Hypothetical Girlfriend, Final Cut

Xeldar

Silver Squire
1,546
133
10/10. Enjoy the ride as everyone looks at us like what the fuck, what the fuck? This fucking buttery nerdy guy and her?
 

Aldarion

Egg Nazi
8,964
24,528
the 1-10 systems is stupid, because 75% of women would be in the 6-9 range, thus your going to have very few outliers to give your data any meaning.

I think a more reasonable scale would be 0-1
0 being "Would not sleep with"
1 being "Would sleep with"



EDIT - TO clarify my original post and to respond to the anonymous "PM" that obviously mis understood.

Mist seemed to indicate that 5 or 5.5 was average because it was in the middle of the scale. I wanted to clarify that this is crazy and you should get off the road. The distribution needs to be weighted and from personal experience most pals don't even use the 1-4 on the spectrum, uggos cash in a 5, which can often being the floor.

Now that that is out of my system, please carry on with the crazy broad.
No no no. This is a huge pet peeve of mine so I'll go off for a moment even though the thread is kind of dumb.

First, you are correct that 5.5 is the midpoint not 5. But this small amount of rightness is HUGELY outweighed by the horrible fallacies that follow.

Its a normal distribution: half of the values are below the median. No, dont argue. It *has* to be a normal distribution. This is exactly the kind of quantitative trait studied by biologists as far back as Fisher; like height or weight or damn near any other human trait that shows continuous variation in a population. Half of women are < 5.5 and half are > 5.5. Any scoring that ignores this rule is biased and can be summarily rejected.

Next, for calibration. None of us has met a 10 and few have even seen one. 10 is a superpower. <0.1% of women are 10s. They never have to leave their mansions on Caribbean islands that they own.

All of us have met 1s. The ugliest women in your homeroom period in highschool was a 1. The ugly chick on the bus this morning was a 1. Although 1s are just as rare as 10s, they dont have a superpower so we see them.

Almost all women any of us have ever met or dated range from 4-6. Since almost all women in the population fall in this range, this must be the case. Some of us may have met a 7 once or twice. Most "hot" celebrities are 7-9s.

Finally, women are incapable or ranking other women or themselves, and men are incapable of ranking women they have feelings for or have fucked.

With those basic common sense rules laid out, I hope youll see the flaws in your statements.
 

Famm

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
11,041
794
No no no. This is a huge pet peeve of mine so I'll go off for a moment even though the thread is kind of dumb.

First, you are correct that 5.5 is the midpoint not 5. But this small amount of rightness is HUGELY outweighed by the horrible fallacies that follow.

Its a normal distribution: half of the values are below the median. No, dont argue. It *has* to be a normal distribution. This is exactly the kind of quantitative trait studied by biologists as far back as Fisher; like height or weight or damn near any other human trait that shows continuous variation in a population. Half of women are < 5.5 and half are > 5.5. Any scoring that ignores this rule is biased and can be summarily rejected.

Next, for calibration. None of us has met a 10 and few have even seen one. 10 is a superpower. <0.1% of women are 10s. They never have to leave their mansions on Caribbean islands that they own.

All of us have met 1s. The ugliest women in your homeroom period in highschool was a 1. The ugly chick on the bus this morning was a 1. Although 1s are just as rare as 10s, they dont have a superpower so we see them.

Almost all women any of us have ever met or dated range from 4-6. Since almost all women in the population fall in this range, this must be the case. Some of us may have met a 7 once or twice. Most "hot" celebrities are 7-9s.

Finally, women are incapable or ranking other women or themselves, and men are incapable of ranking women they have feelings for or have fucked.

With those basic common sense rules laid out, I hope youll see the flaws in your statements.
 

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,481
22,336
Why is this back in the shaw?

This is what I get for contributing.
 

Phazael

Confirmed Beta Shitlord, Fat Bastard
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
14,161
30,345
Hey, I'm not excluding myself. I definitely value looks pretty highly. I'm sure I could have shacked up some some fat dyke a long time ago if I wanted to.
Isn't this basically the living arrangement you and your mom have now, minus (maybe) the scissoring?