"Some see things as they are and ask why;
 Others dream things that never were and ask why not?"

"Some fear losing touch with reality;
 Others more rightly fear losing touch with fantasy."

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

"Today is a fine day to die, but tomorrow works better."

"Those who speak loudest often say nothing."

"If you think you can or think you cannot, you are correct."

(may add more later)

Seems like only a third of girls ever reply to me, and of those, many are polite happy-hunting-good-sir replies, which means two thirds are either completely ignoring the messages or deeming them below the worthwhile return on investment (and many of the 2/3rd's are the ones I most wanted to hear from most -_-). You know though, evidently that reply rate isn't bad. A friend told me that he'd sent over 30 messages and got not a one, which really made me wonder... what are you saying to them?? Is it your tone, or maybe a sarcastic remark you meant for them to interpret as witty? Do you fail to engage them with any topic to reply on? Well, I didn't ask, but I have suspicions.

I suppose I should be happy with only a 1/3, but I still seek a robust formula for making that best first impression. Each message obviously needs to be tailored to each recipient, but there must be a general model that works well, and while I don't know what it is (yet!), I think it would have these elements...

1. Tell them what about them intrigued you.

Duh, why did you send a message to them? Even if they don't reply, you've done the small service of letting them know what others like/dislike about their profile.

2. If you compliment something about them, choose something other than their body.

We may love or hate our looks, but there isn't much we can do about it. Praising a person for their looks is like praising a person for having won the lottery. Good job there Alice! Actually, it's praising their parents more than anything. Accomplishments on the other hand shows you are looking at the person, not the object. Wow, you ran that marathon? Wow, you built a life-size R2-D2 from LEGO's?

3. Send messages to those likely to reply.

A high match is of course a good start, and similar hobbies are important, but another often overlooked one is that of approximately equal status and attraction. If you always aim for supermodel when you look nothing like one, then yours will be one of many messages sitting in her inbox. She'll have her pick, and all other things being about equal (interests, morals, income), you'll be lower in that pick. So, while I generally like the phrase that if you shoot for the moon and fall short, at least you'll farther than if you hadn't tried at all, in this case, that time would be better spent writing a letter to someone who you are similar to.

If we had a limited population, say a village of 10 guys and 10 girls (all with similar hobbies and compatible personalities), matches would naturally stabilize, as the most attractive ones match with the most attractive ones, leaving plain looking ones for each other. Because there is no other arrangement where two people could swap with each other and have higher happiness, then this is a stable match.

In our very large village though (Seattle area), this never happens because the volatility is too much to make this obviousness, well, obvious. We're always aiming for higher on both sides (plain girls sending messages to hot guys, and more often vice versa), shooting our arrows in a futile criss-cross (the movie A Beautiful Mind also had a good lesson on this). So, why not shortcut the whole realization and just send a message to your equal in the first place? Well, there is the argument that if you don't try, you don't know what you may have missed out on. Alright then, you go ahead and send your message to the many beautiful girls I've seen on this site. Meanwhile, average Jack and Jill remain lonely and oblivious to each other.

4. Save the longer letter until later.

Frack it - I'm guilty of this just recently. I guess I misinterpreted her enthusiastic reply and request to tell her more as an invitation to, well, tell her more. So I did. It was long. Too long. That was the first and last reply I heard. As much as I want to think all my words are words of gold, they're just iron pyrite. It isn't that girls are overly busy or that they don't have enough time (the common excuse), because you can be assured that if you really appeared worth the return on investment, they WOULD sacrifice their Top Model viewing time to reply to you. See, even if they did have more time, they'd use that additional time to slip in more joys that were more interesting than replying to you would be. So to refine the ore, you might try writing your letter, then NOT sending it. Instead, look at it again the next day to see what cruft you can trim.

5. Leave them a question to reply to.

If it's all declarations about you (for which they can read your profile instead), then they have to think of how to carry on the conversation, whereas a question makes it easier for them to carry it on. Compare "So I play the piano and sing. / Oh, I see, well umm [where do I branch out from here, talk about my musical past or ask more about why they like those or..?]" to "So I play the piano and sing. Do you play anything? / Well I used to play the violin when younger." for the difference in flow.

Any ideas you can add?

(just moved from profile to journal article)

I have things to do
before I pursue,
and should really wait
to actively date.
My place is a mess
with stuff in excess,
and I lack a car
so don't go that far;
but if you're the one
wanting more than fun,
my most likely mate,
don't leave it to fate.
With adequate bait,
I will accelerate.
Either way, new friend,
I'll enjoy your send.
2011-11-06 01:35
2012-01-22 03:47

Rather than subdivide them into a tree-like taxonomy based on specific beliefs (do this, don't do that, Mary is important, no Jesus is the focus, no God is... sigh), I've divided them into an arbitrary clustering of how I see them. Note, many of these are oxymorons, like acute apathy and baggy tights; so calling them Christian is ... quite questionable.

• Hypocritical Christians - those who say one thing and do another. Despicable.
• Christofascist Christians - those intolerant to deviation from their cherry picked interpretation of what they believe is a/moral, who then must impose it onto others and into politics. Sadly, "even the devil can cite Scripture for his purpose." You see it now in America. You saw it in the Crusades...
• Quite Preachy Christians - not content to lead by example, not content to discuss it with their friends, they go around door to door to preach their message. Atheists and agnostics don't hate them like they hate the Christofascist ones - they just find them a little annoying.
• Shallow Showy Christians - they attend church regularly, and they show a good presentation to others, but under the facade is little to respect.
• Illiterate Christians - whatever the preacher has spoon fed to them, that's what they believe. The Bible is the book they claim to read, but, really, they haven't.
• Cult Christians - a subclass of Illiterate Christians, these folks get crazy ideas into their head, and worship the wrong person, the mortal man at the pulpit. They're sometimes dangerous, but thankfully not for too long, because they eventually commit mass suicide or something as one of their prophecies nears. Oh, happy 2012 everyone!
• Recently Reborn Christian - they've recently found a purpose in their life. They're full of zeal. They call Jesus by his first name. They might have their little prayer circles. They ... kinda scare me. (though, I don't dislike them)
• Respectable Christian - that is, an actual Christian. They really have that key phrase down, "Love one another". Seriously, everything else can be derived from that. Every other moral code is a by product of that. You don't even need to explicitly say "don't murder your neighbor", because you know, that's not very loving, is it?
• Easter/Christmas Christians - they attend services on those two days. They're generally decent folks who don't regularly attend any particular church, but have some moral code. They may have even read more of the book than many of the ones who do attend services!
• Originally Born Christian - they were raised Christian, and then later, after years of unpleasant and often overbearing indoctrination from their parents, rebel violently and develop a grudge against traditional religion with a crusading spirit to "free all others from their chains" too. You usually encounter these as "atheist and very serious about it".

Which am I? hint: Not the bitter, fascist, preachy, judgmental, showy ones.

Herein lies the dilemma. I'm too Christian for atheists who I have much in common with hobby-wise (one seriously apologized after learning this, after we'd been talking for the past 45 minutes lest anything I've said since we started offended me ... um, ok), and not Christian enough for many others (they look like wonderful people based on their personality and acts, and helping others in distress is important, but sorry, I'm not going to be as enthusiastic as you about it, for science is my passion). So, I just need to find someone else who is less passionate about it, but doesn't dislike Christians either. They exist, but they're a rare middle ground.

Why do you like to dance? While I lack the skill, it intrigues me; though, for likely very different reasons. Geometry was certainly my favorite math subject, and dancing has intricately mesmerizing geometry to it. Even the club dancing frowned upon by 'real' dancers, which lacks an overall story and choreography, has enough to pleasantly confound. I've found myself rewatching certain videos over and over trying to break down the sequence of moves to figure out why some forms of dance please, while so many do not.

What I eventually realized is that every type of dance has different geometry that it carves out through space, and that this is really what made it appealing or less so to me. Imagine you could actually paint in the air, and that you could see what the various moves look like (maybe via photographic light painting at night), their angles, direction changes, extent, and speed, what would you see for each? Well, I'm still looking into this, so I haven't the answers for each, and I'd be interested to know if existing research has been done on this.

For me, the slow sweeping, outstretched dance forms just bore me (ballet, no offense intended to my aunt). Anything with a 1-and-uh-2-and-uh repeated step (waltz) doesn't stimulate either, watching or doing. Then you reach the more lively complex forms (not that the others are easy) like competitive lindy hop, irish jig, hip-hop, break dance, rave shuffling, and other forms of 'dancing' geometric flow like fire dancing/poi swinging/hooping, and I definitely perk up - you know, all the ones where it looks like people are actually having fun?

Lindy: Ultimate Lindy Hop Showdown 2006 - Liberation
Fire: Yuta - Open Stage ECJ 2008
Dancehall: Dancehall Vany et guillaume
Ragga: Andrey Boyko - Ragga Dancehall Routine
Rave: JOZAQT - full bod & foot work, rave/club style 2004
Glowsticks: LingLingHota - Handles
Hooping: Mona Quadomi - Shpongled Hoop Dancing is Here
Industrial: Sasa - first industrial dance
Liquid: 'some dude liquid dancing'

I've watched these a few times, wondering why they intrigued me, and what moves made up the larger shape/feel... Slow-mo please! Now if I could just get the talented folks to either hold flashlights in their hands for some light painting or maybe motion capture, because I'd love to see what they look in actual space.

How sad. I suspect people were overusing it, devaluing it into ineffectualness. So, copy&paste, recorded for ages...

BrittaAnderson gave me: Friends In Real Life, Awarded Jan 15, 2010

“I've known this guy since 2004, and though he is a bit quiet and shy in personality, he is always full of surprises and is always good for a laugh or an adventure. He is a great friend, and is someone who I wish I still lived closer to.”

ProseRose gave me: Smarter Than The Average Bear, Awarded Jan 17, 2010

“This guy is always on the ball. He has a black belt in punnage and he's not afraid to use it! He is also an amazing artist.”

OSUFlatland gave me: Smarter Than The Average Bear, Awarded Mar 12, 2010

“I know the guy in person, he's a good friend, and one of the smartest people I know, while still being well-grounded in the real world.”

TaylorPhelps gave me: Makes Me Laugh
Awarded Mar 27, 2010

“Piken has a unique perspective that frequently results in giggles :)”

---------------------

I gave BrittaAnderson: Friends In Real Life, Awarded Jan 13, 2010

“An adorable fuzzball of energy and occasional randomness, often open and wanting for adventures. Known her since 2004, staying in the same house for 2 years while attending college. IMHO, certainly someone worth knowing.”

I gave TaylorPhelps: Friends In Real Life, Awarded Apr 7, 2010

“First encountered in 2003, how does one distill into sentence form a perpertual fountain of whimsy and smiles? If my camera could talk, it would tell me that her many facial expressions are some of the best it has enjoyed capturing. She's reluctant to take control but steps up to the plate when needed. She can play the role of both lovely lady and tumultuous tom-boy.”

I gave OSUFlatland: Friends In Real Life, Awarded Apr 7, 2010

“Since 2004, he's been a dependable dude, technological tinkerer, mechanical modder, calm and slow to anger even in the face of being surrounded by idiots, and respectably less Machiavellian than me.”

I don't know if this is really a better formula or not, but it would be interesting to try, and seems more intuitive.

There are so often times when I'd like to state that some answers are neutral (without making the entire thing irrelevant) while other answers should be strongly opposed/for (without making the entire thing mandatory/very important and lumping in the irrelevant neutral questions into that weighting). Maybe you strongly want to avoid frequent alcohol drinkers (yeah, I know, still trying to relive your lost college days), but you don't care much which way they mark the other answers, just as long as it's not frequent.

It's also more straight-forward and less likely to screw up using a pure how-good-bad-is-each-answer, rather than the approach of which-answers-do-you-want plus a separate how-important-are-the-answers. One significant difference is that it starts at zero and tilts either way, kinda like real life - you meet a stranger without real hostility or fondness, and the more you get to know them, the more you form a positive or negative opinion from that baseline. The match can still be normalized and weighted according to the margin of error (OKC matching FAAAQ)

:-/ *Sigh - there are supposed to be little radio buttons, which show fine in the HTML editor, but not in the published journal entry, so link here.

How frequently do you drink alcohol?
Very often
Sometimes
Rarely
Never

Answers I’ll accept…
Very often
 -25 -5 -1 0 +1 +5 +25
Sometimes
 -25 -5 -1 0 +1 +5 +25
Rarely
 -25 -5 -1 0 +1 +5 +25
Never
 -25 -5 -1 0 +1 +5 +25

Here's another question where I'll bet a lot of you will be pro for one, polarly con to another, and mostly neutral about the centrist/other.

Which best describes your political beliefs?
Liberal / Left-wing
Centrist
Conservative / Right-wing
Other

Answers I’ll accept…
Liberal / Left-wing
 -25 -5 -1 0 +1 +5 +25
Centrist
 -25 -5 -1 0 +1 +5 +25
Conservative / Right-wing
 -25 -5 -1 0 +1 +5 +25
Other
 -25 -5 -1 0 +1 +5 +25

Notice the slight graying and decreased font size of the +/-25? That's a subtle hint to encourage people to avoid choosing the extremes of the spectrum, generally preferring 1 or 5. Although it displays many more controls that one could click, by having each radio button default to zero, you have around the same number of mouse clicks (before you clicked on which answers you'd accept plus a click for how important, whereas now we're clicking on how important an answer is on the same click that choose the acceptable answers).

"You should message me if you live in Seattle."

What is considered Seattle? Does that mean city proper, only on the west side of the lake, or the Seattle area? To me, Bellevue is a city of its own, but then to many others when asked where they live, they just say 'downtown', like Bellevue is merely an extension of Seattle separated by a little bridge, and downtown is Seattle. Well, it's no long distance to me to consider Bellevue, Seattle, Redmond, Kirkland, and Mercer Island - they're all within easy distance (lived in downtown Bellevue before, and the border of Bellevue/Redmond). Though Bothell and Renton start feeling a tad far north/south.

Profile is getting tooooo long, so moved here.

▶ disposition: slow to anger, but quick to smile if I respect you (only a genuine one too, for non-Duchenne smiles are disgusting).

▶ independence: not dependent on anyone, but definitely willing to give up a little independence for a partner to do things with (and someone to talk to on weeknights other than myself, the walls, and whatever friends happen to be online. Maybe I should get another pet or get around to that meetup.com homework...).

▶ motivation: derives not from profit, but rather challenge and satisfaction (I'm just fortunate to happen to also be profitable with my challenging and satisfying job).

▶ initiative: less often the person to organize events (unless it's a movie I must see, PAX/other con, FF symphony, the fair), but readily the person to join in on one (hiking somewhere new, seeing a museum...). Ambition is definitely there to do a good job on whatever I do, but, the ambition to actually do in the first place, could use some work. Though, one need not be first, they simply should avoid being last - if the early bird gets the worm (ick), then I'd rather sleep in, for the second mouse gets the cheese.

▶ nostalgia: the person in the group who always carries a camera in their pocket wherever they go, for memories are important!

▶ volume: a quiet guy in a crowd of 3 or more, particularly if strangers, but not timid. I'm quite well aware of who I am, and quite willing to talk to any stranger, even ones of humbling notoriety without hesitation. Kings, queens, presidents, and millionaires - no sweat (though, I say that having never actually met any), but an artistically/musically talented attractive girl my own age? All the premeditated preparation doesn't help.

▶ intelligence: smarter than the average bear. Actually, no. I just seem smarter because my model came equipped with a filter that generally prevents dumb things from leaving the mouth. (Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.) So, I'll probably never join Mensa nor win the $1 million from the Clay institute for solving P vs NP, but the average bear was often annoyed with my test scores. o_o?

▶ inheritance: the genetic product of builders a plenty, including drafters, architects, machinists, carpenters, and pole barn builders. They must be lost on this tech field I entered, but really, it's just a less tangible variation of construction traits I inherited from them. As for birth order, I'm the first and last, but not a spoiled child. I read that only-children are career driven and destined for career success. Shrug. We shall see. Going well so far. "A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops. On my desk, I have a work station." ... :-P

▶ focus: less interested in sports/politics/business and such mundane competitions; more interested in things that make measurable progress.

▶ energy level: pretty placid, without chocolate milk or other fructose stimulant. Though, I tend to run up stairs whenever they're in my way; and my metabolism has always been high. My friends would attest that I tend to walk fast. If I live to 120, I _may_ actually cross everything off my potential investigate-this-and-that todo list. How can people be bored? How..?

▶ pets: not currently. I had two albino rats when much younger. Had the show existed at that time, I would have called them Pinky and the Brain.

▶ disclaimer: more impressive on paper than in real life. ;)

▶ fitness: I wouldn't call myself fit, but I can keep up with you (unless it's on the Burke Gilman Trail and you have that light city bike with a high gear ratio whereas I have an old mountain bike). If you like to hike, I'll be there right along with you. If you want to bicycle from Seattle to Redmond, I'm coming with. If you want to climb a mountain, ... I'll be cheering for your successful climb at the base.

This was going to be a pleasant entry, but I'll postpone that one. Decided to ride my bicycle around today (pleasant weather today, no?) to enjoy the changing gradient of the trees and soak in the semi-sunny day, but mainly to go to Crossroads Park to take a picture of that large orca statue - Kasumi was asking me if I'd seen Shamu lately, and since I haven't been to Sea World since probably age 12, that's as close as I can get for now.

All is pleasant until about 3/4 of the way back home. I'm a little tired, so I'm just pushing my bicycle along the sidewalk, about to cross the street at the crosswalk when it's my turn, when a ~25 year old white guy in a fancy car yells out something unclear "?? your ?? ? ??, you bitch", then speeds off. Eh? What's that all about? If you're going to insult, at least speak clearly.

Well, knowing neither what he said nor why he said, all I heard clearly was his tone, a tone of utter unhappiness with the world and himself. I wish no harm him, but I sincerely hope his aggressive driving habits someday soon cause him to wreck his shiny fancy car, and that society repays him in kind. No (insert made-up name here), Ashton, you're a jerk. You do not get the promotion. No, you're a jerk - you do not get the girl. Until you mature, you do not get any further rewards from life. You've already been well-rewarded (judging from the car and hairstyle) and should be plenty happy. You're a selfish pleasure seeking leach who does no good to advance human kind or ease other's pain. Society would not miss or even notice your absence. Despite all you may possess, you are worthless. So... why not either go find a nice bridge to jump off to expedite society's not-missing-you-at-all, or better yet, take a fresh look at how good things are; for without war, famine, and sickness, happiness is less about the life you have and much more about how you interpret it.

This entry is just a little vent. I seek no social validation...