Agnostic about any/all god(s). I am functionally an atheist, but you can't know, so I leave the door open.

If you graphed it, I'm an asymptote of agnosticism approaching the atheist line closer and closer.

Strictly speaking I am an agnostic atheist, but I generally just describe myself as an atheist.
Atheist describes what I believe about god. I believe that the claims by theists do not meet their burden of proof. I see no evidence that leads me to believe that a god/s exists. Do I know that a god/s cannot exist in any form in any universe? No - hence the agnostic bit of the label.

As for deist gods, for me, they are a non-starter and just a god of the gaps. 'Something' that creates then has no other action, cannot be detected and has no effect on the universe once it's created. In reality is indeterminate from something that doesn't exist. So why not just say "I don't know what created the universe"?

I'm an agnostic deist. I believe there might be a god who creates and just never stops creating and expanding the universe, but I don't believe god is involved beyond that. I also see god as more of an energy than an actual physical deity.

I base my life on science and the scientific method I believe God, gods and religion was made up by people. The more intelligent people used religion and God , gods to control the less intelligent people or their own benefit. This seems like the only logical answer to me. But science cannot prove God does not exist or exist. So just let people go on your merry way.

none zero

All of the above. The whole impetus for being an agnostic is fully grasping that until something can be seen, felt or touched, it can be neither proven nor disproven.

An agnostic does not cling to the notion of there being absolutely nothing beyond sentient, organic life with the same furvor in which a gnostic clings to the opposing viewpoint. An agnostic is open to possibility, but only possibility until such time as clear sensory evidence is presented.

You're asking two (or three?) questions. I'll answer them all tomorrow after I get some sleep.

I'm not an agnostic or an atheist because I don't believe there's a god for me to not believe in.

I do not believe in any gods until I see solid evidence of its existance.one was not needed to start the universe and one was not needed to start life on earth,energy matter and chemistry was all that was needed to start life .

I'm guessing your definition of "agnostic" is different than mine. Your question gives the impression that you think I may believe in god or gods. I don't. When you ask "What kind of god or gods do you believe may exist?"... That question doesn't fit inside my definition. My version of agnosticism is simply that the existence of any god is unknowable. The burden of proof is on the positive rather than the negative. However, there is no way to give a definitive answer in either direction. So, unless some evidence becomes available either way to make me pursue the question, in my opinion, there is no "god" and the question is moot. I don't believe that any god or gods may exist. But, my limited understanding has trouble grasping the concept of infinity also. I simply understand that what I believe is just that, a belief. It is not a scientific proof. And, as such, it is not infallible.

I go with atheist as I don't have a good definition of agnostic. I can find no evidence of god, so atheist.

Anything less than the Spinozian definition isn’t worth calling god. Thor, Odin, Baal... can easily be dealt with logically. It’s the spinozian definition that complicates things. You can divorce god from Christianity, Hinduism, Islam.... and still talk about it as a logical possibility. But that’s it. You can’t know that or approach it logically. So, since you can’t disprove it or prove it, the question becomes moot. Agnosticism is the acknowledgement of that logical dilemma.

I need to see some proof before I'll "believe" anything: this God, that god, those gods, no gods. Anything. Everything.

Show me proof, and then we'll talk.

I am an agnostic not an atheist. I don't know if there is a higher being or not. I am anti religions. If there is a creator he is not involved in our world. We are on our own.

I take the label because I see an infinite universe, with infinite possibilities; so I can't discount the possibility outright, even though I see no real evidence. That being said, I do outright renounce traditional ideas of God - but to say that no entitiy (even beyond what we would define as such) could ever exists, in the unknowable depths of creation -

Hell, dogs can hear things I can't - so who the hell am I to say it isn't possible?

I always thought that agnostic was just not knowing..
So, that would be "whatever" ?????

For me, it is a matter of accepting "best evidence". There is no convincing evidence of any god so therefore, I accept that as most likely.

The universe if infinite. Thus there are an infinite number of explanations for it's coming into being .
. All of which are wrong.