So There's a New Article on Vice about Tulpas

[Pleeb]

While we're not selling a product, we are selling awareness. And while this article might not be showing tulpas in the best light, it does the job of getting tulpas out there to more people. Even someone from this thread noted that they found tulpa.info through that article. Besides, from an academic point of view, I've talked with enough psychologists to know that many of them are able to see past the negative light for legitimate research, and this is going on around us right now as more in academia are giving an eye towards tulpas.

 

The key to bad publicity is turning it around for our benefit. We'll undoubtedly have more people googling tulpas then we did before this article was published. When they find our site, we'll educate them on the subject and help further spread awareness.

[Argentum]

P.s. everyone hating on the bronies must have missed the furry on the head of that article :p

 

No, we didn't miss it. We just didn't want to rustle any (sensitive) jimmies.

 

This sort of feedback is to be expected from the media. They like drama, they like shock factor. There's a reason why good news doesn't sell, people would rather talk about the negative. Even on this forum, there's plenty of talk about this article, yet tulpa.info was mentioned in an academic paper just a bit ago (on academia.edu, yet) and nobody bats an eye. Heck, I've just recently been interviewed by a professor who is writing a book on the subject, while other people I know are talking to people in their universities about tulpas. Nobody talks about this though, they're assuming the worst from the news media.

 

If its academic, I suppose its better than it being painted as a way for male furries to achieve their sexual fantasies. However, I have always thought that any publicity is bad publicity for the tulpa community. People bring drama, and drama pushes out all the serious ones.

 

While we're not selling a product, we are selling awareness. And while this article might not be showing tulpas in the best light, it does the job of getting tulpas out there to more people. Even someone from this thread noted that they found tulpa.info through that article. Besides, from an academic point of view, I've talked with enough psychologists to know that many of them are able to see past the negative light for legitimate research, and this is going on around us right now as more in academia are giving an eye towards tulpas.

 

Why do you want awareness man? I guess its nice that there are smart people willing to give people with imaginary friends a second chance but, this community won't revert back to when it was nice if you bring more people in. I think more people will just dilute the community down further. Unless quantity rather than quality is your goal, I don't think that is the best course of action. Bad publicity is bad publicity, and if people see the article and think that the whole point of tulpas is a magical sex toy, then they not only miss the point but throw embarrassment on everyone else who is legitimate.

 

Maybe academia will bring in more professors who want imaginary friends. I wouldn't mind chilling with old dudes if they were honest and serious when they needed to be.

 

The key to bad publicity is turning it around for our benefit. We'll undoubtedly have more people googling tulpas then we did before this article was published. When they find our site, we'll educate them on the subject and help further spread awareness.

 

What I said above. How is it a benefit to anything but the advertisements on the site to get more eyeballs on it? Sure you can bring a horse (pony...?) to a water hole, but you can't make him drink. They won't read stuff. They will read maybe one guide, take fifteen minutes to decide, and commit to something that should take considerable thought before throwing yourself into. Again I'm not sure if you want quantity or quality, but if you think that more tulpas is good, I have to disagree.

 

----

 

The point of tulpamancy is introspection and meditation - however, many people do not use it for said purpose. A lot of tulpamancers don't know how to meditate and lack the skill to look at themselves from a 3rd person perspective. This is why you'll meet a lot of members that you can not take seriously - because they don't take this practice as seriously as you (the presumably "serious tulpamancer") do. This article (nor any other article) can't damage the practice itself, no matter how hard it tries to. It might ruin the reputation of tulpas - but, really, how good did you think this community's reputation was in the first place? I see people within the community saying that this community is "shit" all over the place, so it would be wrong to assume that this article changed anything, or that any type of news report Fox or any other news channel can make will make this community look any worse than it already does. Perhaps that's what you should be focusing on, instead of this article.

 

I guess... it's not exactly about the reputation. Its more about the crowd of people that hangs out here. I'll try to explain.

 

Sure tups were always thought of as being something dumb, and sure the tulpa community looks crazy, but at least it was mostly relevant, mostly serious people. Maybe the grass always looks greener on the other side, but the beginning of the community was probably the best time of the community. The community from what I heard was thought of as crazy, but if I were around back then, I wouldn't mind it as long as the people in it were reasonable.

 

Then came along shitposters, drama queens, and the like. If the community was still crazy and had a large section of these types of people I would go very quickly and find or start a greener pasture.

 

So what I am trying to say is that it depends on the kind of crazy that is in the community, at least for me.

[FurryBlueNaki]

I found tulpa.info through looking up tulpas dangerous as Google suggested.