waffles Wrote:NotAnonymous' vote is "Approved", I am told. That gives this guide 9 votes out of 12, so overall approved. Of course, as new GATs come in they are welcome to post approval/disapproval, which can be considered when added.
To clarify, in my first post I've said "Approved" or "Blank Vote".
If the vote is counted as "Approved", you get 9/12 or 0.75 approval rate (0.6 is needed for it to pass).
If my vote is counted as "Blank", then for this particular thread I'm not counted toward the total number of members, thus you have a 8/11 approval rate, or 0.(72) approval rate, which is again above the 0.6 needed for a guide to be approved. In either case, the final choice is the same.
As for my closing words why my vote is as it is:
The guide works for those that have the matching mindset - for example, Fede reports that his tulpas do exhibit most of the traditional qualities of independence a tulpa made using more normal methods exhibits - that said, some things he has yet to achieve (such as switching) - it will be interesting to see updates on that if he achieves it.
Obviously anyone who doesn't agree with his philosophy wouldn't use it, thus it doesn't constitute "bad advice" - people are expected to be able to think and see if they agree with the beliefs of the guide author or not - if they don't, there's no reason they should use the guide - for example, I tend to enjoy just interacting with my tulpas freely without needing to do any parroting, however some people may prefer parroting as a creation method and they do believe it will work and given what they report, it seems to work for them.
To summarize: Use the guide is you agree with it, don't if you don't. From an objective standpoint and given the current reports, it seems to give the desired results for those that agree with the guide and anybody who disagrees with it wouldn't be caught using it. Also, the guide itself is well-written and has various tips (such as imposition ones) which may be useful even if one doesn't subscribe to Fede's philosophy, thus it's still worth a read either way.