Analysing forum “chads” (MEGA THREAD)

[Thebuffdon]

obviously, just go out for a walk around your city and you will see countless examples, I don't even need to show you

And how many times do we have to tell you that just bcuz a women is with a man doesn’t mean it’s a good relationship

 

[phencyclidine]

And how many times do we have to tell you that just bcuz a women is with a man doesn’t mean it’s a good relationship

having good ratios won't assure you a good relationship either, the issue here is that they think that it's all about looks and that being attractive will assure you a good relationship, therefore going to these extremes of having to use mathematics just to get women to like you is the main reason why they have so many problems with women and why they will go to the grave with this page.

 

[Deleted member 26824]

It won’t differ that much

yes, yes it will

 

[Thebuffdon]

yes, yes it will

Naahhhh

 

[Thebuffdon]

having good ratios won't assure you a good relationship either, the issue here is that they think that it's all about looks and that being attractive will assure you a good relationship, therefore going to these extremes of having to use mathematics just to get women to like you is the main reason why they have so many problems with women and why they will go to the grave with this page.

Yeh well no surprise it’s not all about looks, but that’s what gets you into the door

 

[Anon53]

ANALYSING FORUM CHADS - Theory ​

Introduction

I’m back guys with my second thread of this new arc that I’m on. This section clearly needs revival so here I am with todays thread, where we will be analysing popular forum chads to see if they really are really “chads” or not.

This thread is really meant to be a summary introduction to the upcoming release of my new facial calculator in a few months time, which is still in beta testing at this moment. However, like I emphasised in my previous thread, this will give massive insights into your facial rating so that you can accurately determine where you fall onto the looks scale.

It should benefit everyone here as I aim to make it the most accurate facial calculator ever released. I will be giving these upcoming gentleman ratings and demonstrating briefly how the calculator works, without going too in depth, but it should give you guys a general understanding.

Also let me know if you want to be analysed or suggest others to be analysed in upcoming threads if I make them on this topic again. I will be going into all the details (specific measurements, calibrations, weights etc) once that thread is released. So let’s get started:

---

A brief introduction:

The calculator is split into 4 segments

1. Harmony score - total of 100%

Of course this assesses your harmony score. This acts as the anchor for your overall rating. Remember this is only how well your features are positioned scientifically and isn’t accurate on its own for assessing facial attractiveness, so we move onto the second segment

2. Dimorphism - total of 9 points

You cannot be attractive as a man without a dimorphic face, so this takes into account various measurements to assess how masculine your face is. Things like your bone mass, brows, chin etc.

3. Body fat factors - total of 9.7 points

Of course we all know lean is law, and you cannot be attractive while not being lean (for the most part). So this takes into account a couple of measurements to determine your body fat levels and how they contribute to your facial attractiveness.

4. Miscellaneous factors (softmax score) - total of 8.77 points

This is how well you are soft maxxed in terms of miscellaneous features such as brows, lashes, skin, hair etc that contribute to your overall attractiveness. It is then converted into a %, which you can use to assess your progress. These 4 factors combined are then weighted for your overall score and subsequently ranked on the scale.


Now onto the ratings:

Note: for the ratings, all scores are subject to scrutiny due to factors such as lens distortion and angles depending on the pictures used, however the scores should be fairly accurate and fluctuate between 0.5-1 deviation of the attained score for each respective candidate.

---

@Clavicular

WELCOME. People have been debating this topic for centuries and that is whether Clavicular is an actual Chad or not, so let’s rate the infamous “slayer” (JFL) and find out:

1. Harmony

Front profile:

View attachment 3046877
Esr - 0.48

Slightly outside of ideal as his eyes are wider set, although no substantial points deducted

View attachment 3046878
FWHR - 1.9

Perfectly ideal

View attachment 3046879
Bigonial width - 86%

Perfectly ideal

View attachment 3046881
Neck width - 90%

Just about ideal


View attachment 3046883
Chin to philtrum ratio - 1.97

Ever so slightly outside of the ideal. His philtrum is very long

View attachment 3046893
Mouth width to nose width - 1.33

Unideal

View attachment 3046894
Midface ratio - 1:1

Perfectly ideal

View attachment 3046897
Cheekbone height - 80 - 85%

High set - perfectly ideal


- Total of 21 Measurements


- Total front score: 63%

• Side profile:

View attachment 3046901
Gonial angle - 120 degrees - ideal

View attachment 3046902
Facial convexities - accurate

View attachment 3046912
Orbital vector - positive

View attachment 3046916
Frankfort plane recession - none

View attachment 3046918
Lip assessments - accurate

View attachment 3046921
Nasal assessments - mostly accurate


- Total of 23 Measurements

- Total of 44 measurements for both

Total side profile score: 94%

- His side profile harmony is close to perfect


- Total harmony score: around 79%

- very good score. It is around this range as the side profile photo might be slightly inaccurate due to being quite blurry and the front is affected by lens distortion etc, but should still be fairly accurate (in the 75-80% range).


2. Dimorphism

Clavicular scored an 8.1 out of 9 possible points, a very good score. He clearly has relatively high dimorphism, with things like brows (excellent density and low set), decent bone mass and jaw width etc. however he could improve on things like his chin height and prominence (more of a rounded chin) and his overall facial angularity, which also lowers his bf score as well.


3. Body fat factors

Clavicular scored an 8.6 out of a possible 9.7 points, again a very good score. However he loses some points as he seems more bloated compared to other “chads” his bones being less visible and prominent, but still pretty good.

4. Miscellaneous factors

Clavicular scored an 8.36 out of a possible 8.77 points, with a softmax score of 95.3%, a very good score. He is almost nearly softmaxxed out. He scored very high for things like skin, brows again, eye colouring and colouring in general, although not max points for colouring as it might be too far due to the MT2 most likely lol. Bro looks like he just stepped out of a volcano in some pics.

For other miscellaneous factors he loses some points cuz of his bulbous ass nose which he could fix, but not too many points.

---

Scoring

His final rating comes out to:

Final rating: 8/10

Characterisation: low Chad

Rarity: roughly 1 in 8226 faces or top 0.0122%

- a reasonably rare face - mainly carried by colouring and harmony, but a very high percentile attractive face nonetheless.

Fits into this bracket:

8+: (Low chad) (Rare) few times a year sighting if you live in a busy city, usually most attractive person in a town/college campus, - <250000 alive

- still celebrity status looks at this level and can be known for their looks at this level

Theory: So Clavicular should be the most attractive person in his uni statistically, or at least top 3. Lifefuel for him lol.

Reference: other guys who fit this bracket - Louis partridge, Manu rios, Theo James

Note: It’s important to note that this rating is based off his best pics so him in his absolute current prime. Realistically IRL and between photos it probably fluctuates from around a 7.5-8. This is the case for every person as well.

---

@Zeta

A very well respected member amongst the community - known for his insane looksmaxxing transformation. Let’s see how attractive he really is…


1. Harmony

• Front profile:

View attachment 3046979
Esr - 46%

Perfectly ideal


View attachment 3046980
Cheekbone height - 87%

Extremely high set - perfectly ideal


View attachment 3046983
Midface ratio - 0.98

Perfectly ideal

View attachment 3046984
FWHR - 2.1

Slightly ideal


View attachment 3046987
Bigonial width - 87%

Perfectly ideal - downward angle means it’s taken above the lip line


View attachment 3046989
Chin to philtrum - 2.29

Perfectly ideal


View attachment 3046991
Neck width - 82%

Unideal - he could easily gain points by having a wider neck


View attachment 3046992
Mouth to nose width - 1.47

Perfectly ideal


Total front score - 72%

• Side profile:

View attachment 3046993
Gonial angle - 108 degrees - unideal, but might be skewed by the angle

View attachment 3046994
Facial convexities - accurate

View attachment 3046995
recession in Frankfort plane - none


Total side score - 71%


Overall harmony score - around 72%


2. Dimorphism


Zeta scored an 8.3 out of a possible 9 points for dimorphism. He clearly has excellent dimorphism, although not perfect. He scored extremely high for his eyebrow positioning, besides Tom cruise he has the lowest set brows I’ve ever seen pretty much. Excellent brow density and extremely deep set eyes, the most you can get. Excellent bone mass also. However his chin height and prominence kind of cucks him so he didn’t score above an 8.5.


3. Body fat factors


Zeta scored an 8.85 out of a possible 9.7 points, a very good score. He has excellent bone visibility and jaw angularity, however his cheekbones could be more prominent and more visibly tapered, but it’s not bad. This prevented him from scoring above a 9. But still a very good score.


4. Miscellaneous features


This is Zeta’s strongest segment by far. He scored an astounding 8.52 points out a possible 8.77 points, which correlates to a softmax score of 97.2%. He is almost completely soft maxxed out no surprise there. He scored extremely high for things like skin quality, hair texture, brows, eye colouring as well (I know he wears contacts but they still count on my calculator). This is what carries him towards his final rating.

---

Scoring

His final rating comes out to:

Final rating: 8.25/10

Characterisation: mid Chad

Rarity: roughly 1 in 33,093 faces or top 0.003%

- a very rare face - a very high percentile attractive face. You pretty much will never see someone who looks like this in real life.

Fits into this bracket:

8.25+: (Mid chad) (Reasonably Rare) On average once in a blue moon/decades you'll see one, usually most attractive person in a town/minor city, average rating of a top hollywood actor, average rating of an instagram influencer/model - <90000 alive

Theory: So Zeta should be the most attractive person in his town statistically, or at least top 3 if he lives in a minor city.

Reference: other guys who fit this bracket - Moose Ali Khan, David Laid, Vinnie Hacker

Note: It’s important to note again that this rating is based off his best pics so him in his absolute current prime. Realistically IRL and between photos it probably fluctuates from around a 7.75-8.25.

---

Conclusion

I chose these 2 to rate as they are two members who are very closely related in terms of looks, which is why I picked them to study (JFL). They both are pretty much the same in terms of looks on the scale, both scoring an 8.1/10 objectively.

However because of how my calculator functions, the actual rating irl is subject to rounding, so that’s why Clavicular is rounded down and zeta is rounded up, but again they are pretty much the same.

Anyway that’s it for now, my calculator should be releasing soon, but comment again any thread ideas you want me to cover and let me know what you think about the thread, as well as any suggestions for my calculator that I should include in it to enhance its efficiency, and much thanks for the read.

Tags:

@ggg.tv🤫 @greycel @coispet @yeeyeeslayer @moreroidsmoredates @Darktriad16 @Clavicular @Zenis @<6PSLcel @hopecel @0steotomy @blknswag @Charisma @Lynxress @plukee @noodlelover @optimisticzoomer @RaidenJTR @silencio @slavicpsycho @Xangsane @shieldzz @PseudoMaxxer @lestoa @King Solomon @JohnBaza @RaidenJTR @tombradylover @gigell @8incheer @smallman @Zeta @PsychoDsk @halloweed @N1666 @LegitUser @boss8055 @smoth @F36 @RealFlunkyFlamingo @mogre @ambi @OneTwoThree @wsada @Mewton

Shit nice thread bro, feel free to make one on me if you ever feel like it, no pressure. I’ll include a front and side pic

 

[Thebuffdon]

Shit nice thread bro, feel free to make one on me if you ever feel like it, no pressure. I’ll include a front and side pic

I charge money unfortunately, but it’s definitely worth the cost

 

[Anon53]

I charge money unfortunately, but it’s definitely worth the cost

How much?

 

[Thebuffdon]

How much?

I take offers

 

[Ghoulish]

i think hes top 20 percentile unfrauded,and clavicular top 3-5 percent bc his pics are already unfrauded

So he’s top 20% of men, but he’s mid mtn, which means completely average so 50%???

What Richard Ramirez fangirling does to a nigga

 

[Deleted member 83081]

There is no such thing as a forum Chad.

They are all either looksmaxxer (Chads are born, not made) or frauder.

 

[Thebuffdon]

There is no such thing as a forum Chad.

They are all either looksmaxxer (Chads are born, not made) or frauder.

I thought Forum chads refer to users who are the most popular amongst the forum not actual chads, although some of them are

 

[Thebuffdon]

.

 

[cashcow]

so here I am with todays thread, where we will be analysing popular forum chads to see if they really are really “chads” or not.​

holy cuck

 

[geneticmaxxed]

.

JFL that you think side profile matters 50%. Seems almost if your Front-profile would be a weakness and you somehow found a way to cope that side profile matters 50% (it's common sense that the "Front-Profile" aka "Face" matters the most in attractiveness) ... You aren't CreatingAttractive bro, you are worse (-> and the modified system is worse).

-> I would recommend you just sticking to CAs harmony system and creating some logical guide for the Dimorphism-part, Bodyfat-Factors and Miscellaneous-Features.

 

[Thebuffdon]

JFL that you think side profile matters 50%. Seems almost if your Front-profile would be a weakness and you somehow found a way to cope that side profile matters 50% (it's common sense that the "Front-Profile" aka "Face" matters the most in attractiveness) ... You aren't CreatingAttractive bro, you are worse (-> and the modified system is worse).

-> I would recommend you just sticking to CAs harmony system and creating some logical guide for the Dimorphism-part, Bodyfat-Factors and Miscellaneous-Features.

My system isn’t modified it’s the exact same you fucking idiot

If you have a problem with the ratings yeh I admit it was kind of shit this was before I gave my calculator a massive overhaul

So fuck you

 

[geneticmaxxed]

My system isn’t modified it’s the exact same you fucking idiot

If you have a problem with the ratings yeh I admit it was kind of shit this was before I gave my calculator a massive overhaul

So fuck you

Little incel got mad JFL. CA put 61% importance on the Front-Profile ... You have dyscalculia?

You are a little incel that lives in a delusional world (the same as these reddit guys that are obsessed with IQ-Tests). 6 Months and 4600 posts? Lol at this point you can go and search for "how to hang myself" in the google search bar

 

[Thebuffdon]

Little incel got mad JFL. CA put 61% importance on the Front-Profile ... You have dyscalculia?

You are a little incel that lives in a delusional world (the same as these reddit guys that are obsessed with IQ-Tests). 6 Months and 4600 posts? Lol at this point you can go and search for "how to hang myself" in the google search bar

.

 

[Thebuffdon]

Little incel got mad JFL. CA put 61% importance on the Front-Profile ... You have dyscalculia?

You are a little incel that lives in a delusional world (the same as these reddit guys that are obsessed with IQ-Tests). 6 Months and 4600 posts? Lol at this point you can go and search for "how to hang myself" in the google search bar

Oh I just figured out what you meant. Yeh I know he weights 61 to front and 38 to side lmao.

That’s the formula I used when did I say I weighted them equally? So what’s even your issue I don’t get it

 

[geneticmaxxed]

Oh I just figured out what you meant. Yeh I know he weights 61 to front and 38 to side lmao.

That’s the formula I used when did I say I weighted them equally? So what’s even your issue I don’t get it

Clavicular ...
Front: 63% (lol, why so low? About 110 points deducted on the front?)
Side: 94%
Total: 79% ??

-> Only makes sense if both are weighted 50% (-> 63 × 0.5 + 94 × 0.5 = 78.5% -> 79% rounded)

Can you explain this? You think that the face matters the same as the side?

 

[Thebuffdon]

Clavicular ...
Front: 63% (lol, why so low? About 110 points deducted on the front?)
Side: 94%
Total: 79% ??

-> Only makes sense if both are weighted 50% (-> 63 × 0.5 + 94 × 0.5 = 78.5% -> 79% rounded)

Can you explain this? You think that the face matters the same as the side?

This doesn’t make sense

You can have 63% for the front and 94% for the side? the front has more measurements so it would be lower if you scored less in certain ones

Also the weighting is for the total score, so 63% front is not 50% of the total score because the front is weighted 61% of the total score, so that can’t be possible.

I think you’re calculating it wrong but I’m not sure tbh, how would it be wrong if I used the weights as they are?

 

[geneticmaxxed]

CAs version would get you to about 75% ..
You have somehow calculated it to 79% .. Is there maybe something wrong the the calculator or Excel that you are using?

 

[geneticmaxxed]

This doesn’t make sense

You can have 63% for the front and 94% for the side? the front has more measurements so it would be lower if you scored less in certain ones

Also the weighting is for the total score, so 63% front is not 50% of the total score because the front is weighted 61% of the total score, so that can’t be possible.

I think you’re calculating it wrong but I’m not sure tbh, how would it be wrong if I used the weights as they are?

And how come Clavicular only has 63% Front-Harmony? Thats like a total front-deduction of 110 points, which is really a lot.

 

[Thebuffdon]

CAs version would get you to about 75% ..
You have somehow calculated it to 79% .. Is there maybe something wrong the the calculator or Excel that you are using?

Lmao

No I re did it and got 75%, I calculated some of his side profile ones wrong after

 

[Thebuffdon]

And how come Clavicular only has 63% Front-Harmony? Thats like a total front-deduction of 110 points, which is really a lot.

I listed his unideal features I think but he has a few

And it makes sense given he’s a HTN, he would have around 60% front, no that isn’t low at all for him

 

[geneticmaxxed]

I listed his unideal features I think but he has a few

And it makes sense given he’s a HTN, he would have around 60% front, no that isn’t low at all for hi

Could you provide me a list of his unideal measurements? I wanna know that out of curiosity. Like almost all faces that have a 60-70% front/side harmony-score have something that is VISIBLY off.. like Tier 5 facial thirds and/or a tier 4 canthal tilt for example or also low set cheekbones or very high set eyebrows or some shit . Clavicular doesn't seem to have that many Front-Flaws (but maybe I am just not skilled enough to spot them?)..

 

[Thebuffdon]

Could you provide me a list of his unideal measurements? I wanna know that out of curiosity. Like almost all faces that have a 60-70% front/side harmony-score have something that is VISIBLY off.. like Tier 5 facial thirds and/or a tier 4 canthal tilt for example or also low set cheekbones or very high set eyebrows or some shit . Clavicular doesn't seem to have that many Front-Flaws (but maybe I am just not skilled enough to spot them?)..

He has tier 4 flaws I don’t remember

Can’t you just rate him yourself since you have the formula?

 

[rory4579]

Repping this

 

[geneticmaxxed]

He has tier 4 flaws I don’t remember

Can’t you just rate him yourself since you have the formula?

Well, okay ... will later look by myself which flaws he has. And maybe tell you the results

 

[Thebuffdon]

Well, okay ... will later look by myself which flaws he has. And maybe tell you the results

Tbf I used a really shitty distorted frauded photo of his and rated him an 8, which I admit was retarded, he’s much much lower than that

I revamped my system also his score may be lower idk, I didn’t save the doc

But yeh go ahead and lmk

 

[geneticmaxxed]

Tbf I used a really shitty distorted frauded photo of his and rated him an 8, which I admit was retarded, he’s much much lower than that

I revamped my system also his score may be lower idk, I didn’t save the doc

But yeh go ahead and lmk

And one question more: What about Zeta? The picture that you used also had some distortion, I guess ... And his head was slightly tilted, which is bad

 

[Thebuffdon]

And one question more: What about Zeta? The picture that you used also had some distortion, I guess ... And his head was slightly tilted, which is bad

His is accurate maybe 8 on average

 

[sportsmogger]

i would have a 0% on side profile

 

[Thebuffdon]

i would have a 0% on side profile

So u don’t have a side profile is what ur saying?

So ur basically just wearing a mask as ur face?

Makes sense

 

[sportsmogger]

So u don’t have a side profile is what ur saying?

So ur basically just wearing a mask as ur face?

Makes sense

yes its so bad

 

[geneticmaxxed]

Tbf I used a really shitty distorted frauded photo of his and rated him an 8, which I admit was retarded, he’s much much lower than that

I revamped my system also his score may be lower idk, I didn’t save the doc

But yeh go ahead and lmk

So yeah, I am done with the analysis (just rushed through fast) and I calculated a total deduction of 106.75 points (I was generous with the facial thirds and gave him tier 2 for the ideal distribution -> Lower the biggest and middle the smallest) which equates to 65.1% Front Harmony Score regarding CAs system (well technically you were spot on right with the 63%, cause you could deduct another 7.5 points for the imbalance of the facial thirds)

But yeah, the picture is really distorted, because his Face Shape is very long here (It's like 1.45+ )

Which overall-rating would you realistically give Clavicular? 7 ? Or maybe 7.5?

 

[Thebuffdon]

So yeah, I am done with the analysis (just rushed through fast) and I calculated a total deduction of 106.75 points (I was generous with the facial thirds and gave him tier 2 for the ideal distribution -> Lower the biggest and middle the smallest) which equates to 65.1% Front Harmony Score regarding CAs system (well technically you were spot on right with the 63%, cause you could deduct another 7.5 points for the imbalance of the facial thirds)

But yeah, the picture is really distorted, because his Face Shape is very long here (It's like 1.45+ )

Which overall-rating would you realistically give Clavicular? 7 ? Or maybe 7.5?

That pic is heavily frauded so generally like a 7

So you take back what you said at the start now?

 

[geneticmaxxed]

That pic is heavily frauded so generally like a 7

So you take back what you said at the start now

You mean that insults? Yeah, sorry dude. Wasn't meant in that way

 

[Thebuffdon]

You mean that insults? Yeah, sorry dude. Wasn't meant in that way

Thanks

I’m developing an insane facial calculator to rate people accurately it’s closed to being released in beta

Just to let you know

 

[geneticmaxxed]

Thanks

I’m developing an insane facial calculator to rate people accurately it’s closed to being released in beta

Just to let you know

I will definitely use it if it's good (maybe potentially even pay for it if there will be such a feature)

Are you going to change the "ideal" values a bit? I would prefer changing the ideal ESR to something like 44.7-47.3%. 44.3-47.7% is just TOO BIG of a range! Aesthetically most pleasing is even a smaller range of 45-47%, while 46% is almost perfection, because of the golden ratio. 44.3% looks shit and cyclop-tier on most people!
I know he did a statistical analysis for his ideal ranges, but I find the representativity+sample-size of his statistics quite low ... And what about changing the ideal midface-ratio range to 0.95-1.05 ? The midface-ratio in real kinda tries to "quantity" the compactness of the midface, therefore 1-to-1 is the most "ideal" midface ratio you could say (because it's logically the most compact), and the range of ±0.05 is still ideally compact imo. Like 1.02 is much more compact than 0.92 (which is semi-horse tier), you understand?

 

[Thebuffdon]

I will definitely use it if it's good (maybe potentially even pay for it if there will be such a feature)

Are you going to change the "ideal" values a bit? I would prefer changing the ideal ESR to something like 44.7-47.3%. 44.3-47.7% is just TOO BIG of a range! Aesthetically most pleasing is even a smaller range of 45-47%, while 46% is almost perfection, because of the golden ratio. 44.3% looks shit and cyclop-tier on most people!
I know he did a statistical analysis for his ideal ranges, but I find the representativity+sample-size of his statistics quite low ... And what about changing the ideal midface-ratio range to 0.95-1.05 ? The midface-ratio in real kinda tries to "quantity" the compactness of the midface, therefore 1-to-1 is the most "ideal" midface ratio you could say (because it's logically the most compact), and the range of ±0.05 is still ideally compact imo. Like 1.02 is much more compact than 0.92 (which is semi-horse tier), you understand?

I did change some of the measurements around, like replacing convexity total with gonial angle. I think he doesn’t weight some of the measurements correctly

In terms of eye spacing, I think 44.3% is fine being on the lowest end, I disagree that most people looks cyclops with it, generally anything above 43.4% is fine and you look masculine although it is less ideal.
Like Jensen Ackles has 43.4% esr and he looks alright.

It’s when it starts to become sub 43 it looks very close set and becomes non harmonious. Although it’s still masculine that’s why it’s not the worst thing in the world like Theo James for example, I think wider set looks way worse on a man like above 47.7

I think the tier 1 rankings are fine if 1:1 midface is perfectly ideal, then it makes sense to have tier 2 be a slightly less ideal although still ideal measurement and encompass the range. Tier 3 starts to become flaw territory.

And yes I have a gum road page if you want me to pm you if you can check it out

 

[geneticmaxxed]

I did change some of the measurements around, like replacing convexity total with gonial angle. I think he doesn’t weight some of the measurements correctly

In terms of eye spacing, I think 44.3% is fine being on the lowest end, I disagree that most people looks cyclops with it, generally anything above 43.4% is fine and you look masculine although it is less ideal.
Like Jensen Ackles has 43.4% esr and he looks alright.

It’s when it starts to become sub 43 it looks very close set and becomes non harmonious. Although it’s still masculine that’s why it’s not the worst thing in the world like Theo James for example, I think wider set looks way worse on a man like above 47.7

I think the tier 1 rankings are fine if 1:1 midface is perfectly ideal, then it makes sense to have tier 2 be a slightly less ideal although still ideal measurement and encompass the range. Tier 3 starts to become flaw territory.

And yes I have a gum road page if you want me to pm you if you can check it out

Sorry for the late answer. Will I need to pay for the gum road page? If so, then I will wait for the release ... If not, then I will be happy to check it out

 

[Thebuffdon]

Sorry for the late answer. Will I need to pay for the gum road page? If so, then I will wait for the release ... If not, then I will be happy to check it out

Wait for the release of what?

 

[geneticmaxxed]

Wait for the release of what?

Software release? Is that what you meant?

 

[Thebuffdon]

Software release? Is that what you meant?

Do you have Microsoft excel desktop?

 

[org3cel.RR]

How can I calculate the overral harmony? I have the ratios, how can i calculate the overral?

 

[Thebuffdon]

How can I calculate the overral harmony? I have the ratios, how can i calculate the overral?

I only do paid services bro to reveal that

I have a gum road

 

[org3cel.RR]

I only do paid services bro to reveal that

I have a gum road

I already did a full facial analysis, im just asking how can i Calculate the overral?

 

[Thebuffdon]

I already did a full facial analysis, im just asking how can i Calculate the overral?

Well I would still charge for that information

But it depends what you need

We can negotiate etc if ur down. But I charge everyone for it

 

[org3cel.RR]

Well I would still charge for that information

But it depends what you need

We can negotiate etc if ur down. But I charge everyone for it

If you dont mind for free, I just need you to tell me how to calculate the overral, if you cant share that info on the pms then nvm, to make it easier i send my analisis on pm