Steve, don't be such a hardass. I remember what you told me over PM, but I'm not talking out of my ass, either, so at least hear me out before putting words into my mouth.

I never said that being a generally good person (which, one would presume, involves being a good, kind, attentive listener) is manipulative. What I said was: abusing others' selfishness to your own benefit is bad. Doing so subtly, in ways which the other person doesn't perceive (and are, I'd like to add, of no positive influence to anyone), - doubly so. With those, you're putting yourself in a higher social position with nothing but air; anyone taking even a glance of a critical look at you will see how shallow you are if that's the only way you influence people.

Don't get me wrong: treating people well is what I will vote for ten days out of ten. I think people deserve to be treated well at all times and even despite certain misdemeanors: for example, being rude is forgivable when one's rude under pressure of their personal issues; shit, stealing my stuff is fine if you needed it so much more than I did (like life-and-death-or-serious-injury situations) and didn't have time or opportunity (or mindset) to ask for it, especially if it's something big.

The way it's described in the book, though? No way I'm employing all of it: it would be disrespectful to others' personal space and identity to make them want to do what I wish them to do. People liking me for it is simply not worth it if I violate their right to choose by manipulating their opinion to my favour. Hell, it's called "How to Win Friends and Influence People": of course there's going to be some manipulation involved.

The book has some real good advice to follow, but notice how, in the supercondensed edition posted above, there isn't a single word about respect to others, about commiting yourself to others in healthy ways so they feel that you genuinely care about them, or even about using those methods for good rather than resorting to ego-masturbation. I can only presume that the book itself is like this, as well: why would you drop such important parts when making the list?

Sure, you'll have a lot of "friends" afterwards, but how does it matter if none of them's going to appreciate you for what you are rather than what you present yourself as? I'm presuming here that a lot of the users of the methods are going to be those who care more for their egos to be stroked than for genuine involvement and the sense of integrity within a relationship - which, I grant you, might not necessarily be the case, but why else would you want to employ a lot of the advice given in the book (that is, the part that tells one to "do this when that happens": sounds like a ill-intended methodological approach men and women use to date each other sometimes)? Why not go for much more common-sense, reasonable and natural method of "Hey, I like you; you're a human being, and I respect you for that unless you happen to lose that respect by doing something so bad I can't stand it; with that in mind, let's spend time together to see if we're compatible any more"?

Maybe I'm not seeing things straight about this situation, but so far, this list of advice seems half good and half terrible for any human being to follow. I don't see how making others feel superficially better is of benefit to anyone. Let them like you for what you're really worth, and if you can't provide, you better start acting like a decent human being, and this list of advices won't help you with that.

P.S. Shouldn't have called you a hardass. I apologize for that.