Just like TPM, this allows creation of mental models based on concepts
  7. Created method like 5ds + 1

So actually mostly good things.

I don't actually understand your commentaries, do you have specific examples?

Thank you for sharing John.

Yeah, I have some and I had started writing examples when first Matthew asked, but then erased as that would be too long and off-topic.

But there was one instance where there was a homeless guy from the neighborhood showing up at a store.

He said that using the pepper spray against the homeless without warning was the best solution.

I disagreed because the guy was from the neighborhood, so trying a more win-win solution first was better (neighborhood people are the worst people to get to blows with).

Second, pepper spray without warning can be seen as a "bitch move" from a street guy. That's OK in random situations. But in situations where the guy knows where to find and has nothing to lose while you must keep the shop and have a lot to lose, it's a big risk (ie.: the homeless might come back with a gun).
The rule is always the same: wounding but not killing is a risky choice when you got a lot to lose, the original attacker has nothing to lose, and knows where you live/work.

Third, the best Machiavellian solution, the final one, was not to pepper spray. It was to induce the homeless to actually attack -say, nasty verbal exchange to get under his skin- and then either defend yourself with deadly force (a gun), or have a friend defend you with deadly force (in many US states, once you're under physical attack, it's often legal to defend yourself by shooting).

Those are higher level strategic thinking, and he had missed them all.

Stef has reacted to this post.
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Alright I understand your point. In this specific case, I have to see the video to understand the situation because the third solution is a bit shocking to me if the guy is just being homeless. Like what? So I think I would need the video. I got the general idea, though.


That's the video:

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Ok. You still scare me a little bit wanting to kill this guy, though. First the animals, now this guy. What are you angry about?

Stef has reacted to this post.


Maybe we have a different view of life.

To me, it's not an indissoluble right to stay alive.

If one is an asshole and repeatedly assaults, harms, or threatens other's people's lives and livelihood as if it were dirt, then the world is better off going on without him.
He's already proven he's not here to do anything good for the world.

In some cases, it's a very worthy goal and accomplishment to kill someone.

Think for example of the generals that tried to kill Hitler, how many lives that would have saved if they had succeeded -and what a poorly executed attempt that was :S-.

Plus, there are plenty of situations in which it's about "your life, or someone else's life".
Then, it's no different than competing for a promotion, or for a leadership spot.

And in those cases, if that "someone else's life" is a bandit's life, I'll always be on the side of the "good" guy, and against the bandit.


Stef has reacted to this post.
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

I've seen a few videos, by no means a big chunk, but from that preview this guy seems to have really good content for workplace, high-value communication:

One example:

You: when you mention XYZ, I was concerned because I was not aware of that. I have different information from the information you have. Can you please show it to me?

So the idea is that instead of defending or attacking back, or calling someone a liar or questioning their motives, you take the attack seriously and let him come up with the evidence.

Very good both in the mindsets, and techniques.

That and similar techniques make you antifragile to all attacks, since you show yourself to be open to all criticism for the sake of self-improvement. If the attack was well-founded, you still came out of it with a good reputation of a goal oriented guy focused on process, self-improvement, and achieving company-relevant goals.

If the attack was unfounded, you called it in a very professional manner, without making a big fuss about it, and without making enemies.
And it ends up with a far bigger shame mark on the attacker: they tried a turkey power move, you answered like a real ego.

That attitude and mindset quickly give you a great reputation as a top professional with integrity.


The original message didn't transcribe any dialogue, which I added later.

Ali Scarlett and Bel have reacted to this post.
Ali ScarlettBel
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Reminds me of a "workplace communication for women" page I found a few months back who goes by Sam - Your Career Bestie (@apowermood).

One particular lesson she gave that stood out to me was her advice on how to avoid saying "sorry" too often. And, I couldn't help but notice what felt like a covert power move:

Sam: (her advice on what NOT to do) "I'm so sorry I'm late to this meeting everyone."

Sam: (her advice on what to do instead) "Thanks for waiting for me, I appreciate your patience."

She calls this, "How to replace the word 'sorry' at work like a boss." And, that covert power move certainly makes it seem like she's in charge...which is exactly why it could get under everyone's skin (who's power-aware) if she's actually not.

Here's my opinion on what she's communicating here:

  • "I'm so sorry I'm late to this meeting everyone." (= I'm so sorry I mismanaged my time everyone)
  • "Thanks for waiting for me, I appreciate your patience." (= thanks for letting me make you wait, I appreciate you letting me prioritize what I was doing—which is more important than you—over you)

I especially disliked how she said "I appreciate it" with a seemingly cheeky smile. Almost as if she was sub-communicating: "Thanks for letting me use my lateness as an opportunity to inflate my status here. To show you my thanks, here's my positive judgment."

That said, I could be misanalyzing the above and, regardless, I'm sure she has some other great content and advice.

For example, I quite liked one of her pieces on how to replace the word "just". If you ask me, there were a few good gems in there that I think could benefit both men and women.

And, I especially loved her "WAT Method" for answering the all too common "tell me about yourself" interview question.

Lucio Buffalmano and Transitioned have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoTransitioned
PreviousPage 2 of 4Next