![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sniffnoySorry, I ignored the considers on RGSD because they are listed indirectly. What I said below *should* read: (changes in bold)
Anyway I found that while only 5 out of the 32 types did not have any pairs
Add to the list of pairs:
RGSDf/RGSDf, RGSDf/RGSMf, RGSDf/RGSMm, RGSDm/RGSMf, RGSDm/RGSMm
There are 38 pairs. 18, a bare minority, are self-pairs; note that this also means that 18 out of the 32 types self-pair. Of the 20 remaining pairs, 8 are with RGSMf. (Of course RGSMf really has 9 pairs because it also self-pairs.)
The following 5 types do not pair:
DGLDf DBLMm DBLDf RBLDm RBLDf
Of the 20 non self-pairs, 6[0] are between abcdm and abcdf. That leaves just 6 pairs of two actually different types where neither type is RGSMf.
[0]This is not due to me leaving out RGSD, but rather to simple miscounting.
Anyway I found that while only 5 out of the 32 types did not have any pairs
Add to the list of pairs:
RGSDf/RGSDf, RGSDf/RGSMf, RGSDf/RGSMm, RGSDm/RGSMf, RGSDm/RGSMm
There are 38 pairs. 18, a bare minority, are self-pairs; note that this also means that 18 out of the 32 types self-pair. Of the 20 remaining pairs, 8 are with RGSMf. (Of course RGSMf really has 9 pairs because it also self-pairs.)
The following 5 types do not pair:
DGLDf DBLMm DBLDf RBLDm RBLDf
Of the 20 non self-pairs, 6[0] are between abcdm and abcdf. That leaves just 6 pairs of two actually different types where neither type is RGSMf.
[0]This is not due to me leaving out RGSD, but rather to simple miscounting.
