Indivisible Soul

 

Take a loose piece of paper.

Draw two circles on that paper.

Fold the paper, halfway through one circle.

Now from the perspective of a 2-dimensional object on the paper.

The folded circle has been divided and half of it is gone.

But from our three dimensional perspective the folded circle is still whole, only now partially visible.

Now wonder upon yourself

if objects from higher dimensions

can be folded

they would be invisible to us

but they would be there

the other half of the folded circle is still there

only now there is no evidence from the perspective of the circle we can see.

This is my geometric ponderance of the soul.

Pair bonding and peer bonding

This is a thought and therefore it is to be taken solely as opinion on the author at the time of writing. I reserve to be wrong and alter this thought at any point in the future or the past.

It’s been a frequent conjecture in the red pill sphere that a woman’s ability to form a lasting pair bond is diminished with the number of sexual partners.

But that a man’s ability to pair bond is unaffected by his count of sexual partners.

Whether a double standard or a biological difference.

I can not say nor do I much care.

These are conjectures based on the summaries of my observations.

It is my current belief that women practice both pair bonding and peer bonding.

While men either practice peer bonding or pair bonding.

Peer bonding isn’t discussed when men talk about a women’s ability to pair bond.

It is without a doubt a foreign concept to most men.

Most men do not form new lasting friendships past the age of 25. And so the opportunity to create new and lasting peer bonds among men is diminished. So it is simply not thought about.

Women however can and do form lasting peer bonds throughout their life.

It is my current thought that men either practice peer bonding or pair bonding,

Whereas women can practice both at the same time.

The men who focus on peer bonding tend to put

“Bro’s before Hoes”

They tend to be the HVM (high value male), as their concerns for social status and allows them to climb the corporate ladder as well as become the “lifted” Alpha male of their friend circle.

But these men rarely settle down and if they do they often step out.

As their emotional needs (or need of sexual validation) tends to be more than a single partner can provide.

Where as I see the average Delta and Bravo,

Able to settle down but their pair bond takes priority over their social status.

As well as their economic status.

The drive to climb either ladder seems diminished

as long as things are well at home.

NOW

Here are my observations of women,

I have seen girls with high partner counts settle down into lasting marriages

the difference

A first I thought it was religion….

But whether Born Again Christian, Mormon, Wiccan, or Agnostic

religions where the package but the truth was

that these provide ready and open peer groups for the women

women who’ve taken up a regular social hobby with other women of “good” moral character

I see the same shift in them as well.

She can be the atheist or satanist in a knitting circle but the reinforcement of values through a stable peer group is the difference.

I think that women fill the first two levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs with a strong pair bond but only half of the third tier.

The other half of the third tier of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs as well as the fourth tier is reserved for influences beyond the home.

Whereas men for the most part seek to fill the part two tiers from society and the top two tiers from pair bonding. Men don’t need to peer bond with their coworkers or even hold to religious tenets and practices to satisfy the first two tiers and in most cases the Delta can rest content upon the third tier of Maslow’s hierarchy while filling the need for esteem through self isolating hobbies (video games, model trains, stamp collecting)

If you think I’m wrong about this FIGHT ME!

Thanks for reading, I hope this was of value.

I’ll be streaming from stage one develop to finished product a 4-player card game on twitch every Friday 3pm-5pm EST

give a follow

or feel free @ me on Discord

Want more Ravenclaw over analysis

enjoy this article.

Send an E-mail to

here

Or Follow me on Twitter for retweets of cute Kirby pictures

@HppoTweeter

With Love,

HngyHngyHppo

Devin Nash Hardcore

Devin Nash, affectionately known to the twitch community as CEO Andy, is the CMO of N3rdFusion and the host of the Devin Nash Show

the Devin Nash Show is a twitch.tv broadcast that covers, gaming influencer news, as well as Rogan-esq broadcaster interviews that focus on what makes them successful as broadcasters and influencers

Here are some choice selection of those interviews

Business Experts Talk Success Secrets (ft. Gootecks)

https://youtu.be/7C85wKqiX2c

Top Twitch Streamer MoonMoon Discusses Streaming Success

https://youtu.be/7oXywAvJXr4

And a breakdown of 100 thieves Market genius behind their gaming fortress

(Highly Recommend for the Marketing inclined)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGqUkdNqcxg

Devin Nash is also a Hardcore player of POE(Path of Exile).

This thorn I’m about to pull is why?

In his words he plays Hardcore because when he loses a character he needs to feel it. The absolute loss of a character because of his own actions. Or to the indifference of the games bosses who have broken mechanics, which he should have avoided.

Every man has his preference and it’s perfectly acceptable that his be irregular.

He refers to the normal mode though as a “Baby Game” in rhetoric jest of course. But it is still a deflection of digging at why he truly plays hardcore, with such an off the cuff dismissal of the default and most popular game mode. What bothers me about this is that this is not an argument to sway others to his form of perceived superior play but rather to himself securely coddled in his preference.

Why?

Why is that important that he raises rhetoric argument?

Because rhetoric is not application of persuasion, not the method by which truth is discovered.

Rhetoric is primary used as a weapon, either when there is a lack of knowledge on a subject or where the truth is counter to the conclusion you wish an audience to draw.

So here’s why IMHO

Devin Nash plays Hardcore?

He is practicing attachment, control, investment and failure.

Games fill whatever desire your heart longs for a time but without ever fulfilling that desire forever.

Are you feeling lonely?

Join a cooperative experience

Are you feeling like murdering your boss?

Hop on an Xbox shooter, talk smack and exercise dominance over 12 yr old boys until dawn instead

Are you feeling unchallenged?

We have strategy games for that.

Are you feeling the need for a girl but don’t want to take a shower?

Let me introduce you to the world of dating sims.

Hardcore modes fill a very special need

For some it’s the sheer challenge and proof of mastery

For others it’s the most uncontested leader-board

For Devin Nash

it’s grief and frustration

He doesn’t play Hardcore for fun

No, indeed too many hours have been throw into POE

to call it fun or catharsis

Why would anyone inflict themselves with such pain and loss though?

Understand that for every character death he experiences,

That character is permanently dead and can no longer be played.

Which means all the hours, days, weeks of investment that went into

crafting that character are GONE FOREVER.

Even if that Character does not die they will be forever in memoriam after the seasons end, never to be played again as the call of a new season begs the creation of a new avatar.

Each ending condition is the same the investment squandered, as games like life have an end when all will be forgotten.

POE Hardcore fills Devin Nash’s need for attachment by providing a, relatively, consequence free zone for him to experience attachments ultimate conclusion death and grief

This the motive that he keeps from himself

Because Detachment and the practice thereof dominates his conscience and everyday life. Romanticly, Profressionally, and Religously

Why then must I attack his last vestige of Attachment by revealing it’s nature?

It is the truth as I see it.

It’s not a bad thing, It’s just a hidden thing

and all things must be brought under the light.

Disclaimer: I am not, nor am I holding myself out to be a doctor/physician, nurse, physician’s assistant, advance practice nurse, or any other medical professional (“Medical Provider”), psychiatrist, psychologist, therapist, counselor, or social worker (“Mental Health Provider”), registered dietician or licensed nutritionist, or member of the clergy. This has been intended solely as an excersice of logic and not assertion of my present opinion or of fact. There is no intent to harm inherent in the above statements

Thanks for reading, I hope this was of value.

I’ll be streaming from stage one develop to finished product a 4-player card game on twitch every Friday 3pm-5pm EST

give a follow

or feel free @ me on Discord

Want more Ravenclaw over analysis

enjoy this article.

Send an E-mail to

here

Or Follow me on Twitter for retweets of cute Kirby pictures

@HppoTweeter

With Love,

HngyHngyHppo

GARNER FAME or SERVICE FANS?

This thorn has been in my head for a long time.

I know that TWITTER is for the famous

but I still use it

(and lie to myself saying that I am marketing my works)

I knew that Reddit AMA’s are for those with fame

but I tried it anyway.

I know still that Streaming on Twitch.tv and posting on youtube

is not expanding my base

but I’m there anyways

All of these things will be of service to fans

once I have them

here’s what you came here for though

Step 1: Know your demographic

for me my ideal demographic is young men ages 18-25

Step 2: Know where they are and what content they consume

for my demo

they check best of Reddit 5 times a day via phone,

they are not on twitter in significance,

they have 1-3 forums they are active or lurkers in

(but this are hyper specific and deluded to be of marketing value)

They are on either YouTube or twitch 4 hrs a day

while gaming passively letting the algorithm feed them auto-play content

Step 3: Understand the requirements of the platform

While YouTube’s algorithm is a secret.

It’s a mystery box that millions of people feed hundreds of millions of hours of video into

but we know what gets weight down

and what gets lifted up

RIGHT NOW

recommendations are for evergreen content from creators

with a consistent +4 year back catalog

Live streamers who engage on the platform

(comment-bots , community posts, etc)

are boosted

(my suspicion is that is based on how many times individuals check out the commenters channel page.)

The AI bot ties auto-play together based on the video description

(tags are a distraction)

(this creates a vicious reaction cycle funnel)

It’s why drama is so effective on YouTube

Step 4: lay the foundation for success to keep fans before you have them

Unless you want to be a one-hit wonder

or a that viral tweet

(which may become a Lizzo song)

you need to have a backlog of content

or become a flash in the pan

Step 5: Decide the color of your hat

Black hats:

maybe: use bots to comb your social site and get engagement

(suspect 1, suspect 2)

Buy: sub counts and watch time pushes

Grey Hats:

Kick the Hornets nests

Use the drama feed loop to spread your content and build a base

White Hats:

Get lucky

(this video was featured on the from page on YouTube and rocketed the channel from 50k to 300k subs in one month.

And has almost 1 million views)

Green Hats:

Do what Tai lopez did

“I’m here in my garage!”

There you have it!

I have other posts about the other platforms and best tips

Give me a comment and I’ll point you there.

Like and share this

Thanks for reading, I hope this was of value.

I’ll be streaming from stage one develop to finished product a 4-player card game on twitch every Friday 3pm-5pm EST

give a follow

feel free @ me on Discord

Want more Ravenclaw over analysis

enjoy this article.

Send an E-mail to

here

Or Follow me on Twitter for retweets of cute Kirby pictures

@HppoTweeter

With Love,

HngyHngyHppo

Accidental Branding Genius of Harry Potter’s Houses.

As a member of the House of Raven-claw is nature to analyze, study, and apply logic to solve the mysteries of existence.

-HPPO

These questions seed in my brain like thorns of the prickle-berry bushes, so small an yet if I just give them a little attention and love they can bloom large enough to bear fruit.

Today’s question is why after 28 years are there still people dedicated to their fictional houses of a wizarding school?

The answer is Carl Jung.

Jung’s most notable and unattributed contribution to clinical psychology was the terming of “Introverts” and “Extroverts” but that’s not the reason why Jung’s work is taught in university.

Carl Jung also categorized the four archetypes of personalities. A personality for each Hogwarts House.

Jung identified them as Thinking, Feeling, Intuitive, and Sensation.

Literary scholars who favor Joseph Campbell will teach a modified version of these for archetypes. They named these four the King, Magician, Warrior, and Lover.

Rowling by coincidence or educational Osmosis calls these types

Ravenclaw, Hufflepuff, Gryffindor, and Slytherin.

I’d like to show on graphic where the borders of each house sit, but I can’t visually plot a 4 dimensional graph.

It’s not as simple as the Introvert/Extrovert number lined range from 1 to 10.

The Jung types would be coordinates in 4 dimensional space

X = Thinking

Y = Feeling

Z = Sensation

W = Intuitive

Each Hogwarts house would occupy a quarter of this tesseract chart.

***

Why is this branding genius?

There is a Hogwarts house for everyone and as such displaying your house whether you’re a Hufflepuff Queen on Tumblr, a Ravenclaw Redditor, a 4 channing Slytherin, Or a Tik-Toking Gryffindor is an impression for the Brand of Harry Potter.

We live in the attention economy where impressions matter. You can’t buy the amount of brand power that Hogwarts sorting hat has and it can’t be Usurped in market share as a categorization tool.

As long as Harry Potter is “Scholastic”-ly popular the Hogwarts House’s will continue to be the standard of sorting people by their Jungian personality types.

Now while I and you can’t put

Godric Gryffindor, Salazar Slytherin, Rowena Ravenclaw and Helga Hufflepuff

Into our own original works

without violating copy-write.

We can use the colors schemes and patroni pendants as a short cut/ signal flare to Potter-heads or culturally informed readers (even being remotely aware of the House’s gives these nudges).

To prove that branding has power

Pause for a moment

Refresh for mind

and

Fill in the blank…

Have a taste of a nice refreshing (—-1—)

or

pop a can of (—2—)

put on a pair of (—3—) and just do it.

Head to the (—4—) and pick one up today.

You answered each of these not with a generic object or noun. But with a specific brand name company.

That is the power of branding. It’s in your mind, It’s a shortcut, and It’s a tool.

🙂 (:

Thanks for reading, I hope this was of value.

I’ll be streaming from stage one develop to finished product a 4-player card game on twitch every Friday 3pm-5pm EST

give a follow

or feel free @ me on Discord

Want more Ravenclaw over analysis

enjoy this article.

Send an E-mail to

here

Or Follow me on Twitter for retweets of cute Kirby pictures

@HppoTweeter

With Love,

HngyHngyHppo

 

Horror Writing.

H.P. Lovecraft started his writing process by defining the emotion he was going after. Then drafting until he would illicit that feeling his subjects..ERH..um.. readers. But H.P. Was a heavy plotter.

Stephen King started with a concept and built around it until it was horrifying. And if he failed in giving the scene the sense of horror intended he would go to the extremes of gross to make the scene at least uncomfortable giving it a more horrifying weight in the readers memory as they would be unnerved to recall such passages. Mr. King was a pantser and started with a concept and characters then followed them through the plot as needed to write his book.

I think that when telling a horror story whether on film or the page. You should at least keep in mind the types of and stages of horror.

Unknown, Uncanny, Unstoppable

are at least three of the most common.

Unknown

is the easiest to do right because it is the most commonly done wrong. Darkness itself is not scary, it’s when we can see or hear or feel the edges of what lies in the darkness that begins to press the panic button. It’s when a shadow’s fold over themselves in the corner of the room to make the outline of death himself patiently waiting without breathe for your eyes to close here in this world be you are claimed to his. It’s the darkness of space where stars no longer grow but the eyes see a tint of something else blocking the depths from truly being seen. It’s the shifting at the bottom of a lake, past the searcher’s reflection and the clear sky waters that refuse to let the Autumn clouds above take shape as easily as they do in the sky because something is disturbing the water’s hold on them.

When starting with the Unknown each time it appears it must become more defined, otherwise the subject will place their guard between the satisfaction of knowing and the terror of finding out. The most common mistake is going from 10% reveal to 100% reveal before the third act. The audience expects to find out slowly, manage their expectations against the needs of your story.

Examples:

Friday the 13th

IT by Stephan King

Uncanny

is when something is not quite right. I’d venture that in cinematography this is used by accident and because of form rather than by a deliberate attempt to unnerve the audience.

The best examples are often dolls, painting, ghosts because they are so common and illicit uncanny speculation since they are suppose to fit within a box but changing small details between scenes or in scenes makes them uncanny.

Inanimate objects that move when the viewer isn’t viewing them directly create the start of uncanny horror. “Julee, now three, was about to have her baby sister sharing her room. The sweetest and nicest child according to the neighborhood girls who babysat on our monthly night out. We had set up the crib in the space that was formerly her “High” tea area, where she held here tea parties, passively she may have been throwing us signs that she was upset but she was very outspoken and happy. All the dolls and animals that she gathered around her table were now leaning up against as the wall as if in time-out, all except her porcelain kamacha doll her favorite. She would sit on the edge of Julee’s bed watching the other dolls. Julee was nothing but happy when we talked about her sister coming out of my belly and home soon.”

Ghosts are often given descriptions and visages that would make them human but one detail is wrong. “It may have been they open window but the temperature had fallen and the room was now cold enough to start my shivers. Even over a boiling pot of stew I feel a draft when she walks in the room. Except for a floorboard creak her feet never fall hard enough to hit the ground with sound. “AS A Lady should..” god I’ll be hearing that for the rest of my living days.”

You can start on either side of the Uncanny valley but you must slowly move away from your starting position to build a sense of progression. Dolls with dead eyes and human hair must become moving, talking, demons with soft flesh beating under their immobile outer shell. Ghosts can start as whispers and wind and become the outstretched hand clutching at it’s victim with intend to drag them through the looking glass OR Ghosts can start as people who drift further from humanity as the story unfolds, giving up breathe by never moving their chest, staring off into thought for inhuman stretches, translucency, transparency, incorporeal. The longer something remains in the exact definition as it’s starting point the more familiar that thing becomes and fear begins to remove itself.

Unstoppable

is the pretty clear as in being self defined BUT it does not mean indestructible. There must be hope however small that it can be stopped removing that hope creates certainty and certainty is the enemy of horror. If your monster has eaten a grenade explosion and hasn’t even lost a tooth then his immortality is certain.

A cockroach can be crushed and defeated, a thousand is a challenge, a million is a certainty.

A lumbering zombie can be outsmarted, outmaneuvered, or defeated with brawn. You can out run a zombie but you can’t run forever and while you rest your fragile warm body more gather outside waiting for you meet another demand be it food or fresh air.

Death will come for you. The hope is not today or until the end of your earthly works but that is never a guarantee. You have illusion and hope that your choices have some impact on whether he knocks tomorrow or sixty years from now, eat healthy, avoid stress, go to the doctor all of these are well and good but they do not still the reapers hand forever.

I just want to wrap this up with how Friday the 13th uses all three of these to great effect. But when watching a good example its hard to see why it is good. As an artist you’ll learn more/faster from the mistakes you make and the mistakes of others than from works without mistakes.

With love and hopefully better dreams than me,

HngyHngyHppo

Manufacturing Credibility

Credibility is defined as the quality of being trusted and believed in.

But it is not the same as being true.

Who is more credible on the subject of writing?

The college professor who has published in scholarly journals

OR

The New York Times best selling author

The rational would say that it depends on the advice or the subject. The emotional will indicate that it depends on their proximity and relationship to the subject.

R: The professor specializes in Russian Long form and Eastern European poetry, so as long as that is the realm we are discussing then they are more credible than The NYT bestseller H.K. Rowling but on the subject of YA or scholastic fiction Rowling’s is the more creditable source.

E: I loved the Harry Potter books and they inspired my own journey into writing fan fiction then novels, H.K. Rowling’s is the more creditable source. But my teacher has shown me the finer points of the finer technical points of long form novels even if they were written by some Russian ages ago.

The answer I’ve been trying to find is just how does one manufacture “Credibility”

I know it’s been done before and I’ve seen it done a few different ways.

The first is

“FOAF”

or friend of a friend

the poem “Ozymandias”, Plato’s description of the fall of Atlantis, Star Wars’ opening crawl.

Each use this with great effect to provide a creditable foundation.

It is thought (incorrectly) that because a story is removed by time, space, and even told third hand that it becomes less creditable but there is a blind spot in our psyche’s in the factor of three.

“I met a traveler(1) from an antique land(2).

Who said(3):…”

Ozymandias

In Plato’s Dialogues Plato(1) writes that Socrates(2) called three men to meet him. Socrates(2) asked the men about Atlantis Critias(3,) told them of a story he heard from his grandfather(1A) who heard from the lawgiver Solon(2A) who brought tales from Egypt(3A) about Atlantis.

Plato uses the FOAF technique twice. First to give himself credibility (that this meeting happened and these things were said) then again to give the speaker Critias credibility (that the city/country of Atlantis was indeed a real place).

For the rational this is too far removed to be trusted, but for the emotional with ties/respect for Socrates this is only one use of FOAF and likely creditable.

And of course Star Wars opens with

“A long(1) time ago in a galaxy far(2), far(3) away.”

Each modifier here adds distance and with FOAF gives enough credibility to narrative about to crawl across the screen before the star destroyer appears.

Now of course it’s just a fairy tale nod.

“Once upon a time(1), in a kingdom far(2), far(3) away.”

but with less modifiers the story’s required suspension of disbelief is at jeopardy from over scrutiny of the audience. With more modifiers like Plato’s Dialogues the relevance to the target is called into question and the information can be judged objectively on it’s merits.

“A long(1), long(2), like really long(3) time ago, in a far(4) away place, like further(5) than you’ve ever been before in your life far(6).”

This preface will be ignored and the story will have to stand on it’s own merits

Or

“A while(1) back, a few(2) towns from here.”

This story can be investigated. It’s too recent and too close someone else would need to corroborate that the story is true.

The Second Method of manufacturing creditably is through association. This is target specific and what gives you credibility with one group may make you worth skepticism from another.

Is the Professor from Oxford, Harvard, Yale, the ivy league, Any-town College, or Community College.

Those I’ve met who’ve topped out at a High School diploma provide less credibility the higher up the Academic ladder of Prestige one has climbed. But for those with less than a High School Diploma or more the higher up on Mount Olympus one has climbed and degrees authority from the more credible they are.

Is the best selling author recognized by the New York Times, Publishers Weekly, Goodreads, or Amazon.

The NYT list is a curated list and lends itself to a higher amount of credibility to those outside the publishing industry. Publishers Weekly list is mostly data driven and objective but there are clear cases of advertisers (cough Disney, big 5) consistently placing high even when there numbers may* not be reflected by Amazon’s sales numbers of the same titles. But Amazon has many different categories and in order to have a best seller author’s may have in the past incorrectly categorized their works and personally bought just a dozen copies to claim the top spot and become a number one best seller. Which is why it ranks lowest in credibility even if the top spot was truly earned for a hard category like Fantasy or Romance, it’s impossible to tell those Amazon bestsellers from Fictional Johnny who listed his fantasy novel under Contemporary Fiction.

-IMPORTANT Aside-

Amazon is currently testing Amazon Author Rank as a replacement for their individual category best selling lists. Which means that going forward if the system will be much harder to game but the damage to their reputation will be persistent. This is a good thing for Amazon’s reputation but a bad thing for upcoming Authors who are now competing in the back pages of for potential readers attention. It means that J.K. Rowling will be the Most Popular Fantasy Author even if she never writes another book in here life. Her work will rank at the top spot for decades to come because if this is how readers are introduced to the fantasy section they may just start from the top and give her eight points over her nearest competitor. Sad times really as independent authors job to get notice just got much harder.

-Aside over-

The last method I’ve found is introduction and vouching.

“Have you met my friend Jane she is a classically trained Pianist.”

Now it doesn’t matter if any of that is true. It doesn’t matter if my and the Target are friends. All that matters is someone has vouched for Jane and her credibility. Even If I am a known liar and Jane looks disheveled and perhaps homeless. What matters is the Jane’s credibility is TWO v. ONE. And the target’s resistance to the group is all that stands in the way of Jane being the an authority of whether Handel’s Messiah can be played with only the left handle.

This is credibility through group authority. Essentially the more people you have one your side the more credible you are. A tactic of politics, Head cheerleaders, and Ceo’s who have more than one assist in entourage. The more people eyes nodding in agreement the higher the credibility of the speaker.

Did you hire a cameraman to follow you around, How about a whole camera crew.

Those are the method’s I’ve learned about Manufacturing Credibility.

TL;DR

I heard it from a friend of a friend that this is true.

As a Harvard professor: “this is true.”

“Meet Jane she’s an authority on the subject and she says that this is true.”

but none of these are in themselves true though they are highly credible.

With love,

HngyHngyHppo