An estimation of .com userbase IQ megathread

[Kaari]

View attachment 195946
n****r plss dont leave me alone here, my niggalink jus got updated, im sending you my fentlink over on our neuralink

Ayo dat raycist un sheeit mayn

we wuz kangs un sheeit mayn

Sheeit cuh, sheeit

 

[hannah]

Ayo dat raycist un sheeit mayn

we wuz kangs un sheeit mayn

Sheeit cuh, sheeit

Pervert

 

[Kaari]

Pervert

Piss off dickweed

 

[The Centipede]

A reflection of the average iq in the UK.

 

[RAD]

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

6th place

 

[Its over]

Without the women here, the average would be 120 iq

But they bring it down

 

[Transposon]

A reflection of the average iq in the UK.
View attachment 195949

Tf is this bullshit you’ve saved on your phone

 

[justcopeboyo]

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

DNRD , my iq is 173

 

[Daisy]

No tag no care

@Transposon can you tell my my IQ please

 

[The Centipede]

Tf is this bullshit you’ve saved on your phone

I saved it especially for you X.

 

[Casablanco]

High effort thread. Why is @Casablanco only 5 IQ under me tho

Not even trolling u might be one of the dumbest users on here

 

[zombiebeatz2006]

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

Doesn’t include me cuz mine is 220

 

[can'tcope]

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

why not me

 

[prettybird]

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

Okay well now I want to know what people perceive me as….

 

[rovea]

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

Bro
What even is this thread bro
Plz never talked about IQ in jesters.com

 

[rovea]

Okay well now I want to know what people perceive me as….

user of the forum looksmaxing.com

 

[prettybird]

user of the forum looksmaxing.com

sub 5 iq got it

 

[rovea]

sub 5 iq got it

you can never be me and also the op is just guessing

 

[Darkeningstar]

Okay well now I want to know what people perceive me as….

Don’t worry, this thread is bad

 

[Giovane]

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

brutal

 

[Quncho]

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

Why am I not here

 

[Leainten]

Fascinating. Quite inspiring indeed.
Henceforth I will create my own list.

 

[faithful]

Hi there, since you're being so fucking weird via DM's I figured I would just reply to a couple of your posts publicly.

1. NO, I will NOT send you a picture of my penis
2. Based on the picture you sent me, you look like an overweight 15 or 16 year old girl at best, lose weight I do not have any advice for you
3. You and I are NOT friends, stop trying to act like we are and stop getting butthurt over that shit.

Fuck you bitch

 

[faithful]

Not even trolling u might be one of the dumbest users on here

i took an iq test idgaf about opinion-based viewpoints

 

[ose404]

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

wheres ose✌

 

[Transposon]

why not me

@Transposon can you tell my my IQ please

Who?

 

[Rau Le Creuset]

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

My iq is actually 100 but thanks bhaijaan

 

[sawyer.]

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

hey bud i am 135 tested in real life so basically, I'm a sigma.

 

[can'tcope]

Who?

 

[Aress]

Add me to the list at 140 - New Gen genius saving the forum from retarddom

 

[Aristocrat]

@Aristocrat - 999 iq #deus inter homines

 

[FutaMissionaryMaster]

First, a map (ChatGPT) :
70–79 (Borderline range)

• Roughly 6% of people.
• Cognitive processing is noticeably below average; abstract reasoning and complex problem-solving are challenging.
• People here can still live independently, but academic learning often requires strong structure and repetition.

80–89 (Low average)

• About 16% of people.
• Can handle daily life and most jobs competently. Abstract or theoretical concepts might feel frustrating or “foggy.”
• Tend to do better with concrete tasks than conceptual reasoning.

90–109 (Average)

• About 50% of people fall here.
• Capable of reasoning, learning, and understanding ideas of average complexity.
• The world is designed for this group — education systems, most professions, and social expectations are calibrated here.

110–119 (High average)

• Roughly 16% of people.
• Grasp abstract ideas faster, can strategize and connect patterns with less explicit instruction.
• Often called “bright,” though not necessarily “gifted.” They thrive in analytical or creative fields when motivated.

120–129 (Superior)

• Around 7% of the population.
• Often labeled as “gifted.” Capable of deep understanding, rapid learning, and advanced abstract thought.
• If curiosity and discipline match intelligence, they can excel in intellectually demanding fields.

130–144 (Highly gifted)

• About 2% of people.
• Very high reasoning ability and fast learning speed. They see relationships others miss, often creating their own conceptual frameworks.
• Prone to perfectionism or existential frustration if unstimulated. Many scientists, inventors, and polymaths fall here.

145+ (Exceptionally gifted / profoundly gifted)

• Less than 0.1% of people.
• Extremely fast and deep cognitive processing, sometimes to the point of struggling to relate socially or emotionally to peers.
• They can conceptualize systems-level ideas — physics, philosophy, or abstract mathematics — with near-instinctive clarity.
• Often have asynchronous development: mental maturity outpaces emotional grounding.
  Now..
  
  1. @lumen - 120-125. However, their most interesting aspect is the very high emotional intelligence, not readily captured by g.
  2. @Night - 105-115. Need, just a little more information
  3. @Rau Le Creuset - 125–129. From my discussions with him on anthropology, he can condense large amounts of information into clear, readable paragraphs. Shows real skill in distilling complexity.
  4. @vespertine - 110-119. Need a bit more to say. Seems capable, but interactions haven’t revealed much yet.
  5. @RAD - 115 - 125. Good at abstract reasoning. Thinks through problems logically, connects ideas well.
  6. @slopslinger - 115–125. A little reserved so conversations have been short. It could be so high because of wishful thinking from my end
  7. @over0 - 122.7. Impressive
  8. @apatheia - humble 123. Humble to the extent of being likeable
  9. @Genetics - 123. However, plagued by overthinking
  10. @johnfkennedy - humble 123. Quite articulate, almost all conversations have been fruitful
  11. @faithful - 105-113. Additionally, emotionally intelligent. Not readily captured by g
  12. @Lebensmude - 119 who thinks he's 130
  13. @rovea - Hidden and underrated 113
  14. @RRM67 - 95-100
  15. @Spuffy - very humble 121. Seen a few long responses from them. Handles abstract reasoning smoothly, articulate, and doesn’t get bogged down in unnecessary verbosity.
  16. @milkjar - 105-110 jail
  17. @hannah - 119 who thinks they're 138
  18. @Warden - humble 126. Most articulate user on forum in terms of their writing
  19. @tuberculosisinmybal - 110. Could absolutely be higher
  20. @Riggedahrage - 90-99
  21. @acketar - 119 who thinks he's 122.7
  22. @AuggyDauggy - 100 - 109
  23. @pompompurino - 100-109
  24. @Kaari - 100 - 109
  25. @Schizotypalcel - 115-119. Favourite forum philosopher
  26. @NewFuckingDay - hidden and humble 120. Another one for whom emotional intelligence dominates
  27. @Logicpilled - 119-?. Larping as you was quite fun.
  28. @limo8 - 100-105. Although very cute and likeable
  29. @giga.mia - 100- 105
  30. @Nbernical - 100 - 109
  31. @Casablanco - 100 - 109
  32. @BigDihDiddy - 90-99.
  33. @Darkeningstar - 130-135. If they indeed are pursuing a PHD in physics, it could be higher by just a couple more points. Yes, I know pursuing a PHD in and of itself is not indicative of intelligence since there are many more variables at play. Most importantly conscientiousness. I just feel it would be superfluous to give my reasoning here.
  A point that's completely off topic..
  Although, their writing is undeniably articulate, and their knowledge is definitely not all lie. I have, never in my life witnessed a person so arrogant and narcissistic about their intelligence. Their vanity and egregiousis solipsism is almost entertaining to watch
  34. @blanquita444 - 100 - 109
  35. @Stardust_ - 80-95. Such an interesting person to watch make sense of the world
  36. @RottingCarrie - 90-105.
  37. @huntergirl - 100- 109
  38. @TonyDr - 115 - 119. I loved reading his responses for the time he was here. Very similar to Randomized in terms of personality and writing.
  39. @Knight - 100 - 109
  39. @97baHater -125 -129. Interactions with him were pleasantly surprising. He falls down the pitfalls of black and white thinking often. Regardless, his fluency in scientific discussion is undeniable.
  40. @Jeezy - 95- 105
  41. @cindythetvisleaking - 100 - 109
  42. @SkinnyDennis - 149 silent guardian and observer
  43. @Striking_4 - 105-115
  44. @xy2m - 105- 109
  45. @Transposon - 119 who thinks he's 149
  
  
  Disclaimer : I apologize if you feel I’ve underestimated your IQ.
  Obviously, any analysis based on interactions is inherently limited. This thread is half sarcasm, half serious.
  If you think I’m wrong, chances are you’re right, since I probably am.​

how to know iq??

 

[DoGirlsFart?]

Now me!

 

[mitzimiau]

what od i get

 

[mitzimiau]

Now me!

67