Sociopath Community

Dude, how are you still this triggered and salty? 

Slay:
Words = dont take at face value.
Unless you're an idiot like chapo
And get cucked out of $500 bucks

Slay:
These are the reasons I stated btw: to break down other people's larps/see their copes/defense mechanisms, etc.
Attacking people in certain ways tells you about who they really are

Slay:
Ways that you can't achieve by being less polarizing
Becayse you need to engage the the ego
and their emotions, and investment
to really understand someone
vs what they might like to present as
which is usually just a front that is fake
and does nothing for me

Slay:
Because I like interesting people
And that way I can sift through the trash quite easily.
Garbage = discarded
Potential = I work with and delve deeper into them.
And drop my "larp"
After they've been tested.
and ofc, passed that test

Slay:
Me saying I use a certain tactic for interesting people doesn't mean it's always used for the same reason. I like engaging in this form of bullying, testing other people's mental strength behavior, etc because

Slay:
1. Entertainment
2. It keeps you learning and thinking
Requires you to use your brain and constantly update on people's behaviors
and it is very high-paced thing.
So it's fun.
But you seem schizoid/autistic
0so it won't be you're thing you're too retarded no offense
your*
But also.

Slay:
Time and time again I've had people tell me that I've pointed out something that no one ever has about them, some small detail that is quite significant in some way.

Slay:
So my observational skills are at an extremely high skill level

Slay:
The thing I've had to work on was communicating that
and being succinct about it
So that my point gets across more smoothly to the more retarded and vulnerable parties.
Socially yes, I have a very hard time understanding these types of behaviors - I am far more intelligent when it comes to numbers and logical structures. - Yeah that's autism.
I could tell immediately that you had ASD traits by how you initially tried putting social interactions into rigid systems
But, you could have also been baiting but I thought it was more of an ASD thing.
Be back later. Good talk

Like seriously how are you narcing out this hard? You lost, swallow that pill and grow up instead of acting like a petulant child. 

At least it's fun to wake up to your sperging, I hope you never get over this mark on your e-rep. You only make that plane trip he took more and more valuable as you keep freaking out like a bitch. 

In life, you win some and you lose some, and the sooner you swallow your loss in the form of Chapo's e-load, the sooner you can move on, but if you can't then you will be our punching bag in the meantime over starting something you were too weak spirited to finish, no different from Cawk. 

I've been reading about Narcs in order to understand discord interactions I've seen this past week and how it is their arguments could possibly make sense to them.

They have a high level of rationalization when confronted with their delusions, this seems to manifest as choice-supportive bias.

I think that was exemplified clearly here. 

AliceInWonderland said: 

I've been reading about Narcs in order to understand discord interactions I've seen this past week and how it is their arguments could possibly make sense to them.

They have a high level of rationalization when confronted with their delusions, this seems to manifest as choice-supportive bias.

I think that was exemplified clearly here. 

Narcs when their will is weaker will attempt to use people to confirm their delusions, which is what makes times like now where we're blatantly laughing at his failure all the better. Their unrealistic sense of certainty has a way of tricking people into thinking they know what they're talking about ala Dunning Kruger, and he's clearly used to this to the point of delusionally believed privileges to the point of Fragility. 

He's desperately grasping for enablers during a time we aren't there, and we even saw him come back on when he thought Jim was on his side only to leave immediately after he started clowning his ass raw. 

We have quite a few of them here, they go to ad hom faster than most people. 

Turncoat said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

I've been reading about Narcs in order to understand discord interactions I've seen this past week and how it is their arguments could possibly make sense to them.

They have a high level of rationalization when confronted with their delusions, this seems to manifest as choice-supportive bias.

I think that was exemplified clearly here. 

Narcs when their will is weaker will attempt to use people to confirm their delusions, which is what makes times like now where we're blatantly laughing at his failure all the better. Their unrealistic sense of certainty has a way of tricking people into thinking they know what they're talking about ala Dunning Kruger, and he's clearly used to this to the point of delusionally believed privileges to the point of Fragility. 

Danny-Kruger Effect: In the field of psychology, the Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people with low ability at a task overestimate their ability.

You mentioned this the other day. 

Its manifestation here is Slay believing that he is Machiavellian genius who is capable of above average levels of observation which then leads to a notion of overall superiority. 

They reinforce these ideas about themselves through rationalization and a form of confirmation bias where they are selective of those who they let into their inner circle. 

The rationalization as exemplified here is X can partake in the same exact behavior as Y but X maintains their superiority over Y because X is in control and Y is not X has reason to act like Y while Y does not have reasons. Essentially there are always reasons that separate X and Y in X's eyes despite the fact that when an outsider is observing X and Y exhibit the same behaviors. 

He's desperately grasping for enablers during a time we aren't there, and we even saw him come back on when he thought Jim was on his side only to leave immediately after he started clowning his ass raw. 

We have quite a few of them here. 

 The idea of conformation bias comes in here with this example and in a more extreme way with the existence of his server and how he maintains it. For instance I have been removed (I think, I was in his server and since this drama began I am not) and I witnessed him mute an individual who was ragging on him after the Chapo situation while egging on other users calling him a King. 

This could be considered a manifestation of Selective exposure theory. 

He's also been projecting so hard that he's accusing others of it on loop. 

On some level he's aware of the situation but is otherwise trying to tune it out, and we see this in the form of his attacks against us. We're basically a mirror towards his own self-reporting, like when he accuses an entire crowd of people of pretending to not be mad as he pretends not to be (in spite of very obvious triggered symptoms). It's so bad that he's accusing a conspiracy of having his feelings rather than just face them himself. 

Try asking him questions about himself, as is he's struggled to negatively self-direct unless it's proxied through other people. His lashing out is effectively him Live Journaling, which is why it's fun to keep him talking. People in general have an easier time talking about what's already on their mind, and this is the only way he can. 

Big narc cope 

AliceInWonderland said: 

Turncoat said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

I've been reading about Narcs in order to understand discord interactions I've seen this past week and how it is their arguments could possibly make sense to them.

They have a high level of rationalization when confronted with their delusions, this seems to manifest as choice-supportive bias.

I think that was exemplified clearly here. 

Narcs when their will is weaker will attempt to use people to confirm their delusions, which is what makes times like now where we're blatantly laughing at his failure all the better. Their unrealistic sense of certainty has a way of tricking people into thinking they know what they're talking about ala Dunning Kruger, and he's clearly used to this to the point of delusionally believed privileges to the point of Fragility. 

Danny-Kruger Effect: In the field of psychology, the Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people with low ability at a task overestimate their ability.

You mentioned this the other day. 

In this case I was referring to how it can affect those around them. By appearing confident in spite of a lack of credentials and stating things in an easy to understand way, you inspire others to believe in you through them thinking they understand it through you. This is how people can find themselves sucked into a narc's certainty, and in turn how a self-crafted group of enablers can train them to perpetuate the grandiosity. 

It's a hilariously nasty feedback loop to have people trust a narc's claims. 

Slay said: 

This is called bandaging the ego before it gets raped.

My abnormal psych class would have been way more fun if they taught theory like this.

Turncoat said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

Turncoat said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

I've been reading about Narcs in order to understand discord interactions I've seen this past week and how it is their arguments could possibly make sense to them.

They have a high level of rationalization when confronted with their delusions, this seems to manifest as choice-supportive bias.

I think that was exemplified clearly here. 

Narcs when their will is weaker will attempt to use people to confirm their delusions, which is what makes times like now where we're blatantly laughing at his failure all the better. Their unrealistic sense of certainty has a way of tricking people into thinking they know what they're talking about ala Dunning Kruger, and he's clearly used to this to the point of delusionally believed privileges to the point of Fragility. 

Danny-Kruger Effect: In the field of psychology, the Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people with low ability at a task overestimate their ability.

You mentioned this the other day. 

In this case I was referring to how it can affect those around them. By appearing confident in spite of a lack of credentials and stating things in an easy to understand way, you inspire others to believe in you through them thinking they understand it through you. This is how people can find themselves sucked into a narc's certainty, and in turn how a self-crafted group of enablers can train them to perpetuate the grandiosity. 

It's a hilariously nasty feedback loop to have people trust a narc's claims. 

 I actually saw something like this discussed the other day, though I do not recall what the phenomenon is called. 

 The theory stated was that a person with higher intelligence can convince people of things can as consequence gain a position of   leadership over them but there's a limit to the process where if you are such and such number of deviations more intelligent than the individuals you are convincing they will no longer believe or follow you do to a break down in communication. 

If I recall it was stated that 30 IQ points was the key number that if you exceed that over your peers they will no longer follow you. 

Tryptamine said: 

Slay said: 

This is called bandaging the ego before it gets raped.

My abnormal psych class would have been way more fun if they taught theory like this.

 A book that teaches layman social psychology with the goal of larping on chat sites would probably be popular. 

AliceInWonderland said:

I actually saw something like this discussed the other day, though I do not recall what the phenomenon is called.

The theory stated was that a person with higher intelligence can convince people of things can as consequence gain a position of leadership over them but there's a limit to the process where if you are such and such number of deviations more intelligent than the individuals you are convincing they will no longer believe or follow you do to a break down in communication.

If I recall it was stated that 30 IQ points was the key number that if you exceed that over your peers they will no longer follow you.

This reminds me of an article I read a long while back, some of which addresses that.

https://prometheussociety.org/wp/articles/the-outsiders/ said:

The data show three things. First, that there is a definite trend for the maladjusted to make higher scores on the Concept Mastery test. Second, that women show symptoms of maladjustment at lower scores than men. And third, that 21 percent of the men and 18 percent of the women showed at least some form of maladjustment.

During 1950-52, when the group was approximately 41 years old, another examination was made using a new test, the Concept Mastery test form T. Test scores were again compared to assessments of adjustment. (CMT-T scores are not interchangeable with CMT-A scores. They have different means and standard deviations.)



Similar conclusions can be drawn from these data as well. Again, there is a definite trend shown for the maladjusted to make higher scores than the satisfactorily adjusted. Again, women show symptoms of maladjustment at lower scores than men. But the most alarming thing of all is that the percentage of maladjustment shown for both sexes rose in the 12 years since the previous examination. The percentage of men showing maladjustment having risen from 21 percent to 29 percent, and the figure for women having risen from 18 percent to 33 percent! Nearly double what it was before!