Wednesday, July 4, 2007

What you say when you "observe and challenge".

People who are following my template for the first open communication letter are often confused with the "observe and challenge" section.

I don't blame you. This section, when successfully accomplished, demonstrates and accomplishes a lot of things... in spite of the fact that it's only one or two sentences.

For one, it demonstrates that you're a quality person, looking for another quality person. You value yourself, and your time. You don't just talk to anybody. You read the profiles. (I hear so many complaints from women about men who don't...) And when you read the profile, you noticed something that interested you. But, being a quality person, you're not completely convinced by her words alone... she needs to demonstrate that she's "for real".

Receiving this, overall, should be considered a compliment. It implies that the two of you share some things in common that are worth exploring. And it shows the woman that, if she is the real deal (which she probably is, at least in her mind), that you'll reward her with your interest. And like I said before, women value the things they have to work for... not the things that fall into their laps. And the beauty is... she can hook you in by doing something that she already enjoys doing.

Overall, she should imagine you as a friendly, social person, with a sense of humor. Someone who shares some things in common with her, and is, potentially a great catch... that just needs to be reeled in with a little effort.

The most common errors at this phase?
  • That you're pointing out an area of dissimilarity, rather than confirming a similarity.
  • Coming off as unfriendly, harsh, or critical. Being too cocky, and not social, friendly, or funny.
  • That you're setting an impossible standard for her.
It may take some practice to get this section "right". But when you pull it off... women chase you. And that's a great thing.

2 comments:

Uncle Fester said...

You wrote on May 17-18 about addressing dissimilarities. I tried this in an OC letter that you critiqued on 6/12 and you didn't like what I did. Now you say that pointing out dissimilarities is a common error. Why the flip-flopping?

Scott Grey said...

You're right. I WAS unclear in the 5/17-18 articles, now that I reread them...

These articles were meant to cover the uncommon situation where you feel you absolutely MUST address a "red flag" issue before going further.

It's better to avoid doing it when you can. (Some things are better off discussed in person. Or, at least, on the phone.) You shouldn't do it routinely.