User Tag List

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 52 of 52
  1. #41
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    13,726
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chemgoddess1 @ Dec 28 2009, 03:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Seeing as this is totally subjective a mathematical approach is unjustified.</div>
    I disagree. It's not like we can use a mathematical model to describe our preferences to an exact degree, but you can make some generalizations. For instance, no one here seems to be using a linear scale, as everyone seems to agree that the 9s and 10s are pretty rare.

  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,941
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, but what I would consider "upper digits" and what you consider "upper digits" are totally different, therefore subjective.


  3. #43
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    13,726
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chemgoddess1 @ Dec 28 2009, 03:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yeah, but what I would consider "upper digits" and what you consider "upper digits" are totally different, therefore subjective.</div>
    Of course it's subjective. That's why each person has their own "model". I don't think my model would fit your specific tastes, or vice-versa.

  4. #44
    Senior Member Par Deus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    14,485
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chemgoddess1 @ Dec 28 2009, 01:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yeah, but what I would consider "upper digits" and what you consider "upper digits" are totally different, therefore subjective.</div>

    Well, the whole point of the thread is to find out what individual people subjectively try to rate objectively and how they do it.

    Where's the Pats on the head and says "you're pretty" emoticon?


    Right-Wing Terrorist Bot 2.010

  5. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,534
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Par Deus @ Dec 28 2009, 12:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well, the whole point of the thread is to find out what individual people subjectively try to rate objectively and how they do it.

    Where's the Pats on the head and says "you're pretty" emoticon?</div>

    I raised all of these philosophical caveats in my post.

    In order to examine the question, one must 1) state his or her demographic, 2) state their historical preferences, 3) state the model they use for deriving conclusions from that data set, and, ideally, 4) state how useful the different models that they've employed have been for predicting future choices for each iteration of the model.

    I just implicated 1-3 and jumped straight to 4, because I'm a pretty horrible human being.

    Chem's just trying to tell you that I'm right, LOL. A mathematical model is unjustified because we compete with each other, on our own terms, while women select among the competitors based on their own necessarily esoteric criteria. Standards of female beauty aren't so much culturally contingent as they are part of a continual flux driven by women's caprice vis-a-vis how they present themselves. (Did it escape everyone's notice that the implication of the pictures is that most women in the age-bracket of reproductive viability are capable of changing their rating (by our standards) basically at will? How many men can say that they can change their own female-given rating with the same ease?)

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Most Under-Appreciated Book Ever)</div><div class='quotemain'>Man: I propose that we get married.
    Rosemary: Do you love me?
    Man: Don't be silly. I'm the best of the men, and you're the best of the women; we're above love.
    Rosemary: Just needed to make sure. Of course, I accept your proposal, as long as you don't love me. I'm glad we can speak so plainly, so intimately. Now go kill [her lover's best friend].
    Man: Thank God! I've been itching for something to do, but haven't been able to decide what, ever since I conquered the social order of this place. You've saved me! I'll go shoot some people right now!
    Rosemary, to herself: What a fool he is, to speak so plainly! Now that I control his heart I control his Gun. I can have anyone I don't like killed, and those losers will all blame it on Man; when they eventually band together and overtake him, the best of them will just "propose" to me all over again.
    Rosemary, to Man: Well, get to it, before I change my mind.
    Man: (exits with haste)
    Rosemary, to herself: I've already changed my mind ... What if [R's lover] is upset? Then I'll have to listen to him whine all night! God forbid I have to actually sleep with Man ... Oh well, I'll just yell at Man for it when he gets back. It's his fault for not/listening to me, anyways.</div>

    Alexander wept when he reached the ocean because he was gay, not because their were no more lands to conquer.

  6. #46
    Senior Member Par Deus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    14,485
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Section 8 @ Dec 28 2009, 04:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I raised all of these philosophical caveats in my post.


    1) And, I chided you to post because you're awesome.


    In order to examine the question, one must 1) state his or her demographic, 2) state their historical preferences, 3) state the model they use for deriving conclusions from that data set, and, ideally, 4) state how useful the different models that they've employed have been for predicting future choices for each iteration of the model. I just implicated 1-3 and jumped straight to 4, because I'm a pretty horrible human being.


    2) Again, I just originally wondered how different people mathematically numbered it, not why, but I do like how yall have expanded it.






    Chem's just trying to tell you that I'm right, LOL. A mathematical model is unjustified because we compete with each other, on our own terms, while women select among the competitors based on their own necessarily esoteric criteria. Standards of female beauty aren't so much culturally contingent as they are part of a continual flux driven by women's caprice vis-a-vis how they present themselves. (Did it escape everyone's notice that the implication of the pictures is that most women in the age-bracket of reproductive viability are capable of changing their rating (by our standards) basically at will? How many men can say that they can change their own female-given rating with the same ease?)


    3) I don't have to wear makeup or get plastic surgery -- or compete.

    I just have to choose, then do it again the next day.

    But, that is quite true for betas.




    Alexander wept when he reached the ocean because he was gay, not because their were no more lands to conquer.


    4) Your mnemonics are gay.</div>


    Right-Wing Terrorist Bot 2.010

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,534
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>3) I don't have to wear makeup or get plastic surgery -- or compete.

    I just have to choose, then do it again the next day.

    But, that is quite true for betas.</div>

    Plastic surgery and makeup are two totally different things, btw. Plastic surgery says something about who a person does or does not want to be. Makeup may or may not say something about how a girl wants to be perceived, not perceived, or both. The former is a submissive concession, the latter is active dynamic image management, and is inherently manipulative.

    You don't have to compete in order to get laid, but you do have to compete in order to keep from getting shot (or starve, etc.). IOW, you have to compete in order to avoid finding yourself trapped in a world that disgusts you. Attraction and repulsion make for strange bed-fellows. A girl that would otherwise be attractive, all things being equal, may easily trigger nothing at all [but spite, more than likely], simply because you sense that something about her suggests that relations might compromise your currency in the social circle that you actually appreciate. Assuming a non-masochistic individual, the higher the stakes you're playing for, the more discrimination will be operating at an unconscious level. People operate heuristically, and most people are at least somewhat aware of that; if a guy is playing for high-stakes but tries to turn a ho into a housewife then people will tend to avoid him, partly out of recognition that such women are dangerous -- making the person, by proxy, a danger to himself -- and partly out of concern that there must be something wrong with him on a depth level to allow himself to be seduced by someone so degenerate.

    If you do, in fact, "choose every day," then you're only supporting my assertion that the vast majority of men are naive cuckolds -- not that either genetics research or common sense needs anecdotal confirmation. But then, everyone has that option available to them... there are tons of emotionally damaged hot chicks out there, and there are call girls for those who're looking for hot sex + low-risk. However, attraction, to my mind, carries connotations of a compulsive desire for coupling, and that sort of thing has to piggy-back on a primal drive or three: self-destruction (Clinton-Lewinsky pairings), self-advancement (Federline-Spears pairings), or greater self-realization (Sartre-de Beauvoir pairings). Otherwise, we're not talking about attraction any more, but rather a game for figuring out who to choose or exclude from a set of objects that is barren of attractive qualities... which is, in itself, a form of competition.

  8. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    4,748
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Standard curve might describe mine. 2 SDs above the mean and you might be close to 9 territory.

    Or perhaps something linear, but constantly updating so that a 10 is always the most desirable woman I've ever met, and 1 being the least, everyone else being somewhere in between.

    BTW There are no girls on the internet, and therefore I am somewhat disinclined to believe that pictures of women exceeding my "10" actually exist. Reminds me of this thread.

    EDIT: BTW, I'm fascinated by fake boobs -- if a woman has very large breasts, I kinda prefer them to be fake.

  9. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    London
    Posts
    486
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've never liked the 1-10 scale.

    It's either "I would" or "I wouldn't"

    So I guess I'm a binary man.

  10. #50
    Senior Member Jinx Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    3,338
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Par Deus @ Dec 26 2009, 09:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Chem and Jinx, yall can reply about dudes (or chicks).</div>

    Aw, I feel so included! Thanks PD! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif[/img]

    It's simply a matter of how hot is his/her body, and how hot is his/her face. Hair counts, and style and all that is nice, but that's just a part of who the person is. Same with brains - of course, few intelligent people are going to find an idiot attractive in the long term, but that doesn't really mean an idiot can't be a 9. It just means it won't sustain an erection over the long haul.

    Kicking ass is my comfort food

  11. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    258
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I use the 10 point must system
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dr. Lats @ Mar 25 2008, 11:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>more full flaccid penis</div>

  12. #52
    Member DeniseXan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    92
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Par Deus View Post
    Technically, should a 9 should just be in the top 10%.

    I don't think many of us actually scale it that way.

    More like where the 50% mark is a zero, and each number represents 5% points up.

    Or would you use something more like normal distribution where it is a parabolic curve (but, again, likely having the actual 50th percentile be a zero), where it is much harder to go from even an 8-9 to an 9-10

    I think I'd call a chick who was truly in the 90 percentile on looks like a 7. And, I've only described 4-5 girls that I have known as a 9.5, though they were probably more like 99-99.9.
    My thoughts exactly.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Married chicks.....
    By Par Deus in forum M&M Lounge Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: December 25th, 2009, 09:27 PM
  2. Hot Chicks Make Men Stupid, Women Still Sociopaths
    By Section 8 in forum M&M Lounge Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: September 16th, 2009, 07:28 PM
  3. On a scale from one to ten...
    By Gahan in forum M&M Lounge Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: January 16th, 2008, 06:06 PM
  4. chicks and breakups and stuff
    By Kow in forum M&M Lounge Forum
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: July 10th, 2003, 10:42 AM
  5. For those with their hands on hot chicks asses.
    By zeppelin in forum Training Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: February 27th, 2003, 06:09 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •