>> ^Payback:
If Imperial is so much better, why is pot not sold by pound and ounce?

It is if you're not one of those skeezy gram buying cheapos. Sack up and by and eighth...an eighth of what you ask? An eighth of an ounce. If you're flippin birds big time you could be buying a pound (16 oz) of marijuana. Now, it gets tricky when you're buying grams cause there's some conversion involved. There's about 28.3 grams per ounce. So buy a $300 ounce, sell it as $20 grams and you've made roughly $560-$300=$260 profit. Now you'll be tempted to do half-eighths for $25, but you're actually losing about $10 dollars on the deal as that person is getting about 1.75 grams for $25 bucks. That's an extra .75 grams for $5! Save the price break for the bigger clients or long time clients that will come back with business for you later.

Do this a couple times and build a rapport with your dealer and you will be buying cheap half pounds to pounds of weed. Now with this quantity it's better to sell them as half to full ounces.

Not that I know...

>> ^ponceleon:
Actually, when you see what he does, it seems easier than normal comedy. Half the jokes were just what the audience said. I'm not criticizing, he definitely has a rapport with the audience to encourage them to say inane things, but I don't think it is especially hard perse. Again, love the guy, he IS very funny.


Hrm.. It's probably hard to appreciate just how difficult that is without doing it. I think it'd require a quick wit and a razor sharp sense of humor to take the jumbled thoughts that the audience throws at you, pick out what is genuinely funny, and expand upon that. Much harder and stressful than regurgitating a well rehearsed performance.

Anyways, the fact that Jimmy Carr makes it seem so natural and easy is amazing.

>> ^BreaksTheEarth:
I can't think of any other comedian who would dare to have this level of audience participation. Going to one of his shows must be completely awesome.


Actually, when you see what he does, it seems easier than normal comedy. Half the jokes were just what the audience said. I'm not criticizing, he definitely has a rapport with the audience to encourage them to say inane things, but I don't think it is especially hard perse. Again, love the guy, he IS very funny.

^The situations you suggest are created by Brown. I should have mentioned in my previous post that he is a showman, and a former conman. All of the "this is a unique situation" and (if you've seen it) the Russian Roulette bit is set up. The participants are screened without their knowledge, and often groomed for weeks. What's great is that Brown is upfront about these fact. But the setup is only what creates the drama, and not what seals the deal itself--that's the NLP.

I understand the skepticism, but if you read some actual NLP literature (eg. rapport, anchoring and reframing) and try some of it for yourself, you'll get the idea pretty quickly that theses techniques are responsible for the effects you see in Brown's performance.

Hey, I was watching you video on Vincent Bugliosi and the second. In his second video he establishes a rapport with the lady who asked him about WMDs. You can see her head shaking with ever down note in his voice. (Nodding up and down - agreement) This is what causes him to escalate , and also causes the gentlemen to the right of the chairmen to start to get a little worried. I think that the guy to the right was clearly scared of what was about what was happening.

Helluva speech.

Fixed my silly typo. Thanks!

In reply to this comment by HaricotVert:
repore = rapport

word.

In reply to this comment by jwray:
my mistake.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
You downvoted my comment on this video, and then you elaborated on the same point I was making.

?

In reply to this comment by jwray:
Alienation does not elicit the truthtelling. Unfalsifiable stories are easily fabricated. Torture does not work. A slow process of building rapport does work.

my mistake.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
You downvoted my comment on this video, and then you elaborated on the same point I was making.

?

In reply to this comment by jwray:
Alienation does not elicit the truthtelling. Unfalsifiable stories are easily fabricated. Torture does not work. A slow process of building rapport does work.

You downvoted my comment on this video, and then you elaborated on the same point I was making.

?

In reply to this comment by jwray:
Alienation does not elicit the truthtelling. Unfalsifiable stories are easily fabricated. Torture does not work. A slow process of building rapport does work.

where's the "best dressed" and "most likely to succeed" panels?

Seriously, how about a useful sidebar panel like "Newest Probie Submissions" or something that benefits those who don't have the rapport of a circle jerking veteran like we all do.

Alienation does not elicit the truthtelling. Unfalsifiable stories are easily fabricated. Torture does not work. A slow process of building rapport does work.

As many have said over and over in this thread in many shades of seriousness and sarcasm, torture isn't reliable or effective, so ruling it out doesn't really make a lot of difference in your exciting scenario.

According to people who do this kind of thing for a living, building a rapport with the prisoner is the most effective means of extracting information.

I suppose I would follow whatever FBI protocol is most effective in these situations based on past experience. I'm sure you could find a book or article about what those particulars might be if you are as curious as you claim to be. I'd probably also look for other leads.

I thought you would appreciate this:

Reaction to Snakes
• Civilian: Runs away from the snake screaming.
• Paratrooper: Lands on and kills the snake.
• Armor: runs over snake, giggles, and looks for more snakes.
• Infantry: "Look, a pussy cat. Come 'ere kitty....Ouch! Hey, that's not a pussy cat."
• Army Aviation: Has GPS grid to snake. Can't find snake. Back to base for crew rest and the club and some sort of drink called "The Snake."
• Ranger: Plays with the snake, then eats it.
• 2nd Ranger: Assaults the snake's home and secures it for use by friendly snakes.
• MI: analyzes all available intelligence and national asset input on the reptilian situation; reports sighting of Godzilla to National Command Authority.
• JAG: Advises the snake on the rules of engagement and the law of war as it pertains to the snake and its defensive posture.
• Quartermaster: Captures snake and applies a NSN to it. Implements a FOI procedure and picks up snake on property book. Has company commander sign hand receipt for "Snake, Green, One Each," as non-expendable unit property.
• Chemical Corps: Starts to gas the little booger, but then realizes that there is an M-18, A-2 Respirator especially made for snakes, remembers the Chemical Corps Motto, "UTRWBAG" (Up Their Rear With Bugs and Gas), and conducts three experiments on it that have been strictly prohibited by the Clinton Treaty of 1999.
• Navy SEAL: Expends all ammunition, several grenades and calls for naval gunfire in a failed attempt to kill the snake. The snake bites the SEAL then retreats to safety.
• Artillery: Kills snake, but in the process kills several hundred civilians with a massive TOT with three FA BDEs in support. Mission is considered a success and all participants (cooks, mechanics, clerks) are awarded Silver Stars.
• Marine Recon: Follows the snake and gets lost.
• Pathfinder: Guides the snake elsewhere.
• AF Fighter Pilot: Mis-identifies the snake as a Russian HIND helicopter and engages it with missiles. Crew chief paints a snake on airplane.
• AF Pararescue: Wounds the snake in first encounter, then feverishly works to save the snake's life.
• Green Beret: Makes contact with the snake, builds rapport, wins its heart and mind, then trains it to kill other snakes.

Call me an idiot, but I highly doubt the Kremlin OR Putin would find her work SO THREATENING that they had to send government assassins to take her down. Especially after watching the Orange revolution unfold from the same exact way in Ukraine. Are the Russian government so stupid to do such a thing??? This is downright fantasy level conspiracy theory. You wanna see what you WANNA see, that being me and you both.

Just because she was against the Russian government, the culprit automatically becomes that of her enemies in life. Russia has had a lot of fishy underhanded activities before and it's justified that they should be the prime suspects. But in this case it just doesn't make sense.

The rational explanation would be that a former Russian soldier who served in Chechnya hated her biased journalism so much that he took the matter into his own hands. You guys do realize that she has an extremely leftist liberal outlook, and was never liked by the Russian troops. War is brutal, for both parties. Yet she always sided with the Chechnyans, and that pissed off a lot of Russian patriots who always thought her works were unfair and biased and always downplayed the brutality of Chechnya rebels and only focusing on the retaliation acts of Russian soldiers.

Part of being a journalist is having tolerable rapport and non-biased views of the situation, and report the situation as is, without one's own analysis. Imagine how our troops feel if you went to Iraq as a journalist and constantly complained and criticized US troops for bombarding Afghans and starving Iraqi children, yet report how awful the Americans are because they're terrorizing the neighborhood with random raids and patrols but getting anything done, and that they're useless, and blame all the collateral damage on them. And the reporter is here to interview you about how futile the US efforts are in Middle east, while you lay in bed with a charred leg from an roadside IED, and just got back from a friend's funeral.

Your feelings to strangle the reporter is justified at that point. Well at least American journalists are trained to be unbiased and fair, which is very hard to do and often a forgotten art nowadays.

Anna Politkovskaya, on the other hand, never tried to understand Russians' side of the aspect, like many many other ultra liberal crazies. Yes we should mourn for her death, but don't justify her loss by saying 'she was right about everything'. Because she was a very biased journalist who provoked and enraged the Russian soldiers.


My god, the more I read about you guys posts, more I realize how sickened I am by ultra liberal craziness. I think you guys are starting to turn me into a hard ass conservative Republican!! 0_o What have you done to me?!?!!? (although Republicans hate Russians just as much as any other. A common trait throughout American history. Shared hatred against enemy FTW! Reunite the nation by focusing on hating Russia!!!)

Did Letterman just call his show The Colbert Rapport?