Let's start by
LII
ILI
or Alternative ideas
Give your impressions
Type Me
Let's start by
LII
ILI
or Alternative ideas
Give your impressions
I always seem to be attracted to your avatar anytime I try to read your posts! However, I don't have a clear reading on your type, but i'm not sure of LII - but not unsure of it either, sorry for not being too helpful, i'll try and have a look at some of your posts.
Removed at User Request
I dunno man, do you think we were activating this whole time?
The saddest ESFj
...
Lol noOriginally Posted by electric sheep
Alright let me post this in before I forget (don't type me on this, what I'll end up posting is better)...... I'll come back and edit this later, I just want to get these categories so I remember....
Daily Routine
Not a fan of routines
Usually I wake up and think about what it is I have to do, get that done first or schedule it later in the day, and then spend my day chasing whatever it is I feel like doing, if I don't feel like doing anything in particular I either sit at the computer and pick around on games and music, or I go drive or hang out with friends. However mostly I always have some kind of project I am working on to keep me occupied in my own time.
I spend a lot of time just getting some coffee and crusing in my car listening to music or thinking, it calms me down usually and jogs my mind (unless traffic is horrible), it also helps insert breaks in between activites, I would ideally prefer to walk but usually I always feel akward walking by myself because so many people are so deterministic about where they walk to that if they saw a person walking just to walk I'm afraid they'd find me suspicious, that and I talk aloud to myself when I think, and people would find that odd, but you can get away with that while driving.
Also while I don't like routines I will spontaneous do some routines, like eat a particular resteraunt a lot one week, like every day, then all of sudden without any well thought out reason I will decide to quit and do something else.
Life History
University student, physics major
Heres the most pertinant peice of my history, I could tell you my fucking autobiography, but I'll spare you and be brief... basically I started off as a engineering major and I went to a simple school and transfered to a huge ass university, there was all these people, all these offices, a lot of errands and paperwork and beaurcracy cause the school was massive (one of the most populated in the US), I really didn't like it and would end up spending my time skipping a lot of class which I got away with at my other school cause I would just do extremely well on every test and study in between them. However at the university I transfered to it was more strict and mainstream, they basically wanted you to attend and their was a stigma if u didn't, so I didn't do well the first semester, feel behind etc, and then I got kicked out of engineering, decided to do physics instead, liked it better, learned to cope with all the bullshit in university where you really don't learn anything but just do all your duties, and now I am about to graduate.
I guess from all of this my point is I don't like formal education, I find it pointless, its a bunch of a formalities to make people feel smart. I don't think grades are accurate and I could write an entire rant about the bullshit of formal education. Regardless of that I usually end up being the one who pisses people off cause I never show up to class but get the highest grade on the final and out do their average, it makes them feel like I've commited some injustice because they think all that matters in life is to do your duties and go through the motions if you want to get ahead.... I don't and I get ahead by being that good, people hate me, but I don't care, cause I am not a bad person and I prize competency over sensless duties and tradition.
What I really want in life is maybe adventure and room to be creative.
The end, this is probably too long but think of it as raw material, grab the metal out of the ore if you can find any in typing me.
Behavior/Mannerism/Pet Peeves
Basically I am getting tired of writing so I'll settle for posting in my biggest pet peeve....
Traffic
I hate traffic, people are so retarded in traffic
First people are never aware of their surroundings.... people park in the middle of busy roads to do stuff when there is a parking spot or when they could simply pull aside. They don't feel that urge that they are blocking the works that a person should feel in a situation, its ridiculous like standing in front of doorways, in front of stairways, or in front of elevators and clueless talking.... MOVE those places people need to access and you should be aware of that.... this is the reason why people trample over each other in emergency situations, everyone is too dumb about their surroundings, some are pros, but sadly they are drowned out by the masses of idiots and prevented from doing anything useful.
Which brings me to my next point about driving.... competivity, also the reason why people do poorly in emergency situations. Its the classic crabs in a bucket syndrome. Place a single crab in a bucket and it can freely walk out on its own, place more than one and any time a crab tries to escape another will pull it down back into the bucket, thus trapping crabs in the bucket that would be otherwise able to freely move out on their own.
Thats traffic basically, and further thats people in society, instead of actually being intelligent and altrustic enough to work together and do what is best for something beyond them, they care more about doing better than the person next to them.
This is like so in traffic, no one every simply focuses on driving to their destination in the best way possible given whatever environmental conditions are thrown at them. What they focus on is cutting you off, blocking you in, getting ahead of you, tailgaiting you and so forth, all because they perceive you as a threat to them being able to reach their destination safely and on time, and in the process it creates more problems than fixes them.
There are several instances in specific I have observed this but it gets to me, people seem like they just try so hard to have what others don't and to keep others wanting what they have and to keep others not having it to feel better, and in the process it accomplishes nothing but bringing the whole of humanity into the dirt.
I also hate women who care about their appearance a lot, I have NOTHING against beautiful women or sexy women, I love them a lot, but I hate women who use their looks as the manner mentioned above, they exploit the oppurtunity of possibly having sex with them to get favors, treated nicely etc, when they know they have no intention of having sex, its exploitation, and further they use it as a superiority factor against other women. Basically its something they use to have power over others in this competivity way, when I dunno, I think an altrustic person would care more about the beauty of the world than their individual beauty. I mean sure nothing wrong with being beautiful yourself, but there is something wrong if you want to be the ONLY beautiful thing in the world so you can be that much more powerful.
Really spin this on forever, that what pisses me off about people in general, their focus is on gratifying their own selfish needs in ways they don't realize simply because its something thats accepted at large. And of course they also do good things but sometimes its out of social pressure and not out of something higher within themselves.
Hobbies
Driving
Aviation/Flying (I am a pilot)
Physics/Philosophy
Psychology (specifically personality)
Architecture/Engineering
Gaming (Tf2 and other first person shooters, RPGs, Gmod - sandbox mod)
Movie Editting
Music Writing (I do soundtrackish orchestrial peices and electronic music)
Drawing
Running/Rock Climbing
Game Mapping/Modeling
Sound Editting/Engineering
Technology
Wasting my Time on Internet Forums
Porn
Random Peice of Information
My favourite lost character is Locke
Last edited by male; 02-07-2010 at 07:55 AM.
haha you laughed. LII
The saddest ESFj
...
Removed at User Request
lol I can, but right now I am busy on all fronts, got classes, working on projects on the side, social demands, looking for internships, looking to set up things for career/graduation, having concerns about medication, simple daily stuff like groceries etc..... I really don't have the same time I did since classes started and further I can't seem to get any "creative projects" started that I am enthusiastic about, and thats pretty much what I live for these days, classes/work is just duties along with the other stuff I take up for god knows what reason but I hate them, and my social life is more annoying than anything, I am really not a fan of people in general, I am only really a fan of particular individuals and things about them, but people (as in general public etc) I find to be generally annoying, stupid, degenerate.... thats probably because I have higher standards than how people act in reality but thats not bad to me, I completely accept that about myself. Anyways I am busy.... and I don't enjoy it much, can't focus on the important stuff.I have the impression that you also have ADHD, HaveLucidDreamz. Can you focus on something more than 0.1 seconds?
Removed at User Request
You come across as an introvert NF type, INFp if I had to guess. You obviously have an interest in abstaction, but I can't remember a single time you expressed a factual conviction and defended it with reason.
Yes, I can see why INFP isn't a bad alternative.
On here yes I can see why you say that but I am rather good at the sciences, my major is physics and I do rather well at that, on here I am less inclined to point out facts because I feel it complicates things further usually it only builds more and more doubt and adds extreme complexity instead of moving toward a solution it delays it in other words. Plus in all honesty I feel a lot of what is discussed in psychology/personality is essentially very subjective.
I just find it a bit futile to debate people on an internet forum to that degree, I mean even in the rare chance I manage to convince someone of my point, it changes absolutely nothing about the world and does nothing productive rather than merely supplicating ones ego and making them feel intelligent.
A lot of people on this forum would like to think they are onto digging towards some deep truth and uncovering some kind of profound perceptions and knowledge, but really the sad reality is the state of this forum is more of a "hang out" place with a light common interest for naming celebrities types, characters from shows/movies they watch, talking about each others identity, and trying to one up other people at how intelligent you are.
I am really only interested in using my mind for the digging deep part and not so much for the other crap, needless to say I still stay here because I find the other stuff entertaining and engaging, but really anything productive is overshadowed by a lot of the egos on here.
But if you wish to maintain your point I won't resist it with all this "factual conviction", I find it a waste of time. All I care about is the truth and not convincing other people of whatever I shit out of my head while experiencing thought after its been placed on a pedestal and forcibly made to be revered by my opposition.
Lol you really don't like me....
of course your going to deny....
wait o no, I wasn't saying anything against you, whats the problem everyone is just chill here having a good time, why do you have to freak out....
but come on I am not an idiot, your basically trying to act like what I wrote was crazy, by agreeing but in such a way that suggests essentially your not even going to try to explain how I am wrong, that it simply should be self-evident and your not even going to bother.....
but really half my post was just explaining about how I am busy.... you'de act like you've never met a person that was frantic and scattered as a result of being busy with stuff........
all I can surmise from this is that you really have something you have against me slightly, not anything super serious, but I'd respect you more (which likely you don't even care about) if you'de just be direct and say whatever it is that annoys me about you?
Is it because you wrote alll this stuff in my post about Model A and I never got back to you that you think I have ADHD.....
I mean come on, just say it, get it off your chest, I hate playing little games, 4 months from now you'll respond to a post with an equally snooty attitude just to toot your trumpet over some long dead issue in my mind. Just say it now and be done with it.
HEY I also editted my description, its long so I'd suggest just scanning it unless you have the patience
Removed at User Request
Removed at User Request
INFp could be a good typing for you, you come across in your posts as a little too vague and meandering for INTj. Sure I imagine it is maybe possible for them to be that way, but typically I find that they communicate on the forum, and IRL, much more concisely than you do, you seem more dynamic than static, like your posts are thoughts in actions, among the other stuff.
I'm not particurlarly sold that you have Ti base of the INTj, you're logics don't seem as sharp and self-contained as I normally expect from them, perhaps i'll give you some examples, but I think the posts on this thread and probably just about all your posts would demonstrated this and first paragraph.
I look forward to the outcome :-)
Ok ok thats fair, I can't read your expression as you say it on the internet@HaveLucidDreamz: LOL, I don't know where you deduced that I don't like you. I mean I don't necessarily like you but neither dislike. I said "ok then" just for you to know that I read and I understood what you wrote, but I didn't have something to say, what you wrote makes sense, and me too, I have periods I pay no attention to things I used to pay a lot of it. And so on.
So nothing wrong from my part, man
IMO you're an Alpha NT, looks to me that you're rather Irrational, but dunno, we'll see about that. I'll take a look on that description if I have the time, too.
Edit: yeah, in the "Model A" you were asking some things that I just explained and it seems to me that you miss some things, like being spaced or something
Hmmm... what should I say?
I take ... to be kind of an expression of akwardness, like an akward pause meant to imply some sort of replusion at what a person said.
Fair enough... I wrote this cause sometimes I see myself an Irrational Intuitor, but a lot of people have typed me in the past as INTj and really I don't blame them I like to strategically orchestrate things in systematic ways when I think and analyze things.
Removed at User Request
Man, you remind me so much of a guy that I think is Ti-ILE, even down to your daily "routine". Your pet peeves .. haha .. the other day I was driving with him, and he's basically an easygoing guy, but he was driving at a good speed down this meandering road and came across a car stopped in the middle of the road, taking its time turning left or something. I've never seem him get so frustrated! :-p And re your point about competivity, he used an example of the stupidity of people who rush to get off an airplane first. He reckons he sits there until he's the last one on the plane, then casually walks off. :-)
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
Definately an perceiving base function going by your communication style, yeah, irrational intuitor of some type.
Yeah you notice it too.
Could be right.I dismiss any other type than a Ti one, btw.
LucidDreams - i'm sorry if i'm too hasty to say INFp could be good typing for you, I suppose what I really mean is that, all I can say for sure from the posts i've read of you so far is that I agree you're definately a perceiving type of some sorts, and irrational intuitor like you say makes most sense, so it's either Ni or Ne base :-D
And for sure I don't think out the 4 possibles that you're ENFp.
I think a NF type.. maybe IEE, EIE, IEI...
This is really the reason why I don't think you're Alpha NT or a T of any sort, because in a sense this is all T types do. One-up for intellectual superiority, they have different methods in how to achieve this sort of superiority, money, breakthrough changes, organization, etc, but it's fulfilling to make the arguments.
Some T types have a compulsive need to be "right", behavioral misanthropy be damned.
Now you might actually be exactly the opposite of this and are hiding your ego or at least some reservations about acting in this fashion.
I'm not necessarily competitive in being right or not because things will be proven in the exposition but it's very important that I have a good grasp of something and that my viewpoint is out there for others to understand.
What I've always considered myself is to be this type (relax its from kiersey)
I started off learning kiersey before MBTI and before socionics, its what I am most familiar with and what I have discussed with my friends. They all considered me a INTj though, its not hard to see why, one thing I forgot to mention is that while you may take from my writting style and interests an Irrational type (xxxp), much of my outward social persona matches that of a Rational type (xxxj).
I've always wondered why, personally I valued spontaneity and freedom to do my own activities and creativity over the rigid compulsivity of rational types. I feel its because of my family upbringing... my mom is ISTj with emphasis on xxxj, also my dad is a pilot so he played a more supportive role on the day to day scale - in other words it was mainly my mom at work on the day to day stuff. Anyways I remember my mom teaching us to organize stuff in our room from an early age. My INFp friend that types me as a kiersey INTj thinks I am super organized, but in all honesty I always tend to believe that if I was never forced to organize stuff and left to my own devices my xxxp would be more apparent.
At any rate, my theory about myself is that since I am more intuitive, I have a less focus on sensing, and what I learned about basic sensing stuff, came from my early family life learning stuff from an ISTj's point of view.
Basically I think my nature is more xxxp but my nuture is more xxxj.
Now enough talking about my family life, ugh it feels bad enough, it sounds so cliche, but I think its important to explain.
Anyways the above description matches me perfectly
and I've ran the following thought scenario before with dicotomies and kiersey....
If I start at INTp
The most likely type that I would manifest if I was forced to change in a j way from p is
INTj
To change from T to F
INFp
To change from N to S
ISTp
To change from I to E
ENTp
Notice all 4 of these types plus INTp in socionics have been typed for me already here, without me presenting this idea ahead of time.
To me INTp makes perfect sense, at least from the kiersey P.O.V.
I am almost positive though ILI's here will reject my membership into their typing circle.
But some food for thought....
I also bolded the areas in the description I agree with.
Also I am kind of apprehensive to debate the details of my type in this depth, since I have a totally different theory than Model A of approaching typings, I usually lay low and post about the enneagram stuff or post in anything goes.
My idea is like I showed above... I don't think people EXACTLY match a single type, but rather that their are minor fluctuations in their dicotomies at the very least. An introvert, isn't a pure introvert, but suggests a preference for introverted behavior. In practice you can type one as an introvert, but all people are truely a combination of these.
This is complicated with Model A since it uses the jungian functions rather than the dicotomies and there is no coherent model that is universally agreed upon to relate the dicotomies to the functions. However I am also inclined to view functions as the same way, existing in each person, but with preferences.
I think a model for selecting the way people prefer dicotomies and functions though is too difficult to explain simply, Model A is a nice start and idea at least for the practical application of intertype theory, but the problem is the implementation of something like Se may better serve an individual in certain situations than the implementation of say Ni, in this way a person's nature cannot be solely relied upon as a way of explain their outward behaviors. An accurate model would need to account for what behaviors are the result of nature and nuture, and in all honesty that is a bit hard to establish universally. The kind of analysis I do is usually more "case studyish" based on this, and etc etc etc....
You get the point, I just look at it differently.
Also I am more than willingly to discuss why I think of myself as INTp though I don't argue too much on here, the simple answer is I feel some of the arguments on here are unproductive and its more efficient to spend your time thinking alone and productively than trying to convince somebody who isn't concerned with the truth over their ego, in this sense its more productive to simply ignore the topic and "pick and choose your battles"... something I learned on here fast with all the massive egos floating around.
Last edited by male; 02-09-2010 at 10:41 AM.
Removed at User Request
The way you speak makes me think you're ethical, but you could be a logical creative function. I don't think you're a logical first function, they simply are more confident in their rationalizations and/or understanding.
Given that you think of yourself as intuitive as well, I'm ok with that.
I think you could be IEE since this post you offer a lot of alternatives situational rationalizations for your behavior and request productivity over conflict. In this particular post I think you use some Ne and Fi to describe yourself via your relationships and give alternative rationalizations. Also in your skepticism against Model A, you're asking for concrete examples of function manifestation and behavioral description.
Model A and Model A functions simply does not relate directly to situational behavior. It describes the framework of a process. Much like the carnot cycle which it is derived from, it describes how a engine works, but not the construction or realization of the design.
I think he does a lot of "I don't understand why Model A works like this way or that way, someone explain it to..." me sort of talking.
Removed at User Request
Ti valueing or Ti seeking, perhaps the obvious question.
I don't see him suggesting his own ideas and constructing them logically into a cohesive whole, is that a stereotype of ENTp's or something we'd expect due to their strong/valued functions?
I'm hesitant to associate this withego vs
I think he verbalizes a lot of skepticism towards rules making and universalize of structure. This is actually a core motivation of a LII.
Also he is asking for a concrete rather then model oriented description of personality, which socionics explicitly is not.
Take this post he wrote in the thread you posted..
He shows he does not really understand Model A, nor the rules and fundamentals of the theory. And he dismisses the whole situation personally as it seemingly gives some restriction to how he can or can't think.
As far as his type is concerned, I'm pretty sure he's a result type and intuitive.
Which leaves LII, IEE, IEI, LIE.
I want to note that people deal with information pertaining to their super-ego quite often even if it is ignored, avoided or bashed. I do not think that super-ego information is unprocessed, but this block is a area of vulnerability and pain. If one gets punched in the face, there will be a reaction but it may not be a expected reaction and unexpected reactions are where compatibility and conflict occur(beyond more material conflicts such as money and status and survival). Material necessity can still largely override information conflict until a situation where the material situation disappears. This is why people can sometimes bond in a emergency but then degenerate into bickering when the situation disappears and vice versa.
Wow you really don't understand me a single bit.
I think your projecting your own assumptions onto this a bit heavily.
First of all I don't really care about someone explaining it to me like baby asking to be fed food that I can't provide for myself. You make me sound so incompetent from this, really I have a lot of reasons to suspect model A is not perfect. I just don't really ever care to explain it out in grand detail because everyone on here embraces it like a religion, really is it so unreasonable to just consider the possibility of human personality working on a different model?
My problem is I am simply not convinced of 8 functions being placed statically into different places each performing a different role and each of these roles connected together in various ways.
This model is very ummm "human" in thinking and not so "physical" its like a mechanical structure or factory machine and is not really like the way nature works. I mean if you look at any real problem in physics you see that things work in sometimes very random complex ways and are subject to their environments. I think personality is quite similar, I think the way the functions work are highly influenced by the need for growth, human evolution, a.k.a. the recurrent theme of nuture playing a hand in the game as well at nature. Also I think for evolutionary/adaptive reasons that functions find their way to different roles in people.
Really all this thought is nothing too deep, its quite simple, its the idea of experience and nuture and adaption and evolution playing a role in personality. I simply refute the idea of a model of nature based personality. I mean there are studies in psychology denoting the role of nuture, studies between seperated twins and so forth. You can't neglect environment and even for more fundamental reasons, the brain is nothing more than an evolving biological system, and in such its going to evolve and as it does it will affect psychology, fundamentally this doesn't affect a person on the timescale of their life, but it will affect a person's fundamental biologicaly instinct to adapt, which does tend to cause people to reinvent themselves, a very basic attribute model A doesn't take into account.
Simply using numbers physicists (and others) do this thing all the time to explain things mathematically.
you take an equation in the following form
y = c1 (x1) + c2 (x2) + c3 (x3)
c1,c2,c2 are the weights which denote the relative probability of a event occurance
x1,x2,x3 are the variables denoting a property of an event
y is the most likely combined resulting property or characteristic of the combined system
I think similarly about model A
Instead of Ti Ego perhaps its better to say
(.90)Ti + (0.04)Te + (.03)Ne + (.03)Ni = Ego, with other elements held negilible in comparison
This is more instructive imo because we see that Ti can shift to a Te ego with a relative occurance of 0.04/0.90 => that the reciprocal of this ratio is a number of instances that a person would manifest Ti ego for a given time they manifested the Te ego. This is realistic model based on dynamic shifts with weights determined probabilistically.
Also the ratio doesn't account for long term shifts in probabilities due to adaptation on a longer scale. Its not dynamical with respect to time, but with respect to functions, to include both would complicate the model further.
But this is only beginning to describe the way in which I think in terms of model A....
I don't like the static nature of it, it consequently would seem to suggest that people are merely machines that are born with a fixed mode of operation. This is ridiculous, but Model A does function exceedingly well at explaining intertype theory by comparing the relation between Ego blocks and Super-Id blocks for example.
But my no means is it a perfect model and I actually find it funny because I regard people who lack this skepticism that isn't immediate to them as the ones who lack the logic.
All your saying is that simply I don't accept it because I don't understand it (projection and false assumptions), and therefore I lack logic.
Not particularly surprising and I imagine you'll retort to this post in a manner to suggest that what I've written on here illustrates my lack of understanding and thus solidifies the fact I am an ethical type, which of course is not surprising but if you were to take a step back and just look at the thinking I am employing, mathematics etc, probability.... all of these are tools logical types use and ethical type find bothersome, ethical type in my experience will avoid employing these unless its required for some ethical based reason (assignment tasked with etc).
Also I tend to ask about model A stuff not because I am incompetent but because being perceptive enough I realize there are perhaps ways of approaching Model A I haven't been introduced to that other people may know well, and it is therefore efficient to assimilate this knowledge from them rather than attempt to discover everything myself. Its a process of fishing for information not a desperate pathetic plea for help as you've made it sound incorrectly. Are you really so arrogant as to never realize you've probably at one point learned something from another person or online or etc without coming up with it yourself? I mean you didn't invent socionics, so BAM prime example.... you fished for the information, and just because you set your mind to master this model doesn't mean you are correct, perhaps you fail to neglect the bigger question of the assumptions the model takes into account and the validity the model holds up in practice. And to this end where are your reasons that you seemingly posses with no end in order to justify the existance of Model A, besides posting an article from wikisocion and saying "Augusta told me so".
My goal to refute Model A also is still in its early stages........... I am still collecting data on it to breakdown, I don't claim to fully comphrend all the minutia that is in socionics.
Last edited by male; 02-10-2010 at 02:55 AM.
Yea but I mean I am a physics major, the whole point of physics is to build models that hold up as concrete, to explain the actual universe and not to invent some masturbatory metaphysical laws that you fool yourself into thinking are the ways the universe works.
Models aren't these detached entities that you play around with in your mind, they really should be useful mental constructs that represent reality, and with every model there should be an extra peice of information you take with it which is absolutely critical. The validity conditions of the model.
Skepticism of accepted models and structures is the only thing that will lead to evolution of those models, thats the very driving impetus behind the advancement of science, even social sciences.
Removed at User Request
Well as far as current models have probed, the wave-particle duality dictates what an atom actually is.
The simplest model to start with is a nucleus with an electron probability cloud, which is even itself flawed, because the protons themselves are a probability cloud and the quarks are a probability cloud.
Further probability cloud is misleading, physically there is no indication of what these probabilities actually represent. The whole reason they are introduced is that a particle has an infinitely indeterminate position, its like a localize wave packet, drop a peeble into a pond, notice it rippling outward, this signal which travel outward is in a wave packet.
A wave packet contains many frequencies, watching carefully you will see that as the wave spreads out elements of the wave will disperse, higher frequencies will travel faster or slower than the slower ones. A wave packet is a combination of frequencies, a sound from a musical instrument is a combination of frequencies**, and an electron is a wave packet of mass with a combination of positions all weighted with probabilities and constructed together as a probability density function that also change with time. Many people therefore tend to say matter is actually a wave, and experiments do show that matter acts like waves, electron diffraction etc. yet experiments show that light (waves) also acts as matter, and therefore strangley it is not longer possible to distinguish reality as solely particulate or as solely waves/fields, it is a strange combination of the two.
It gets more complicated though and I am going to grab some food, I don't mind explain more about it later though, and really what an "atom" actually is, is still a mystery, the current model by no means has to be perfect, experience has shown it changes a lot over time, but each model contains more information and is therefore able to create new applications in technology and so forth that may not have existed without its invention.
** for example a 256Hz C is actually a set of frequencies weighted in the mathematical form I showed above... (.99)256Hz + (.01)512Hz.... (99% of the radiated power is 256Hz frequencies and 1% of the radiated power is 512Hz) musically these extra frequencies are the overtones and the reason for the tone quality of an instrumentson for the tone quality of an instrument
Last edited by male; 02-10-2010 at 03:32 AM.
Removed at User Request
Alright I'll give you that your reasoning seems sensible pino
as for hkmr, I'd like to see what type you think I am and if you still think ethical, I've calmed down a bit, but I would like to say outside of typing me that I don't write my topics on model A out of being dumb and needing help, I write them to poll the community on what they think, which is different, I am "data collecting". But regardless of this point, I'll leave you the room and freedom to develop your own theories on my type.
I think you could be N ILE, Lucid. If not that, than LII.
I want you to be ILE though
The end is nigh
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
