|
Scale (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Boomer187 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Mikey Mike
Another amazing Orbax thread to add to the collection. Well done to you sir 
Gimp :rolleyes: |
| quote: | Originally posted by Boomer187
I think we should stop hatin on people who start stupid threads and start hatin on people with stupid replies to threads they dislike. Just don't hit the reply button and never come back, all will be good.
|
make your own damn thread. judas priest. |
|
|
| Ezman |
| I'd usually put 6 as "would only touch her if i was drunk or really horny". 5 as "average". 1 as "wouldnt touch her with a 10 foot pole (or my own pole:p )" etc. |
|
|
| DJ Mikey Mike |
| quote: | Originally posted by Boomer187
make your own damn thread. judas priest. |
When a forum is consistantly full of e like this, knocking decent threads off the page, i'll voice my opinion however I please. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
All of you have it completely wrong.
When coming up with a rating, you have to take into account body (x) and face (y). Plotting the points, you have:
  
The green area is the average. The light blue area is where you get the butter faces and the fatties who could be hot, if only they worked out. Around the turquoise area (the intersection between green and blue) are the ones you'd only do if you were horny and drunk.
Yellow is where you start seeing the exceptionally hot ones. Usually these ones are almost perfect, but have some tiny flaw which is usually subjective to the person doing the rating. A little too tall, a little too short, are too small/too big, etc. You can see that, as we travel across the body (x) axis, the facial requirements to reach the yellow shaded area decrease - however, they never drop below an 8 or so.
Red are sizzlin' hot. Don't mess with the ones in that area unless you know what you're doing.
The blue area are dogs. You can see from the last rotated graph that this area actually "dips", and thus represents only a miniscule portion of the population. These are the ones that could actually make you soft if they took their clothes off. They are the female equivalent of poor fat pimpled men who play video games and eat old pizza all day. To reach this area, you have to try, you have to be fat AND ugly, and very few women have low enough genetics AND self-respect to get there.
Thank you for your attention.
P.S. the facial axis is offset to give it symmetry and make it easier to view. Don't assume that a 0 is as good as a 10. |
|
|
| sym |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
|
Wow, well put. Surprise you took the time to make those graphs :P |
|
|
| drizzt81 |
| my curve sees a 4-ish being ok, a 7 quite hot, 10 über-hot.. but it depends, i have non-linear scales most of the time |
|
|
| anuneventrade |
Coming from a *girls* point of view, I suppose we do things differently. Me and my friends don't judge things on a scale of numbers, per say. But I suppose numbers could be added in. It goes:
(1)Puke just by looking at him
(2)Just plain Fugly.
(3)Not worth my time.
(4)Decent (ish) But still wouldn't chance it.
(5)Worth a glance.
(6)Worth a stare.
(7)Double look.
(8)Completely turn around when he passes you to catch a third look.
and....
(9)OMFG so wickedly hot! :stongue:
Post note: That's the scale. But let me tell you, it's extreemely rare that anyone gets past number 7, or even *gets* to number 7. Normally, it stops at about number 5 or 6. :p |
|
|
| sym |
| quote: | Originally posted by anuneventrade
Coming from a *girls* point of view, I suppose we do things differently. Me and my friends don't judge things on a scale of numbers, per say. But I suppose numbers could be added in. It goes:
(1)Puke just by looking at him
(2)Just plain Fugly.
(3)Not worth my time.
(4)Decent (ish) But still wouldn't chance it.
(5)Worth a glance.
(6)Worth a stare.
(7)Double look.
(8)Completely turn around when he passes you to catch a third look.
and....
(9)OMFG so wickedly hot! :stongue:
Post note: That's the scale. But let me tell you, it's extreemely rare that anyone gets past number 7, or even *gets* to number 7. Normally, it stops at about number 5 or 6. :p |
What about 10? Immediately rip his clothes off right than and there? :tongue2 |
|
|
| Boomer187 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Mikey Mike
When a forum is consistantly full of e like this, knocking decent threads off the page, i'll voice my opinion however I please. |
Realize that the message of a single smilely face rolling its eyes will not stop people from making posts that they think are cool. That message is very unclear. Thats why I believe you are replying for other reasons besides to get people to not make posts you do not like that bump the threads you do like all the way to page 2, and maybe 3.
So maybe a rethink of stategy is needed, but as you have stated, you can post as you please and you should. However just as you are quick to criticize this thread, you will also be quickly criticized.
Great graph Diginut.... |
|
|
| Redeye |
| quote: | Originally posted by anuneventrade
Coming from a *girls* point of view, I suppose we do things differently. Me and my friends don't judge things on a scale of numbers, per say. But I suppose numbers could be added in. It goes:
(1)Puke just by looking at him
(2)Just plain Fugly.
(3)Not worth my time.
(4)Decent (ish) But still wouldn't chance it.
(5)Worth a glance.
(6)Worth a stare.
(7)Double look.
(8)Completely turn around when he passes you to catch a third look.
and....
(9)OMFG so wickedly hot! :stongue:
Post note: That's the scale. But let me tell you, it's extreemely rare that anyone gets past number 7, or even *gets* to number 7. Normally, it stops at about number 5 or 6. :p |
shouldn't you be studying missy?!?!?!! :p |
|
|
| whiskers |
| .................................................................................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by whiskers
.................................................................................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
And this reply was useful/interesting to us... how?
Incidentally, my graphs WERE a joke, although now that I think about it, I guess they make sense... :haha:
I used a parabolic scale for the face and logarithmic for the body. :p
Edit: Not wasting another post on this, but just wanted to add that whiskers is an idiot. |
|
|
|
|
