Alt.Seduction.Fast (ASF) was a Usenet newsgroup that served as an early hub for the pickup artist (PUA) community, with ties to the broader incelosphere in the 1990s. It gained notoriety for being a central platform for discussing strategies and sharing experiences related to seduction techniques, most notably those developed by Ross Jeffries, the creator of Speed Seduction™. This method of seduction integrated concepts from Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) and hypnosis to enhance communication efficacy with women.

The foundation of ASF was rooted in providing a focal point for individuals interested in the art of seduction. It was structured to serve multiple functions within the confines of its online space:

1. ASF offered a community where subscribers could gather to exchange ideas and share opinions on Jeffries’ theories and practices. By fostering an environment built on communication and shared learning, users catalyzed the evolution of seduction strategies and patterns within the group.

2. The newsgroup also functioned as a resource for individuals looking to learn about Speed Seduction™. Prospective customers or followers could inquire about the approach, seeking guidance from more experienced group members.

3. In addition to guidance, ASF provided newcomers with a platform to experiment with the tactics they had learned. These “field tests” of newly devised patterns or techniques were critiqued and honed with input from seasoned practitioners.

4. Beyond the practical applications of seduction, ASF also served as a meeting point for enthusiasts and customers to engage in casual conversations and build camaraderie with like-minded individuals.

Despite its original aspirations as a space for learning and development, ASF grew to be perceived as controversial and polarizing due to the nature of its content. Criticisms ranged from ethical concerns about the manipulation of emotional states for seduction to the legal implications of sharing copyrighted Speed Seduction™ material without permission. Debates within the community often centered on the potential for misuse of the seduction techniques, with detractors arguing that it encouraged dishonesty and deception.

In response to these disputes, ASF had a strict set of guidelines for its members. Rules strictly prohibited spamming, disruption of the newsgroup, and the promotion of products unrelated to Speed Seduction™ without adhering to certain criteria. Additionally, there were measures in place against flaming, crossposting in inappropriate forums, and the unauthorized sharing of proprietary material. These rules were established not only to maintain order within the group but also to protect the intellectual property of Ross Jeffries and uphold the integrity of the Speed Seduction™ brand.

Common terminology used within ASF included acronyms and phrases specific to the community, such as “AFC” (Average Frustrated Chump), “PUA” (Pick Up Artist), “HB” (Hot Babe), and “neg hit” (a backhanded compliment intended to pique a woman’s interest). The frequent use of these terms and others like them contributed to the creation of a distinct jargon that became a hallmark of the PUA community.

Despite the tools and strategies shared on ASF being cloaked in a language of empowerment and self-improvement, the newsgroup and its associated practices were met with an array of ethical concerns. Reality Spirituality Unveiled Detractors of ASF and Speed Seduction™ raised concerns about the potential for the techniques to be wielded unethically, arguing that they could be manipulative, and that the intentions behind their use might not always be honorable. ASF’s proponents, however, maintained that Speed Seduction™ was about effective communication rather than coercion, emphasizing that the techniques could only evoke feelings that were already present in the other person.

Amidst the controversy, ASF played a pivotal role in shaping the early seduction community, influencing later developments in the field. The newsgroup served as a precursor to later online forums and communities dedicated to seduction techniques and dating advice. It functioned as a microcosm for the challenges faced by emerging online communities, balancing freedom of expression and innovation with the need for regulation and ethical considerations.



Speed Seduction FAQ: This section aimed to address common questions regarding the effectiveness of Ross Jeffries’s techniques, their application across different contexts, and the ethical implications of their use. Jeffries himself had posted responses, claiming the value of Speed Seduction™ in helping individuals improve their communication and interaction with women.

Criticisms & Responses: Here, the FAQ tackled some of the frequent criticisms directed toward Speed Seduction™. Responses generally underscored that any form of communication can be perceived as manipulating and that Speed Seduction™ was simply a more focused application of persuasive language techniques.

Contact Information: The FAQ included details for reaching out to Odious or Jeffries for further inquiries, demonstrating an effort to remain accessible and open to dialogue despite the contentious nature of the ASF content.

As the internet evolved with the advent of social media and specialized forums, the relevance and activity of ASF began to wane. However, the legacy of ASF has persisted, particularly in the form of ongoing debates over the ethics of seduction techniques and how they intersect with respect to consent and transparency.

Furthermore, ASF highlighted the potential for the internet to act as a catalyst in forming subcultures with their own coded lexicons, hierarchies, and ideologies. While ASF has retreated into the background of the online seduction narrative, its influence continues to be felt in prospective domains of pickup arts and the broader socio-sexual discourse on the internet. The discussions and methodologies that were honed within ASF are echoes in contemporary discussions on masculinity, dating, and human relationships.

Despite this, the criticisms that were initially laid out against ASF remain pertinent today. Questions of manipulative tactics and the objectification of women are central to ongoing debates about the role of seduction communities in modern society. Advocates for ethical seduction practices argue for a focus on consent, authenticity, and mutual respect, ideas that confront the more controversial sides of ASF’s legacy.

In reviewing ASF and its contributions to the early digital culture around seduction, it is important to contextualize its development within the larger narrative of internet history and the fascinating ways virtual platforms can shape and reflect human social behavior.

The rise and gradual decline of ASF parallel the early days of internet communities, bearing witness to the period when digital spaces began to influence offline dynamics in significant ways. The ASF’s stories, victories, and controversies fed into a larger societal conversation about gender dynamics, social interactions, and the complexities of attraction.

Alt.Seduction.Fast was not just another message board—it became emblematic of a subculture and a type of thinking that continues to find iterations in the current digital landscape. It raises questions about the internet’s role in supporting niche ideologies and fostering collective identity formation. Could ASF have been a formative step in showcasing how online communities could mobilize, develop, and propagate specific viewpoints? The subsequent rise of websites, blogs, and online coaching services for pickup artists suggests that ASF’s influence was far-reaching.

This newsgroup pointed to both the positive and negative aspects of cultural self-organization on the web. On the one hand, ASF highlighted the potential for shared learning, network formation, and empowerment; on the other, it also showcased the risks inherent in echo chambers, the amplification of questionable ethics, and potential harms arising from unregulated advice-sharing.

Viewed through a wider lens, ASF’s story is about more than seduction techniques; it’s about the evolving ethics and responsibility of online communities. As ASF members increasingly learned and shared more about each other’s experiences, the platform morphed into a real-time laboratory for sociocultural development and group dynamics—all at a time when such experiments were novel and largely unregulated by societal norms that hadn’t yet caught up with the speed of digital technology.

In documenting the existence and impact of ASF, one must also address the problems it helped surface regarding anonymity and accountability online. Participants in ASF could hide behind screen names, providing them the freedom to express ideas without fear of retribution but also creating an environment where disrespect and harmful ideologies could be propagated without much consequence.

The conversational style and tactics discussed within the ASF community were a direct precursor to modern social tactics used in dating apps and other platforms where communication is heavily text-driven. The patterns of engagement first outlined in ASF posts are seen in the emoji-laden conversations of today’s Tinder and Bumble exchanges. Language, regardless of medium, carries power, and ASF was at the forefront of exploring how that power could be harnessed within interpersonal relationships.

As we look back, it is imperative to view ASF not in isolation but as a foundational stone in the evolution of online communities centered on dating advice. While the explicit techniques of the ASF days may have evolved or been abandoned, the overarching themes—including the desire for connection, the use of language as a tool for engagement, and the moral concerns surrounding the dynamics of pursuit—remain as relevant as ever.

In the end, ASF serves as both a historical footnote and a mirror reflecting broader social dynamics and debates. Its influence on the PUA community, the discussions it sparked about consent and communication, and the patterns of interaction it introduced have become part of the intricate web that is modern social interaction, both online and offline. As such, its legacy demands critical examination, and despite its cessation, its echoes will continue to reverberate through the vast halls of internet history.