My goodness. So much wrong with just 1 comment. Where do I even begin.

In the TRP sense, absolutely. OP's postulate was that TRP techniques create a selection bias because they only work on subset of women. Women who aren't receptive to these techniques would then [sexually] avoid a user of them.

First off. "Avoid" is a word. It's a verb that refers to the act of deliberately making an effort to stay out of someone's way - trying not to come into contact with them. That's what it means. It had that meaning before and after I clicked subscribe on TRP. You don't get to decide what words mean. You don't get to change the meaning of a word, especially not to try and save face after you got called out for misusing said word.

Now, I'm not blind or retarded. I noticed how you sneakily tried to add the word "sexually" in there to redeem the original post. First it was:

Any women who these tactics would not work on will actively start to avoid the man using those tactics.

Which you're now trying to rationalize to mean:

That woman has chosen to [sexually] avoid you.

No. No dude. Slipping the word "sexually" in there already changes the meaning of that entire sentence. That's not what OP was referring to, which is why he sat the fuck down and stopped responding. He knew he was wrong and couldn't go on defending that stance. But let's pretend he did mean that - but just didn't clarify for some unknown reason - and continue where he left off.

"Sexually avoid"? What the fuck is this then? A quick google search shows that this is clearly not a term that anyone but you the uses for anything. It's like.. staying out of someone's way, only...sexually? How would that work? If you're in a sexual encounter with someone, you've already not really avoided them. Those 2 words kind of defeat each other.

It doesn't mean she ran away screaming, it just means she's not having sex with you.

So now you're trying rationalize the term "sexually avoid" to mean "not having sex". But that's the default relationship that literally everyone has with almost everyone else on the planet. Why use the term "sexually avoid" to describe that? There's already a term that refers to the state of not having sex. It's called..... "NOT HAVING SEX".

Your response was "no woman has avoided me for a year!" which cannot be true unless you've plated 100% of your targets for that year, right?

No. When I say that no woman has avoided me for a year, that means exactly what the words themselves mean. That I haven't been avoided for a year. Me being RP doesn't magically change the dictionary definition of "avoid".

This decision may be due to random noise or may be directly due to your [TRP-ish] actions, there's no way to know.

... Not a single time has a woman reacted purely negatively to me. Sure, not every woman I pursue agrees to fuck me within a few hours of meeting me. Sure not every woman agrees to come to my house after a short text convo on tinder. You're absolutely right. But never have I been met with a "fuck off creep" or a cold shoulder or "yeah I have to go now" or "nah, no way" or a woman tossing her drink on my face or anything like that. This TRP hysteria that BPers imagine all women experiencing is an utter myth. I'm not going around with "RED PILL 4 LYF" tattooed on my forehead. They don't know I read TRP. All they see is some fit dude with fresh clothes and hair and straight white teeth smiling at them. They don't hate that. Even I wouldn't hate that. They might not fuck that either, but they aren't repulsed at all like BPers would let you understand. I think it's because BPers fundamentally misunderstand TRP. Negs, backhanded compliments, displays of value and escalation can all be done smoothly and in a friendly, joking manner. We don't go around growling at women and grabbing their asses and yelling "FUCK ME YOU WHORE!". Like no. Wtf.

(because why be friends with a woman you aren't going to fuck amirite?)

Wrong wrong wrong. Again. Hot female friends are amazing indicators of preselection and status. Every single woman will be more receptive towards you if they see you with attractive women before talking to you. Especially the ones who claim they don't care how many girls a guy has slept with. And sometimes they can even be fun to hang out with them and share stories and make them laugh. Not to mention, they can function as safe backup fucks if your night doesn't end well. But I guess that falls outside of platonic friendship. Ugly women are garbage though, even as friends.

(...) will go unnoticed and you can further strengthen your belief in AWALT without having to reconcile this outlier.

TRP is not a guarantee that you will succeed with every single woman you want. If it did, Kate Upton and Emma Watson would have been fucked 110k times by now. Clicking a button on reddit doesn't magically transform you into some god of game. Seriously, show me the man that succeeds with any woman he approaches. I want to see him. According to you AWALT supposedly means that all women everywhere are slaves to TRP tactics no matter who is doing it. But that"s a hideous misrepresentation and you're perfectly aware of that

do you not agree that there's almost certainly a selection bias problem that contributes to the AWALT philosophy?

There would certainly be a selection bias to the imaginary scenario that you introduced. But since that doesn't in any way concern the red pill, no.

Phew, that was long.

TL;DR - You're wrong.