Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Definitive dictionary of power

Quote from Stef on September 10, 2020, 2:40 am

people should already know that scalping refers to social credit, or they will have to research anyways as these new concepts requires understanding of the original.

what you describe may be used as a fair defense against social credit scalping. (counter-scalping) preemptive or posterior to the scalper attack.

or used against well deserved social credit (here it is when it becomes nasty) so it becomes: "dark reversed/inverted scalping

this second dark variety, we may call it "social credit eraser" as thats exactly what he tries to achieve

"Social credit eraser", mind blown!

And genius idea on differentiating fair credit erasing against social scalper, and manipulative social credit erasing against an actual helpful fella.

Both concepts have been added, with credits.

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

“Social credit eraser” is a very good name, though I find “Social credit deflector” slightly more precise as they try to shield from being in debt in the first place, f.e. through minimizing.

 

But that one is yet another very important concept, and even though it’s conceptually just the inverse of “Social Credit Scalping”, now that you brought it up, it definitly needed it’s own entry and examples, that makes recocgnizing and predicting this type of behaviour so much easier.

 

Though I think only one example is not as good as it could be – two or even three very different ones seem better, because you then can more easily anchor the concept in you mind. If you have only one, you have to think up different applications yourself, and maybe can’t immediately.

 

 

On another note, it seems you haven’t referenced the Dictionary in your “Start Here”-page yet, and I think it is a great fit for that, and one of the most insightful Articles on here.

(Though the dictionary-nature doesn’t grant ultimate reading pleasure, but it’s so packed with value, it really needs a reference, and it’s especially good for newcomers in my opinion.)

"Social credit deflector"

great and elegant alternative,

social credit repeler also should do

I choose eraser because it is a very basic/simple word.

plus it give me a clear visual action image, like scalping, if we wanted or needed absolute precision another word would be probably better.

yet it is good to have many options, since a bigger vocabulary helps to strategize with more nuance.

 

 

 

  • Naming the credit erasing

To me, "credit deflector" makes me think of someone who is channeling that debt towards someone else, rather than simply trying to erase it.

But it could be another smaller sub-category.
For example:

You: Hey guys, I've just stumbled upon this website called "thepowermoves.com", it's a game-changer, check it out, you're going to step up your game 10-fild
(2 days later)
Friend: hey man, yeah, it was good. I mean, most of the stuff I actually knew it, but not bad (social credit erasing). Mark though, that guy really is lapping it up and is learning a lot. He really owes you (social credit deflection)

That second part is more "credit deflecting" to me.
You kinda of accept there is value in what's been given, but instead of admitting so yourself and becoming indebted, you tell the originator to go collect his credit from someone else, and you make someone else indebted.

  • More examples

Yes, that's a great point.

I'm worried that page will become so big though as to make it unwieldy, tha'ts why I usually limit myself to one.
The goal though is to then link to more examples in more in-depth articles or forum entries. Or I could to this page here for more examples and discussions when there isn't yet a more in-depth discussion with examples.

  • Adding the dictionary to "start here"

Yes, great idea.

I added now in the menu beneath the "start here" link.

I'm also adding H2 titles for key definition that should serve as a sort of "handles" and help navigate.

So far only a few H2, but I will be adding more.

What do you think: keep it purely alphabetical, or add category sorting?

I'm thinking whether it makes sense to keep it purely alphabetical or to pick a few high-level categori or important concepts, and then to sort most definitions alphabetically beneath the higher-level category.

For example, if we'd use category-sorting "availability" wouldn't be anymore at the top, but would go beneath "social dynamics".

It makes for an easier read, I think, but some issues would arise: some concepts are overlapping.
Availability is relevant to persuasion and seduction as much as it's relevant to social and power dynamics. And the same is true for many, many other definitions.

Thoughts on this?

 

 

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on September 10, 2020, 12:50 pm
  • Naming the credit erasing

To me, "credit deflector" makes me think of someone who is channeling that debt towards someone else, rather than simply trying to erase it.

But it could be another smaller sub-category.
For example:

You: Hey guys, I've just read this awesome upon this website called "thepowermoves.com", please check it out, it's aweome
(2 days later)
Friend: hey man, yeah, it was good. I mean, most of the stuff I actually knew it, but not bad (social credit erasing). Mark though, that guy really is lapping it up and is learning a lot. He really owes you (social credit deflection)

That second part is more "credit deflecting" to me.
You kinda of accept there is value in what's been given, but instead of admitting so yourself and becoming indebted, you tell the originator to go collect his credit from someone else, and you make someone else indebted.


That was very convincing, and it's truly impressive how you immediatly found or -maybe even completely created from scratch- another dark application for it. That level of understanding is astonishing.

 


Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on September 10, 2020, 12:50 pm

  • More examples

Yes, that's a great point.

I'm worried that page will become so big though as to make it unwieldy, tha'ts why I usually limit myself to one.
The goal though is to then link to more examples in more in-depth articles or forum entries. Or I could to this page here for more examples and discussions when there isn't yet a more in-depth discussion with examples.


 

Interesting, and I totally see your point, as it is a hard to balance, though I still think two examples with very different situations help with the anchoring, if you are reading through it with the intend to grasp the concepts as throughly as possible in the shortest amount of time possible.

 

Because if it's only one example, the general concept may be somewhat theoretically clear but sticks a bit to that one example and the situation - at least for me. And there is also the danger that someone can't possibly relate (f.e. an example-situation that contains a typical situation between heteresexual-dating could be hard to grasp for someone who is homosexual).

 

This is solvable if you have more very different ones, but for efficiency two or three would help already a lot.

Having that said the overall amount of content to go through is very important as well - and that's another reason why I think there should be at least two examples, because in that sense the definitions-article has very much potential for an absolute "core article"* (it already is, but there is still even way more potential) on it's own, so that you can go through it, be blown away by the insights, and then after that, go further in deptht with the articles on the topics.

 

And good, clear examples are a very crucial part for grasping these concepts - at least for me, and it might have to do with the fact that you are the one who conceptualized most of them, and therefore it might seem easy for you, but I for one need and appreciate examples a lot. Though I'm curious about others' experinces as well, as it might be different for others.

 

*regarding core-articles: Articles that are absolutely packed with important content, but still very well and efficiently structured, yet contain only the bary minimum that you have to go through content-wise. In many ways TPM is already that for several areas of knowledge, but it's still possible to apply the very same to the site as a whole (and Power Univerity), so it culminates into a best-of so to speak.

 

Your site is so massive that even my own, let's call it -database-, is now massive in that regard too, so for real digestion of even only the most important parts, I plan to really go through everything and rewrite and restructure it for my own most efficient approach, and for more depht of understanding even translate it in my primary language (as it's the "machine code" of the mind so to speak).

 

And the dictionary article is an example in general of what I think can come out of this applied to general concepts. It really needs to be in power-University as well!

I'm sure you remeber this discussion on a pdf-summary on Power University, and that is already a great summary for that part.


Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on September 10, 2020, 12:50 pm

"What do you think: keep it purely alphabetical, or add category sorting?

I'm thinking whether it makes sense to keep it purely alphabetical or to pick a few high-level categori or important concepts, and then to sort most definitions alphabetically beneath the higher-level category.

For example, if we'd use category-sorting "availability" wouldn't be anymore at the top, but would go beneath "social dynamics".

It makes for an easier read, I think, but some issues would arise: some concepts are overlapping.
Availability is relevant to persuasion and seduction as much as it's relevant to social and power dynamics. And the same is true for many, many other definitions.

Thoughts on this?"


 

As much as I like the "dictionary" part of it, I think for the most efficient learning approach it's a lot more efficient to have related concepts grouped. If they overlap a bit it should (in theory) make it possible to generalize the concepts even more and apply them in different scenarios through examples.

 

I personally like it to have concepts grouped and structured in terms of how fundamental and important they are as well as their probability, instead of what happens to be their first letter.

A note at the beginning that it makes particular sense here to look for specific terms with |Ctrl+F| (for those that are unaware of that) could be the best of both worlds.

 

 

Quote from Anon on September 10, 2020, 2:11 pm

As much as I like the "dictionary" part of it, I think for the most efficient learning approach it's a lot more efficient to have related concepts grouped. If they overlap a bit it should (in theory) make it possible to generalize the concepts even more and apply them in different scenarios through examples.I personally like it to have concepts grouped and structured in terms of how fundamental and important they are as well as their probability, instead of what happens to be their first letter.

Thank you for the feedback, Anon!

Yeah, what you say makes sense, I'm making up my mind in that direction.

With the grouping, the dictionary could become two things in one: an overview-resource of all the main concepts relating to social strategies and power dynamics (the meta-summary), as well as a resource quick reference for concepts, social dynamics, and strategies (what a normal dictionary usually does).

If anyone else who's reading has an opinion on this, please let us know.

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

New entry:

Collaborative reframing ™: a strategy to turn neutral or antagonistic interactions into collaborative ones.
Explanation: it serves to remind people of the win-win opportunities of collaboration, and it increases the odds of developing win-win and value-adding relationships

We have seen several examples here already, now it has a name :).

 

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Super excited about the new lesson on social exchanges in PU.

Came up with a few new definitions.

Especially like this one for a social-exchange strategy that sits in between "social scalpers" and "naive collaborators".

It's the strategy for "smart collaborators", and it's quite central for this website's philosophy, since the aim of TPM is to make people high-power, high-value smart collaborators.

It's called (so far):

Fair value marketing, social: in social exchanges, to appropriately sell and present one's own contributions and value-offering in a way that other people will correctly value and appreciate.
Conversely, to address "social scalping" attempts by more manipulative and Machiavellian individuals to avoid that they claim too much credit for their contributions.
This is the "smart collaborator" approach.

Explanation: imagine "social exchange marketing" on a continuum.
Clueless people fail to have their contributions and value-offering properly valued, and they fail to spot or correct individuals who devalue their contributions ("credit erasing") and/or inflate their own contributions ("social scalping").
At the opposite end of the spectrum, manipulators seek to devalue other people's contributions, and inflate their own.
Fair value marketing sits in the middle, and it's the equivalent of assertiveness in social skills. It assertively seeks win-win.


Feedback is very welcome. Especially "tough love" feedback.

Can you think of a more intuitive name?

And does the infographic look too childish with the cats figures?

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Just boom.

I think the names you found are clear and self-explanatory. My input for another name: "fair collaborator". I think "smart collaborator" is better. I think the cat pictures are fine. I think choosing animals is good (dogs, etc.). What other designs did you have in mind?

The other concept that resembles the most that could inspire you is from Cipolla: "intelligent people"

The only thing I would change is the alignment of the words above "Smart Collaborator", etc. to make it easier to read. Same for the text below the images, making two separate lines:

Under-sells

Over-values

Instead of the "/" separating it

Thank you, John!

And yes, Cipolla's quadrant is quite similar.
This is the same concept applied to social exchanges / social relationships / deals.

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?