I have read a lot of criminal profiling on Zodiac, (I do know what that is)and it is all over the place.

Sure some like John Douglas are exceptionally good at profiling, but the others not as good.

My argument with you is, that you don’t know KQ to say that he fits everything on the list you read. You are making an "assumption" that KQ was like that.

To determine how high one scores on the Dark Triad, they are asked to answer 12 questions:

I tend to manipulate others to get my way.
I have used deceit or lied to get my way.
I have used flattery to get my way.
I tend to exploit others towards my own end.
I tend to lack remorse.
I tend to not be too concerned with morality or the morality of my actions.
I tend to be callous or insensitive.
I tend to be cynical.
I tend to want others to admire me.
I tend to want others to pay attention to me.
I tend to seek prestige or status.
I tend to expect special favors from others.

From and article in Psychology Today:

"People who score high on the traditional Dark Triad measures that test each of the three qualities separately show a pattern of behavior that in fact combines the worst of all worlds. They seek out multiple, casual sex partners. When someone gets in their way, they act out aggressively to take what they want. Oddly enough, although their self-esteem doesn’t seem to be either higher or lower than others, people who score high on the Dark Triad qualities have an unstable view of themselves. Perhaps reflecting the aggressiveness inherent in the Dark Triad, these tendencies are more likely to be shown by men, particularly those who are high on psychopathy and Machiavellianism."

So, to summarize, someone who scores high in the Dark Triad is typically intelligent, good looking, charming, and high achieving. They also lie, cheat, steal, bully, and sleep around. They abuse drugs and alcohol. They can be violent and aggressive, and at times a bit bizarre in their behavior and interests. They are more likely to be the boss you can’t stand or the co-worker who you hate to be around or the loud, weird, racist uncle who ruins Thanksgiving dinner when he gets drunk and slaps your sister on her ass. They are internet trolls who anonymously post hateful material online or try to be argumentative, provocative, controversial, or contrarian just for "the lulz".

Harvey Colliver could have written that.

Until Zodiac is caught, we can’t say with certainty any of the known suspects fit that list.

Of course we can! That’s called criminal profiling.

What I’ve found is that people will profile or make facts or semi-facts/clues "fit" their suspect. They will take evidence and make it tie into their favorite suspect. But then will discount that same line of thinking when people attach it to a different suspect. Lol, so amateur criminal profiling is only allowed when we tie it to our favorite suspect, but we don’t want other people to do it for theirs!

What I’ve found is that people will profile or make facts or semi-facts/clues "fit" their suspect. They will take evidence and make it tie into their favorite suspect. But then will discount that same line of thinking when people attach it to a different suspect. Lol, so amateur criminal profiling is only allowed when we tie it to our favorite suspect, but we don’t want other people to do it for theirs!

I think this is 100% accurate.

To be clear, I posted this not to point to any particular suspect or to even claim that the Zodiac fits this particular characterizing. It’s merely food for thought, but I do think that based on the evidence, it is a good profile of the suspect – whomever that may be.

I see him more as a domestic terrorist. A guy who used murder as a way to gain infamy and troll the police. I don’t think murder gave him pleasure as much as it gave him power. Killing was a tool. The idea of Zodiac as a weird loner who hated women and heard voices never jived with me. I think he was charismatic, had friends, had casual sex with many partners, was relatively successful professionally, and would be described by others as "seemingly normal". But I think he led a double life. He was angry because he felt he was owed more by society than what he had. He felt overlooked. He saw himself as superior to others, and looked down on people. Despite his string of sexual encounters, he was lonely and craved attention.

I’ve always imagined himself as yes, a little nerdy and creepy, but as you say socially confident and with a very wry sense of humor. More like Gaikowski or Qvale than ALA or Sullivan.