# Rating Guide(PSL, Percentiles, and IRL)



## BeautifulBones (Dec 3, 2018)

People are confused about PSL, and how it correlates , so this is why I always tell members their percentile when I rate them. However let's just briefly examine why each came about

PSL - This was mostly to see how people compared against male models. The average is 4 and each point you go up is an entire *Standard Deviation* . This is how hot girls with 10k + IG followers, or plastic surgeons see you.


PSL 4 - 50%
PSL 5 - 84.15%
PSL 6 - 97.25
PSL 7 - 99.87
PSL 8 - 99.9968


*68% of people are between a PSL 3 and 5*
TBH being a PSL 5 is good enough to have an active sex life, or even slay especially if you have a cool personality, some style , and a little status in your social circle/social media. However once you start getting above a PSL 6 it can really save you from a lot of shortcomings you may have. The PSL 6 territory is when crazy things start happening. Like girls you used to talk to friends will sleep with you. You can slay 40-100 girls a year without spending 25hours plus a week


Yes there's only 3 out of 100,000 people who are PSL 8. There might be 1-2 on this entire forum

IRL - What people say to your face , so you don't instantly get depressed. In reality it should correlate with stanines because that at least show a distribution similar to the bell curve, but the IRL scale is really the ugliest bottom 10% people(non deformed, as they get empathy from society, as they should) get a 4-5/10

As IRL ratings are based on emotions and not anything empirical I can't put a scale here, but anytime i put an irl rating it will based on stanines







* Percentiles -* This will be the best for most people. If you were in a club or other social setting with 100 same sex people of your age group. This tells where you would rank from those 1-100 people. Getting in the top 20% is good enough if you have other things going for you


----------



## DeformAspergerCel (Dec 3, 2018)

yes bro. too many normniggers and incels fail to comprehend basic highschool statistics


----------



## Madness (Dec 3, 2018)

I guess me being a psl 6 at 13 is pretty insane then


----------



## future chadlite (Dec 3, 2018)

legit thread


----------



## Nibba (Dec 3, 2018)

This is a great post @11gaijin sticky pls

I get approached and get hit on by club sluts do u think that would put me at 6 psl +


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 3, 2018)

@DeformAspergerCel Thanks I wanted to add some order to this chaotic rating system, and I understand people like to have free speech on this forum, but please never use the N-word on any of my post


----------



## Deleted member 443 (Dec 3, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> @DeformAspergerCel Thanks I wanted to add some order to this chaotic rating system, and I understand people like to have free speech on this forum, but please never use the N-word on any of my post


nigger


----------



## VST (Dec 3, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> People are confused about PSL, and how it correlates , so this is why I always tell members their percentile when I rate them. However let's just briefly examine why each came about
> 
> PSL - This was mostly to see how people compared against male models. The average is 4 and each point you go up is an entire *Standard Deviation* . This is how hot girls with 10k + IG followers, or plastic surgeons see you.
> 
> ...



Idk, sounds like a bit of a cope to me with how many people here get rated 6+.
PSL is just IRL rating -2.


----------



## JimJones (Dec 3, 2018)

You're a godsend


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 3, 2018)

@notafed It's people like you , and the censoring mods why I'll probably delete this account , or stop posting and just lurk. Your the lowest of the low, but your still a child of god with something divine integral to you. I hope you raise from your dark catacombs are realize your divine power

@Nibba Dosen't guarantee it , but if you get approached everytime you go to the club. I'd say your face + frame + physique + fashion + height puts you safely in the PSL 5-5.5+ range

@VST Most people are either still stuck in the IRL rating system , or are trolls trying to get reactions. Almost no one is empirical it's hard to get a good rating even on lookist sites. I might have to start charging people for my ratings since they actually give you insight and aren't shitpost


----------



## Nibba (Dec 3, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> @Nibba Dosen't guarantee it , but if you get approached everytime you go to the club. I'd say your face + frame + physique + fashion + height puts you safely in the PSL 5-5.5+ range


Gotcha. I've been rated 6-7 psl here tbh. Someone said 9/10 irl but I think my height and frame halo me a great deal


----------



## DeformAspergerCel (Dec 3, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> @DeformAspergerCel Thanks I wanted to add some order to this chaotic rating system, and I understand people like to have free speech on this forum, but please never use the N-word on any of my post


no man


----------



## Nibba (Dec 3, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> I might have to start charging people for my ratings since they actually give you insight and aren't shitpost


Sad thing is people would actually do this


----------



## Deleted member 443 (Dec 3, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> @notafed It's people like you , and the censoring mods why I'll probably delete this account , or stop posting and just lurk. Your the lowest of the low, but your still a child of god with something divine integral to you. I hope you raise from your dark catacombs are realize your divine power


----------



## Insomniac (Dec 3, 2018)

Too confusing for my retard brain tbh

All I know is that I’m an ugly fuck


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 4, 2018)

@DeformAspergerCel 
- If you can't comply with my only rule please add me to your ignore list


----------



## paulus (Dec 4, 2018)




----------



## DeformAspergerCel (Dec 4, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> @DeformAspergerCel
> - If you can't comply with my only rule please add me to your ignore list


miss me with that gay shit


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 4, 2018)

@DeformAspergerCel Your a reprehensible being, but your still a divine being. I hope one day you save yourself from your own mental hell, that make's Dante's inferno look like a utopian Solace. Welcome to my ignore list


----------



## DeformAspergerCel (Dec 4, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> @DeformAspergerCel Your a reprehensible being, but your still a divine being. I hope one day you save yourself from your own mental hell, that make's Dante's inferno look like a utopian Solace. Welcome to my ignore list


brutal


----------



## Deleted member 39 (Dec 4, 2018)

So this graph shows that being 8/10 is better than 9/10?


paulus said:


>


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 4, 2018)

@Curious0 

Fake News

@Athene 

We can bear up on the weight of the world on our shoulder responsibly in a way that not only gives us the best life possible, but that also respects others. I've respected everyone on this site since I've come here, and I demand my respect in turn


----------



## Genecel (Dec 4, 2018)

Stupid nigger making up statistics without peer reviewed studies fuck off


----------



## Hebbe wem (Dec 4, 2018)

This is my promblem with psl 

1. 8 and 7 psl is completly irrelvant nummebers. Both 8 and 7 psl will be 50 people of a million. So you dosen't need count them 

2. I can be wrong here but it only counts aestic not masculintet or femenibet 

3. The ten promblem. In psl you can't be a ten. Because is a rating of models the extreme minorty you will get a lot faults people rate people to low. When just people psl 7 8 you can just they are tens 

4. Its easier to rate irl. Because everyone know how to rate with that system

In the text you wrote irl rating is empati so people will rate to high. But you know people on rating sites when the irl they dont rate empati


----------



## King (Dec 4, 2018)

psl scores dont match with standard deviations u retard


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 4, 2018)

@Hebbe wem both PSL 7 and 8 are both IRL 10's, by the stanine definition, but they don't live in the same world. A psl 8 could get away with more shortcomings than a PSL 7

@King 
@Genecel 

- Low IQ is a hell of a thing. I hope you both live successful lives though


----------



## itsOVER (Dec 5, 2018)

If only 3% of people are a 6 and a negligible amount are 7+, then all the numbers above 6 are essentially meaningless.

Muh PSL rating is bullshit. How many tinder matches you get is your actual rating. If you get loads, you're not, and if you dont, then you're not hot. That's all that matters, not what some 'expert' on a forum thinks.


----------



## Deleted member 443 (Dec 5, 2018)

itsOVER said:


> If only 3% of people are a 6 and a negligible amount are 7+, then all the numbers above 6 are essentially meaningless.
> 
> Muh PSL rating is bullshit. How many tinder matches you get is your actual rating. If you get loads, you're not, and if you dont, then you're not hot. That's all that matters, not what some 'expert' on a forum thinks.


*itsOVER*


----------



## Deleted member 97 (Dec 5, 2018)

itsOVER said:


> If only 3% of people are a 6 and a negligible amount are 7+, then all the numbers above 6 are essentially meaningless.
> 
> Muh PSL rating is bullshit. How many tinder matches you get is your actual rating. If you get loads, you're not, and if you dont, then you're not hot. That's all that matters, not what some 'expert' on a forum thinks.



To be h. These ridiculously lopsided scales are fake and gay. The units of attractiveness are totally arbitrary - what's the use of having a scale in which large parts are totally inaccessible? "Ackshchshthshually, only 1% of people are 7/10 and there's no such thing as a 9/10". Well change the scaling then, figgernaggot.

The normal distribution is all you need for "PSL" ratings and what a rating should correspond to in order to have real-world utility. When I say I am a 6/10, I mean that I am around the 70th percentile of attractiveness, not the 99.99th.

Maybe you could make a case for centering the distribution nearer the lower tail, as it's easier to ruin one's appearance than improve it and most normalfaggots let themselves go hard by the time they get older. Could be fixed by parsing things out into age-specific distributions (i.e. @IntolerantSocialist is 4.5/10 for 36 y/os - people are calling him a 2.5/10 comparing him to some 20 y/o dicksucking backwards hat longboard queer like it makes any kind of sense).




BeautifulBones said:


> View attachment 6947
> 
> 
> * Percentiles*


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 5, 2018)

@itsOVER



itsOVER said:


> then all the numbers above 6 are essentially meaningless.
> 
> Muh PSL rating is bullshit.



Lmao

- Brb IQ 130 and IQ 160 is same thing
- Brb 6'3 and 6'9 is the same thing
- Brb 40k yearly income and 195 K is the same

A PSL 8 would mog a PSL 6 on tinder.

Learn to statistics son

@Ledgemund



And it's still allow fine grained analysis.
PSL 4 is 50th percentile
4.25 is 59th percentile

This scale allows you to see the nuisance difference between really good looking people , or they would all be 10's(top 1%).


----------



## theropeking (Dec 5, 2018)

OP good thread BUT

>Yes there's only 3 out of 100,000 people who are PSL 8. There might be 1-2 on this entire forum

Pls edit this. Nobody here is a 8 and there was no 8 in the entire psl scene. Orb was the closest to that number. Then again, he was "only" psl 7.

On looksmax we only have only crisick that is in the psl 6-6.5 territory but thats it.

And we have only 1-2 ppl here who are psl 5 but the majority here is on avg 4.2 psl


----------



## itsOVER (Dec 5, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> @itsOVER
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Lol. No more to say.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 5, 2018)

@theropeking Your right I though there was more users on this forum. I agree with the orb rating , but technoslave is a psl 5.5-6 @ best he's haloed by barret tier skin, and stuble. Technoslav mogs him to hell he's a PSL 6-6.5


----------



## Deleted member 97 (Dec 5, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> @Ledgemund
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Ledgemund said:


> Well change the scaling then



What's the use of calling someone an 8/10 vs. a 9.5/10? What's the use of having 1/5 of the scale without occupancy? What's the evidence that these correspond to how whores actually apprehend male attractiveness, beyond the forcing of false numerical indices (these are not actually standard deviations) onto human perception and passing it off as some kind of meta-"science" where the bins are more "true" just because they don't correspond to the conventional ones?

Standard deviations from 4 would actually be:

5 = 68th percentile
6 = 95th percentile
7 = 99.7th percentile

No use not centering it at 5 to begin with, no use not including anything above 8.


----------



## theropeking (Dec 5, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> @theropeking Your right I though there was more users on this forum. I agree with the orb rating , but technoslave is a psl 5.5-6 @ best he's haloed by barret tier skin, and stuble. Technoslav mogs him to hell he's a PSL 6-6.5



I think you did some typo in this. First u say hes psl 5.5-6 and then u say tehno mogs "him"(who? Crisick?) to death.

Nvm yea tehno is 5.5-6 territory. If i wouldnt have seen some bad pics of him id say psl 6-6.5. Hes extremely haloed by his jaw and body.

Have u ever seen @666? He was also very gl. 7 psl territory imo


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 5, 2018)

@theropeking
Yes my mistake
I'd give Crisick a PSL 5.75
Technoslav is like a 6.25

Remember technoslav always has a buzzcut his skull shape is actually much better and bigger + his jaw, he looks like he barely grooms
Crisick is groommaxxed, and is likely near his genetic potential


and I've never seen 666 pm a thread or a pic


----------



## DeformAspergerCel (Dec 5, 2018)

Ledgemund said:


> What's the use of calling someone an 8/10 vs. a 9.5/10? What's the use of having 1/5 of the scale without occupancy? What's the evidence that these correspond to how whores actually apprehend male attractiveness, beyond the forcing of false numerical indices (these are not actually standard deviations) onto human perception and passing it off as some kind of meta-"science" where the bins are more "true" just because they don't correspond to the conventional ones?
> 
> Standard deviations from 4 would actually be:
> 
> ...


I thought the point of the PSL rating is that it has the female perception of male attractiveness as its foundation.






Since it doesn't appear to follow a bell curve, the way men's perception of female attractiveness does, the traditional normie 1-10 scale is incorrect if applied to men the same as it's applied to women. The way I understand the PSL rating system is that the rating attempts to analogize the traditional 1-10 rating system used for women, with the new PSL 1-10 rating system used for men. In other words, a 4/10 female in the traditional rating scale would be considered as attractive among males as a 4/10 male would among females in this new PSL rating scale. That said, how foids rate males still doesn't appear to follow a strict mathematical pattern. The best one can do is to simplify it to the point where it's a somewhat logically sound normal distribution that's digestible for the human mind.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 5, 2018)

@Ledgemund 
These ratings are very complex , so let's narrow it down to one situation
Let's analyze PSL 4-8 in terms of how they would have to go about getting a ONS @ a club
PSL 4 - Be high value, richer than the girl, more confident, more social connections, or go to the club 4-7 times and hope to get luck

PSL 5 - More attractive, but girls can still take it or leave it at this point. He'll still have bring value to the table with MS or personality, but he still might have to go to a club a second time to get laid

PSL 6 - Girls will make it easy, ignore some minor to moderate drawbacks , bad grooming, breath, low social status. Girls friends will not give you a hard time taking home their friend. Girls below your looksmatch will approach 2-10 times a night

PSL 7 - Approached 10-15 times +. Doesn't need any MS can even be below the girls. Girls will lay you in the bathroom , or wherever they can

PSL 8 - At this point your a pretty much treated like a celebrity every-time a girl meets you

Only PSL 6-8 can get laid on any given night reliably. Only PSL 7 and 8 can constantly lay high quality girls as a ONS. The PSL actually correlates well to how you will be treated in the world. A PSL 5.5 and 6 are in similar water, but a PSL 6 might have low self esteem after a night out with a PSL 8


----------



## theropeking (Dec 5, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> @theropeking
> Yes my mistake
> I'd give Crisick a PSL 5.75
> Technoslav is like a 6.25
> ...



Hmm yea. I do also think that crisick would look much worse with a buzzcut. Id say both are equal psl wise but crisick woulf get more matches on tinder. If crisick was buzzcut, tehno would outslay that nerd.

https://lookism.net/Thread-is-itwontbeme-the-biggest-undercover-slayer-on-this-site

Scroll down, there are 2 pics. He is also 6'4. He has a very aesthetic face

Ps: Itwontbeme and @666 are the same person what many ppl dont know.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 5, 2018)

theropeking said:


> Hmm yea. I do also think that crisick would look much worse with a buzzcut. Id say both are equal psl wise but crisick woulf get more matches on tinder. If crisick was buzzcut, tehno would outslay that nerd.
> 
> https://lookism.net/Thread-is-itwontbeme-the-biggest-undercover-slayer-on-this-site
> 
> ...



Gl, mid and lower third are pretty much perfect with hollow cheeks of peace. Only real flaw is vertically and slightly laterally recessed hairline, maybe more PFL , and weird ear shape 6.75 with his heigh


----------



## averageblokecel (Dec 5, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> PSL 4 - 50%
> PSL 5 - 84.15%


quite a difference there bro


BeautifulBones said:


> TBH being a PSL 5 is good enough to have an active sex life, or even slay especially if you have a cool personality, some style , and a little status in your social circle/social media.


I have been called psl 5 by most pople who rate me and I don't have that good of an active sex life


----------



## theropeking (Dec 5, 2018)

averageblokecel said:


> quite a difference there bro
> 
> I have been called psl 5 by most pople who rate me and I don't have that good of an active sex life



Myb they sugar coated you or dont know how to rate. A psl 5 should be nt, otherwise its also over for his sex life.

But you wont get bullied or treated worse from society if youre at least a psl 5


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 5, 2018)

@averageblokecel If most people rated you a PSL 5 your most likely a 4.25 - 4.5 on my scale, but you might have the potential to be a 5.


----------



## averageblokecel (Dec 5, 2018)

theropeking said:


> A psl 5 should be nt


that's where I fail hard as fuck 


BeautifulBones said:


> @averageblokecel If most people rated you a PSL 5 your most likely a 4.25 - 4.5 on my scale, but you might have the potential to be a 5.


Shiiiiiiiiiieeeeeeeeeeeet


----------



## theropeking (Dec 5, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> Gl, mid and lower third are pretty much perfect with hollow cheeks of peace. Only real flaw is vertically and slightly laterally recessed hairline, maybe more PFL , and weird ear shape 6.75 with his heigh



Yea back then he planned to get harline lowering at the end of 2017. His forehead is quite big but his overall facial harmony is goddammnnn nice. Its a very sensible face, 1 stupid surgical change and he could drop 1 point tbh.


----------



## Deleted member 147 (Dec 5, 2018)

Lol this scale is bullshit and not PSL at all.

A 6 is like 97%

So PSL 6-8 make up 3% and 4-5 make up 90%. Lol. Fucking idiot, we understand the fucking maths. We get the fucking concept, we're saying its not fucking fit for purpose.

PSL 1 - 5%
PSL 2 - 15%
PSL 3 - 35%
PSL 4 - 50%
PSL 5 - 65%
PSL 6 - 80%
PSL 7 - 93%
PSL 8 - 97%


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 5, 2018)

Intel.Imperitive said:


> Lol this scale is bullshit and not PSL at all.
> 
> A 6 is like 97%
> 
> ...



Your not only arrogant but wrong. If a PSL 4,5 and 6 went to a club together their experience would be NEARLY IDENTICAL with the PSL 6 getting slightly more attention. Whereas a PSL 4 and 5 on my scale are having different experiences and the PSL 6 would be in a different world. The PSL scale offends a lot of people because it's not meant to judge the average. It doesn't care about the average. It's meant to judge the extremes. Which is why i offered two other scales feel free to use those


----------



## StudyHacks (Dec 5, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> Your not only arrogant but wrong. If a PSL 4,5 and 6 went to a club together their experience would be NEARLY IDENTICAL with the PSL 6 getting slightly more attention. Whereas a PSL 4 and 5 on my scale are having different experiences and the PSL 6 would be in a different world. The PSL scale offends a lot of people because it's not meant to judge the average. It doesn't care about the average. It's meant to judge the extremes. Which is why i offered two other scales feel free to use those


I have trouble understanding your post. If people on here rate me PSL 5 and you say that equals to 84.15%, does that mean that out of 100 hot instagram girls with 10k+ following 84.15 find me attractive / hot? Explain please


----------



## Deleted member 147 (Dec 5, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> Your not only arrogant but wrong. If a PSL 4,5 and 6 went to a club together their experience would be NEARLY IDENTICAL with the PSL 6 getting slightly more attention. Whereas a PSL 4 and 5 on my scale are having different experiences and the PSL 6 would be in a different world. The PSL scale offends a lot of people because it's not meant to judge the average. It doesn't care about the average. It's meant to judge the extremes. Which is why i offered two other scales feel free to use those



Who said the PSL scale was only meant to judge models lol?

JFL if you think someone at 50th percentile is gonna have the same experience as someone in the 65th percentile or 80th percentile.

Not only are you wrong, but ignorant.

PSL has never been about just rating models lol. 

Nigger.


----------



## androidcel (Dec 5, 2018)

StudyHacks said:


> I have trouble understanding your post. If people on here rate me PSL 5 and you say that equals to 84.15%, does that mean that out of 100 hot instagram girls with 10k+ following 84.15 find me attractive / hot? Explain please


----------



## StudyHacks (Dec 5, 2018)

androidcel said:


> View attachment 7103


Explain to me because I don't understand. It was a serious question.


----------



## Evil Genius (Dec 5, 2018)

Way too much autism in here.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 5, 2018)

@Intel.Imperitive
- That's like saying someone 6'1 and 6'2 live completely different lives
- Or someone making 70k and 80k , the 80 k person is living a much more luxurious life

This is wrong your PSL 5 might have 10 lifetime lays and your PSL 6 would have like 12

The difference are minimal-moderate until you jump a standard deviation
- Also you've not seen my rule about the N word on my threads? Welcome to my ignore list you despicable soul

AND BRB 
- Broderick Hunter, Prime Chico, Prime Gandy , and Prime Barret are all PSL 8's no way to seperate them on your scale

LEARN TO STATISTICS YOU DUMB, DISRESPECTFUL FUCK


----------



## Deleted member 147 (Dec 5, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> @Intel.Imperitive
> - That's like saying someone 6'1 and 6'2 live completely different lives
> - Or someone making 70k and 80k , the 80 k person is living a much more luxurious life
> 
> ...



Y would we need to seperate any of these people?


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 5, 2018)

Why do racist low IQ people even talk to me? Not even on a internet forum would I engage in discourse with these tormented souls


----------



## badromance (Dec 7, 2018)




----------



## TRUE_CEL (Dec 7, 2018)

Where do you get these statistics? Out of your ass? You're too liberal. It's near impossible to find a PSL 8, let alone 9.


theropeking said:


> Myb they sugar coated you or dont know how to rate. A psl 5 should be nt, otherwise its also over for his sex life.
> 
> But you wont get bullied or treated worse from society if youre at least a psl 5


I didn't get bullied but I am definitely not at least a PSL 5. I'm a PSL 2. I do get treated worse by female strangers though. PSL 2 confirmed.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 7, 2018)

TRUE_CEL said:


> Where do you get these statistics? Out of your ass? You're too liberal. It's near impossible to find a PSL 8, let alone 9.
> 
> I didn't get bullied but I am definitely not at least a PSL 5. I'm a PSL 2. I do get treated worse by female strangers though. PSL 2 confirmed.








Keep coping buddy boy

Out of the ~ 34 million men age 18-34

REDPILL -

There are 102 PSL 9+'s

But there are no PSL 10's theoretically there only 1 in 10 billion which means there might be one every 5 generations

https://measuringu.com/pcalcz/


----------



## Nibba (Dec 7, 2018)

Madness said:


> I guess me being a psl 6 at 13 is pretty insane then


Ur a handsome kid no homo no pedo


----------



## TRUE_CEL (Dec 7, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> Keep coping buddy boy
> 
> Out of the ~ 34 million men age 18-34
> 
> ...



Giga cope, there are barely any PSL 8s, JFL at claiming there's 50 million of them.  Negged for being retarded.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 7, 2018)

TRUE_CEL said:


> Giga cope, there are barely any PSL 8s, JFL at claiming there's 50 million of them.  Negged for being retarded.



For some reason it typed it but when I pressed enter a line was missing

What I originally said was 

Out of the 34 million men age 18-34

~ 1000 PSL 8's 
Half of them are probably in LTR's or marriages with their looks match
500 left, or about 10 in each state

but... keep coping


----------



## TRUE_CEL (Dec 7, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> but... keep coping



How am I coping if you're saying I'm right?


----------



## Madness (Dec 7, 2018)

Nibba said:


> Ur a handsome kid no homo no pedo


Thanks u pedo


----------



## Nibba (Dec 7, 2018)

Madness said:


> Thanks u pedo


U ogre who is ur avi


----------



## Madness (Dec 8, 2018)

Nibba said:


> U ogre who is ur avi


nic palladino


----------



## Nibba (Dec 8, 2018)

Madness said:


> nic palladino


He looks like chadlite from other angles


----------



## Madness (Dec 8, 2018)

Nibba said:


> He looks like chadlite from other angles


tbh ngl


----------



## Nibba (Dec 8, 2018)

Madness said:


> tbh ngl


That's my saying


----------



## Madness (Dec 8, 2018)

Nibba said:


> That's my saying


k


----------



## Nibba (Dec 8, 2018)

Madness said:


> k


Ogre


----------



## Madness (Dec 8, 2018)

Nibba said:


> Ogre


no u


----------



## Nibba (Dec 8, 2018)

Madness said:


> no u


Already am


----------



## Madness (Dec 8, 2018)

Nibba said:


> Already am


wo


----------



## Nibba (Dec 8, 2018)

Madness said:


> wo


Yeah bro


----------



## Extra Chromosome (Dec 8, 2018)

Madness said:


> I guess me being a psl 6 at 13 is pretty insane then


Don't get ahead of yourself, puberty ruined many of us instead of improving anything.


----------



## Madness (Dec 8, 2018)

Extra Chromosome said:


> Don't get ahead of yourself, puberty ruined many of us instead of improving anything.


You probably had improper tongue posture as well as various other issues


----------



## Extra Chromosome (Dec 8, 2018)

Madness said:


> You probably had improper tongue posture as well as various other issues


ive always nose breathed and mouth was closed.


----------



## Extra Chromosome (Dec 8, 2018)

Insomniac said:


> I’m an ugly fuck


----------



## RedPilledStemcel (Dec 9, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> For some reason it typed it but when I pressed enter a line was missing
> 
> What I originally said was
> 
> ...


The number of male models in the US is probably roughly equal to that number


----------



## Deleted member 97 (Dec 12, 2018)

Late response, but the question is important enough to merit further analysis



DeformAspergerCel said:


> I thought the point of the PSL rating is that it has the female perception of male attractiveness as its foundation.
> 
> View attachment 7089
> 
> ...



Punk ass nikka done banned himself. Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

but

If this were actually the case, the ratings would have to be even more stringent for the average man. Notice how the maximum of the curve occurs _very, very _close to "least attractive", not "4". If PSL were meant to correspond exactly with the gradation of female attraction, the bottom of the scale is then too lax ( average should be around 2/10 with half of men below that - seriously, look at the graph - maximum at 1/5) and the top too conservative (drops steeply after 1/5, but not to the point where 7/10 is the 99.9th percentile - 9/10 is approx. 99th, with 1% of men rated 4.5/5).



BeautifulBones said:


> @Ledgemund
> These ratings are very complex , so let's narrow it down to one situation
> Let's analyze PSL 4-8 in terms of how they would have to go about getting a ONS @ a club
> PSL 4 - Be high value, richer than the girl, more confident, more social connections, or go to the club 4-7 times and hope to get luck
> ...



Where are you getting the percentiles from? A divining rod? there's effectively no difference after the 99th percentile, which is Chad territory - a rating scale is itself rather out of place, as whores are rather more binary than spectral in their attraction, i.e. yes/no vs. 1-10. It is a mistake to attempt fit the scale to whimsically derived tiers, mangling male and female appraisal into some kind of grotesque chimera outfitted with spurious bric-a-brac - where are these numbers coming from? Why is there still not at least a 9? "The divine will receive better treatment than the corporeal and this totally legit science study data scale (HIGH IQ) is meant to show that".


----------



## spark (Dec 15, 2018)

Hebbe wem said:


> This is my promblem with psl
> 
> 1. 8 and 7 psl is completly irrelvant nummebers. Both 8 and 7 psl will be 50 people of a million. So you dosen't need count them
> 
> ...


Yep also PSL only rates the face which is completely useless, I have seen a photo of a legit dwarf with a very good face, it's still over when he is 4 feet tall. I rate IRL, 10 - prime Barrett, 9 - prime Pitt, DiCaprio, 8 - typical hot dude you see on campus, 7 - typical good looking dude you see on campus etc.


----------



## King (Dec 16, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> @Hebbe wem both PSL 7 and 8 are both IRL 10's, by the stanine definition, but they don't live in the same world. A psl 8 could get away with more shortcomings than a PSL 7
> 
> @King
> @Genecel
> ...


ur actually retarded. go on lookism (an actual psl website) and post this thread u will get laughed at so hard. psl rating is just a score like any other rating, its not set with standard deviations, this is just something u made up


----------



## PenileFacialSurgery (Dec 17, 2018)

Half of this is retardation tbh
Pure narcissistic OCD lookism autist basement dwelling mentalcel shit.

Not coping.

1-deformed Subhuman 

5-neutral attractiveness, average person, at least in the west, is NOT ugly 4/10, maybe 3rd world countries with Ethniks

9 a handful of Supermodels and celebrities 

10 don’t exist

THATS IT. It should be to see where you stand against the entire population as a whole, and be an accurate assessment of your level of attractiveness, not just compare you to the handful of perfect beings, tf?
Atleast compare to Subhumans too

6 is slightly decently attractive, I say 10%

7 is certified good looking where you start to benefit in life heavy from looks

8 is giga slayer, some actors, popular IG Models +10k followers at the very least

+8.5 is supermodel and celebrity range


To really have “percentiles”, we need to rate and average out a large percentage of the population, Lookism autism’s percentile guesses could widely vary.

Lol if you think half the population ages 16-35 are a 4 and less, lol


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 17, 2018)

PenileFacialSurgery said:


> Half of this is retardation tbh
> Pure narcissistic OCD lookism autist basement dwelling mentalcel shit.
> 
> Not coping.
> ...



PSL is an age adjusted phenomenon just like IQ

>Over rating models and celebrities fallacy
>To lazy to look up standard deviations
>Autism = I'm jealous but good thread bro it's high IQ it's the 9th time I've been called this today

Thank you for reading


King said:


> ur actually retarded. go on lookism (an actual psl website) and post this thread u will get laughed at so hard. psl rating is just a score like any other rating, its not set with standard deviations, this is just something u made up



>Thank you for reading all of my articles







Ledgemund said:


> If this were actually the case, the ratings would have to be even more stringent for the average man. Notice how the maximum of the curve occurs _very, very _close to "least attractive", not "4". If PSL were meant to correspond exactly with the gradation of female attraction, the bottom of the scale is then too lax ( average should be around 2/10 with half of men below that - seriously, look at the graph - maximum at 1/5) and the top too conservative (drops steeply after 1/5, but not to the point where 7/10 is the 99.9th percentile - 9/10 is approx. 99th, with 1% of men rated 4.5/5).
> 
> 
> 
> Where are you getting the percentiles from? A divining rod? there's effectively no difference after the 99th percentile, which is Chad territory -




Standard deviations are a phenomenon that transcend PSL let's take something like education
Average HS Grad - 100 IQ
Average College Grad - 115 IQ
Average PHD (Hard Science) - 130 IQ
Average Ivy League Undergrad - 145 IQ

Wow look at that 1SD between each of them

Let's go to income in America with data from dqydj.com

Average Person - 43.5k
Middle/Upper Middle - 96.3k
Upper Class - 201k

Now please get your thoughts together and form a well though out argument before you expect a response from me


----------



## PenileFacialSurgery (Dec 17, 2018)

+8.5 is overrating legitimate supermodels and Brad Pitt tier celebrities, the richest and most highest status Good Looking people in the world...

K.

Also, when I meant Autism, I meant the kind like those kids who obsess with train engines all day, and may know the name and date of every film known to man, but are genuinely fucking stupid. That kind.

lol if you thought I was “jealous” of your “high IQ”.


----------



## Deleted member 97 (Dec 17, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> Standard deviations are a phenomenon that transcend PSL



Lok. A phenomenon that you consistently misunderstand, despite LARPing as an engineer. On the normal distribution, 1 SD = 68th percentile, 2 SD = 95th percentile, 3 SD = 99.7th percentile. That's it. On the surface, it's just a set of numbers that "you're" addled mind hasn't been able to retain yet. To go a bit deeper, a standard deviation describes the variation from a mean that is present in a set of data.

Standard deviations are not the following:



BeautifulBones said:


> Average HS Grad - 100 IQ
> Average College Grad - 115 IQ
> Average PHD (Hard Science) - 130 IQ
> Average Ivy League Undergrad - 145 IQ



"Dem nigga all be 15 points apart on dis contingently constructed scale. Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee. Standad sho is right."



BeautifulBones said:


> Wow look at that 1SD between each of them







BeautifulBones said:


> Let's go to income in America with data from dqydj.com
> 
> Average Person - 43.5k
> Middle/Upper Middle - 96.3k
> Upper Class - 201k



1 SD between each of them too? Haw haw haw



BeautifulBones said:


> Now please get your thoughts together and form a well though out argument before you expect a response from me



Argument against what? You can't even properly deploy the basic statistical measures you claim expert facility with.

Tell you what, you put on your big boy cap and learn what a standard deviation is and I'll be here to help you along the way. Then we can start talking about "arguments", after that "well thought out" arguments.

And don't pretend you're busy or supercilious. You're shitposting on an obscure forum, 75% of which is composed of incel refugees. You've only been roused out of shamed embarrassment to fumble an abortive attempt at replying to my critiques now that everyone else is getting wise to your made-up tard shit and you're feeling the fire under your feet.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 17, 2018)

Ledgemund said:


> Lok. A phenomenon that you consistently misunderstand, despite LARPing as an engineer. On the normal distribution, 1 SD = 68th percentile, 2 SD = 95th percentile, 3 SD = 99.7th percentile. That's it. On the surface, it's just a set of numbers that "you're" addled mind hasn't been able to retain yet. To go a bit deeper, a standard deviation describes the variation from a mean that is present in a set of data.
> 
> Standard deviations are not the following:
> 
> ...



You didn't even get your SD to percentiles correct


----------



## Deleted member 97 (Dec 17, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> You didn't even get your SD to percentiles correct



Weak.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/68–95–99.7_rule


----------



## uglykunt (Dec 17, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> You didn't even get your SD to percentiles correct


we should get you banned just like on lookism
srs stop larping with your fake statistics


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 17, 2018)

PenileFacialSurgery said:


> +8.5 is overrating legitimate supermodels and Brad Pitt tier celebrities, the richest and most highest status Good Looking people in the world...
> 
> K.
> 
> ...



Your scale is horrible
> it belongs in the thrash
Deformed is 4 points below average , but extremely GL is 3.5 above
Everything about your scale is off

90% of people with 10k-100k IG followers are PSL 6-7

At least my scales allows you to accurately research the extremes

Lol I make money and have a good social life

JFL if you think i've thought about looks theory on more than my train rides

And although I've been exposed to the theory for less time, and thought about it less. I've come to greater conclusions than most except for people I call my peers in looks theory like @bain ,@theropeking and @Ropemaxing 

Your like people who play games, and then they get beat they say buh buh 
>he's cheating
> aimbotting

Everything but the redpill that they're just better than you





*










*


----------



## uglykunt (Dec 17, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> Lol I make money and have a good social life





BeautifulBones said:


> JFL if you think i've thought about looks theory on more than my train rides


What the fuck is this contradictory shithead talking bout


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 17, 2018)

Ledgemund said:


> Weak.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/68–95–99.7_rule



That's for 1SD deviation out in both directions you absolute imbecile

JFL at using wikepedia as your credible source, and then questioning the credibility of my sources






@uglykunt
>You're just mad I explained how average you are
> When you pm'ed me on free looksmaxing advice I ignored you










*Daily Reminder*
*>NO ONE HAS MOGGED ME IN DEBATE*


----------



## uglykunt (Dec 17, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> >You're just mad I explained how average you are


Cope
also nice projection


----------



## PenileFacialSurgery (Dec 17, 2018)

Fag. You are fucking retarded.

I said the usual absolute lowest is 1, average neutral attractiveness is 5, highest is 9,

General and basic.


>Decided to create this entire autistic thread on obscure LooksMaxing dedicated forum
>Rarely thought about Looks Theory

LOL

Rope your fucking self.


----------



## Deleted member 97 (Dec 17, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> That's for 1SD deviation out in both directions you absolute imbecile



I.e. two-tailed, which a looks distribution is. Is one significantly different from the average _in either direction? _You are not measuring toward Chad, no matter how fixed your enraptured schoolgirl gaze might be on him.



BeautifulBones said:


> JFL at using wikepedia as your credible source, and then questioning the credibility of my sources



Come on, drop the cope. This is a basic statistical law. I learned about it as a college Freshman in very non-statistics-oriented courses like Intro Analytical Chemistry, Biology, Physics, etc. "Wikepedia" is more than suitable to get you up to speed for your job there, Herr Engineer. In due time you'll be able to engineer more than a path for your mop down the hall.



BeautifulBones said:


> *Daily Reminder*
> *>NO ONE HAS MOGGED ME IN DEBATE*



I'll be the judge of that: yes they have, and often.

You're falling apart here, and it's showing.


----------



## uglykunt (Dec 17, 2018)

Ledgemund said:


> I.e. two-tailed, which a looks distribution is. Is one significantly different from the average _in either direction? _You are not measuring toward Chad, no matter how fixed your enraptured schoolgirl gaze might be on him.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But hey we're all mad at him for being average right...


----------



## Deleted member 97 (Dec 17, 2018)

uglykunt said:


> But hey we're all mad at him for being average right...



You got it. @BeautifulBones mogs me to the grave with his 99.98th percentile IQ, 99.99997th looks (=PSL 3.2), and 100th percentile frame.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 17, 2018)

PenileFacialSurgery said:


> Fag. You are fucking retarded.
> 
> I said the usual absolute lowest is 1, average neutral attractiveness is 5, highest is 9,
> 
> ...



Yet I have software that 4 plastic surgeons are begging me to use
>I just learned quicker than you

@Ledgemund
>1SD out in each direction = 2SD deviation distrubution
> I make more money than you which means Donald Trump will deport you soon lmao
Even when I'm drunk and high pecking away at my keyboard I'm still higher IQ
@uglykunt
> Daily reminder your username is accurate, and you'll never slay


----------



## PenileFacialSurgery (Dec 17, 2018)

LOL @ your delusional narcissistic autist coping 

You disgust me.


----------



## Deleted member 97 (Dec 17, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> >1SD out in each direction = 2SD deviation distrubution



Would you just fuckin read the article already?



BeautifulBones said:


> > I make more money than you which means Donald Trump will deport you soon lmao



Yes bro. "Muh money". If you're to be believed, you've got everything you could possibly want and still this is the state you're reduced to. You vomit ill-conceived sophistry in the furthest, least significant corners of the internet and still get clowned on. All that money, all that maxing, all that attention and you still can't do jack shit.



BeautifulBones said:


> Even when I'm drunk and high pecking away at my keyboard I'm still higher IQ



Ah, gearing up for a big day at LookismEngineers, Inc. tomorrow?


----------



## uglykunt (Dec 17, 2018)

BeautifulBones said:


> > Daily reminder your username is accurate, and you'll never slay


again with the projection shaming
dont give two flying fucks about slaying you nigger
you're the nigger that puts pussy on a pedestal you should be lynched
p.s im above average in every way so your argument kinda flunks on your made-up statistics, percentiles etc.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Dec 17, 2018)

uglykunt said:


> again with the projection shaming
> dont give two flying fucks about slaying you nigger
> you're the nigger that puts pussy on a pedestal you should be lynched
> p.s im above average in every way so your argument kinda flunks on your made-up statistics, percentiles etc.




Lmao your above average in every way?

>BRB where's your hot gf
>BRB where's your constant validation
>BRB where's your rich social circle?
>BRB where's anyone rating you above a PSL 6

Don't forget I have pics of you in my PM that show
- Your Philtrum is longer than your chin
- Disgusting fish lips
- Unhealthy BMI
- Bizygomatic breadth under 5.7 inches
- Giraffe neck
- 14 inch neck
- No muscle on upper body

Your a PSL 4 even with your height boost that must be depressing

Now I know why you must be racist and angry on anonymous forums

Keep fucking with me, and I'll run an image recognition software on your pics to find your name. Then I'll send the message about you saying I should get lynched to your school so you can get kicked out

Go back to hole in the wall you came from

Good Day

Happy Looksmaxin


----------



## Reddit_Ruined_PSL (Dec 18, 2018)

Cage at thinking 1 point = 1 sd

narcy reddit newfriends at it again. look up the sluthate archives for the real rating breakdown, we've been over this hundreds of times



theropeking said:


> Hmm yea. I do also think that crisick would look much worse with a buzzcut. Id say both are equal psl wise but crisick woulf get more matches on tinder. If crisick was buzzcut, tehno would outslay that nerd.
> 
> https://lookism.net/Thread-is-itwontbeme-the-biggest-undercover-slayer-on-this-site
> 
> ...


Not him.


----------



## Time Travel (Dec 18, 2018)

makes me cry ngl.


----------



## Kyros (Dec 18, 2018)

plez rate me!!!!

i alredy now i m a chad but how can i be gigechedd??


----------



## Dude420 (Jan 1, 2019)

I am not sure I understood well why 5 isn't the PSL average(50th percentile) based on an exhaustive scientific reasoning, aren't you complicating all of this by not making 5 which is the intuitive thing as the average (which I thought was the case btw when you rated me). All newcomers will be confused with your scale each time. PSL already different from the normie scale which is like 6.5-7.0 average, why make it further complex to adjust? I doubt the validity of your scale, but even if it was valid I wouldn't use it because it is less intuitive than using 5 as the average.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Jan 1, 2019)

Dude420 said:


> I am not sure I understood well why 5 isn't the PSL average based on an exhaustive scientific reasoning, aren't you complicating all of this by not making 5 as the average (which I thought was the case).



Jfl exhaustive scientific reasoning has never been done on a lookist site. Maybe the closest things is our conversations even though we still have to agree to disagree. 5 would be average on 1-10 normie scale, but even then normies rate 80% of people above a 5, so the scale was broke to begin with. PSL goes from 0-8, so the average is 4 which allows you to go 4 SD below average, for the theoretical incel that can only ascend with surgery and all soft lookmaxes to above a 2-3. Then the supermodels/ IG famous people that are 4SD above. Putting it at 5 makes the curve positively skewed which it isn't.

If anything our nutrition and first world living has degenerated how good the average person looks, and the average is more like a 3.75


----------



## dodt (Jan 1, 2019)

@BeautifulBones incorporate the height to that PSL scale tbh. In percentile terms its required less percentile to be 5PSL, rather than be 84th percentile in height. So the rating should also be subjective in some sense. 70/30 face/body thing is also good, but it is about body as a whole.


----------



## Dude420 (Jan 1, 2019)

BeautifulBones said:


> Jfl exhaustive scientific reasoning has never been done on a lookist site. Maybe the closest things is our conversations even though we still have to agree to disagree. 5 would be average on 1-10 normie scale, but even then normies rate 80% of people above a 5, so the scale was broke to begin with. PSL goes from 0-8, so the average is 4 which allows you to go 4 SD below average, for the theoretical incel that can only ascend with surgery and all soft lookmaxes to above a 2-3. Then the supermodels/ IG famous people that are 4SD above. Putting it at 5 makes the curve positively skewed which it isn't.
> 
> If anything our nutrition and first world living has degenerated how good the average person looks, and the average is more like a 3.75



Ah 0-8 ok, might have read your post too fast, I thought you were still using a 10 point scale which confused me why you would force 4 as the average. Using a smaller scale shouldn't logically solve the cognitive biases to misevaluate people, so I don't really see the point. 10 point scale still is the most intuitive to me. I don't think people struggle not overevaluing people looks on the internet anyway, the normie 6.5-7.0 average scale stupidity exist because of it is harsh to say to someone face you are ugly, so it got tilted higher.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Jan 1, 2019)

Dude420 said:


> Ah 0-8 ok, might have read your post too fast, I thought you were still using a 10 point scale which confused me why you would force 4 as the average. Using a smaller scale shouldn't logically solve the cognitive biases to misevaluate people, so I don't really see the point. 10 point scale still is the most intuitive to me. I don't think people struggle not overevaluing people looks on the internet anyway, the normie 6.5-7.0 average scale stupidity exist because of it is harsh to say to someone face you are ugly, so it got tilted higher.



It's a smaller scale , but it can measure more extremes. 98% of people on the normie 1-10 scale fall between PSL 3 and 5. Which leaves 1-2 and 6-8 to measure the extremes


----------



## dodt (Jan 1, 2019)

BeautifulBones said:


> 98% of people on the normie 1-10


Its 95% ngl


----------



## BeautifulBones (Jan 1, 2019)

dodt said:


> Its 95% ngl


It depends how you measure. I use one tail distrubution , but if you use two tail it's ~ 95


----------



## Dude420 (Jan 1, 2019)

PSL should simply be a not inflated scale that has 5 has the average, much simpler. If you use a normal bell curve distribution the extremes are already almost impossible to attain, extremely exclusive.

https://lookism.net/Thread-The-PSL-rating-system-explained-Useful-thread
Here he does like you with being inaccessible but has 5 has the average.

You are all making this a mess to compensate to make sure that the normie don't continue fucking up the scale, but they won't since we are on the internet, not real life, people aren't here giving good review to look nice, quite the opposite, people don't mind being harsh, because they are behind their computer.

Your scale is basically 0-10 with 9-10 vacant which is dumb to me. 10 point scale with 5 as the average and let's just not be stupid, that's how I would go.


----------



## dodt (Jan 1, 2019)

BeautifulBones said:


> It depends how you measure. I use one tail distrubution , but if you use two tail it's ~ 95


tails are about significance, not the distribution itself if I am not mistaken


----------



## Nibba (Jan 1, 2019)

BeautifulBones said:


> It depends how you measure. I use one tail distrubution , but if you use two tail it's ~ 95


One tail and two tail is used in hypothesis testing not for standard deviations...retard


dodt said:


> tails are about significance, not the distribution itself if I am not mistaken


This


----------



## BeautifulBones (Jan 1, 2019)

dodt said:


> tails are about significance, not the distribution itself if I am not mistaken














Dude420 said:


> PSL should simply be an not inflated scale that has 5 has the average, much simpler. If you use a normal bell curve distribution the extremes are already almost impossible to attain, extremely exclusive.
> 
> https://lookism.net/Thread-The-PSL-rating-system-explained-Useful-thread
> Here he does like you with being inaccessible but has 5 has the average.
> ...



There's over 300 million people in the U.S there are plenty of people at both extremes

Daily Reminder this guys IQ is 7SD above average 

*Christopher Langan IQ 200 says : God Exists - Nothing is Wasted ...*


----------



## Time Travel (Jan 1, 2019)

PSL scale is cope


----------



## Nibba (Jan 1, 2019)

Time Travel said:


> PSL scale is cope


Rating are cope. Either you get attention from women or not, which isn't determined by this retarded shit


----------



## Dude420 (Jan 1, 2019)

BeautifulBones said:


> View attachment 10248
> 
> View attachment 10249
> 
> ...




That's dumb, since you can argue the same the other way around... Why not make the PSL average 6 because what about a midget with atrocious facial deformities and muscle atrophy? Let's adjust the scale for that fringe stupid scenario so no one can be 1-2 rating, and use average 6.

Yeah wonderful shit scale.


----------



## dodt (Jan 1, 2019)

BeautifulBones said:


> View attachment 10248
> 
> View attachment 10249





BeautifulBones said:


> 98% of people on the normie 1-10 scale fall between PSL 3 and 5.





BeautifulBones said:


> PSL goes from 0-8


Tail is not about distribution as you see on the image, its about whether you start from the end points to calculate the percentile (further to use it in your hypothesis testing), or you are considering only the middle area of distribution. 2-6PSL is about the area equally distant from the 0-8 scale ends. So, you can use the calculator for 2 tailed test.


----------



## Nibba (Jan 1, 2019)

Dude420 said:


> That's dumb, since you can argue the same the other way around... Why not make the PSL average 6 because what about a midget with atrocious facial deformities and muscle atrophy? Let's adjust the scale for that fringe stupid scenario so no one can be 1-2 rating, and use average 6.
> 
> Yeah wonderful shit scale.


Dude he's literally retarded. Just don't bother with him. He doesn't even understand basic statistics


----------



## Time Travel (Jan 1, 2019)

Nibba said:


> Rating are cope. Either you get attention from women or not, which isn't determined by this retarded shit


----------



## Nibba (Jan 1, 2019)

dodt said:


> Tail is not about distribution as you see on the image, its about whether you start from the end points to calculate the percentile (further to use it in your hypothesis testing), or you are considering only the middle area of distribution. 3-5PSL is about the area equally distant from the 0-8 scale ends. So, you can use the calculator for 2 tailed test.


U can use a z table or t table by hand but ain't nobody got time for.that


----------



## dodt (Jan 1, 2019)

Nibba said:


> U can use a z table or t table by hand but ain't nobody got time for.that


Yes, he actually writes 2-6 psl and then changes it to 3-5 psl, so i fucked it up when copying too. I was talking about 95% for 2-6psl.


----------



## Nibba (Jan 1, 2019)

dodt said:


> Yes, he actually writes 2-6 psl and then changes it to 3-5 psl, so i fucked it up when copying too. I was talking about 95% for 2-6psl.


the funny thing is his standard deviation scale doesn't have anything to do with PSI ratings it's just another rating scale it's not based on percentages or standard deviations. Because ratings are a subjective thing you can't have standard deviations, which would rely on the mean which also can't be known for the same reason. like you can't assign a mean rating to a subjective thing like looks levels of multiple people for the population standard deviationlike you can't assign a mean rating to a subjective thing like looks levels of multiple people for the population standard deviation


----------



## BeautifulBones (Jan 1, 2019)

dodt said:


> Yes, he actually writes 2-6 psl and then changes it to 3-5 psl, so i fucked it up when copying too. I was talking about 95% for 2-6psl.



You're wrong I don't remember why , but two tailed and one tailed have different distributions. 

JFL @Nibba calling me retarted

Daily reminder I got accepted into 3 med schools, and not even SUNY Downstate would accept you


----------



## Dude420 (Jan 1, 2019)

@BeautifulBones I hope you will reply to my last comment.


----------



## dodt (Jan 1, 2019)

@Nibba
If everyone has a clue about others rating models and has understanding about the percentiles, he can also rate in a similar fashion. Moreover, looks are not subjective, so are the ratings if everyone has agreed on a scale even not oficially. Ratings tend to vary, but generally, the arguing goes about 0.5-1PSL. That's a big different in percentiles, but that still gives an approximate representation of your looks position among the active population. So, for the reference it is an extremely useful tool, not a very correct, but still useful as for my needs for example. If you disagree with me that looks are not subjective, you can even disregard my posts, I will not try to prove you anything tbh.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Jan 1, 2019)

Dude420 said:


> That's dumb, since you can argue the same the other way around... Why not make the PSL average 6 because what about a midget with atrocious facial deformities and muscle atrophy? Let's adjust the scale for that fringe stupid scenario so no one can be 1-2 rating, and use average 6.
> 
> Yeah wonderful shit scale.



Your basically asking why the average is in the middle? 

I don't get your contention. I said in the OP people with genetic deformities get a pass. 

Except that people get 0-2 blackopstruecel is in that territory, this is the incel region. Your trying to save peoples feelings by changing the scale. Everyone gets hurt about this. 

@Nibba loved this scale when it first came out you can look at the earlier posts

But then when I told him he's like a PSL 6-6.5 he got super butt hurt. He taught he was a PSL 7.5 maybe because people like @HorseFace gas him up, and make him think he mogs Crisick . 

I told you that your a 4.25. Your prob closer to a 4.5 with the better pic I saw with potential to improve, and your trying to change the scale also.

What do you want me to say to you people ? Biology is a bitch , and nature always has the last laugh


----------



## Dude420 (Jan 1, 2019)

BeautifulBones said:


> Your basically asking why the average is in the middle?
> 
> I don't get your contention. I said in the OP people with genetic deformities get a pass.
> 
> ...



JFL assumptions about my intentions. Having a 10 point scale with the middle in the middle is just the most straightforward and easier for everyone to be on the same page(particularly for the newcomers) which is why I am advocating for it. I heard 4.5 above average but I thought as a normal person that 5 was the average so I didn't get it which is why I am came here trying to understand, and finally understood that it doesn't make much sense. JFL all I wanted was an honest review, but I don't understand what people mean if the scale they are using doesn't make sense, I am not even sure if everyone is using the same scale. If I was stupid enough to want "points" to boost my ego I would ask for some 100 points scale or more, JFL at thinking I could ever follow this retarded logic.

Your average isn't in the middle, the middle is 5, not 4, but you forgot that the PSL started as a 10 points scale with 9-10 being forbidden for retarded reasons, but it was still staying as a 10 point scale with 5 as the middle, not 4. Your scale is a flawed scale of a flawed scale.

Btw, BlackOpsTrueCel obliterates mog a midget with atrocious facial deformities and muscle atrophy so what you said wasn't correct. The logic of removing the top for unattainable GigaChads never made sense following that logic. You haven't disproven that. So your IQ example was dump.


----------



## Nibba (Jan 1, 2019)

dodt said:


> Moreover, looks are not subjective, so are the ratings if everyone has agreed on a scale even not


No man. People here sometimes rate Nick batemen as a 5 PSL and others as 7+ PSL lol. In this way it IS subjective. 


dodt said:


> If you disagree with me that looks are not subjective, you can even disregard my posts, I will not try to prove you anything tbh


That's dumb lol


----------



## VST (Jan 1, 2019)

BeautifulBones said:


> Daily reminder I got accepted into 3 med schools, and not even SUNY Downstate would accept you



Yeah, I'm sure you did.

The entire looksmax.org community is very proud of your extremely inspiring comeback story, where you went from packing groceries as a 3 PSL male to getting into several med schools, creating a very "complex" facial rating software that is so complex that it requires quantum computing (nevermind that quantum computing is still an experimental technology that is extremely inefficient and thus wouldn't be suitable for your meme facial rating software) and has multiple NYC plastic Surgeons GAGGING to use it, even though all your "software" does is use image recognition and is no different than all these meme rating websites such as prettyscale for which you charge $60/hour which is 124.8k/year based on a 40/h workweek, which is an exorbitant amount of money to pay for a piece of software considering how little benefit it offers.

Ah and not to forget that you went from a 3/10 to a 6+/10 thanks in part to a $400/month skincare routine (which is most likely bullshit, but if it isn't, it is undoubtedly full of snake oil)

Thankfully you are such a nice guy that you are able to offer your self improvement secrets to people for a measly sum of $300, nevermind that you have never provided proof of any of your claims.


----------



## HorseFace (Jan 1, 2019)

BeautifulBones said:


> Your basically asking why the average is in the middle?
> 
> I don't get your contention. I said in the OP people with genetic deformities get a pass.
> 
> ...



I said this

"Im not good with psl, but dude got twink and Chad asthethics, dark coloring, and wide frame. I think he is atleast 7 psl. Maybe 7.25 

Crisick looks like a textbook Chad, his harmony isn't that great but his bone structure is preety good. Bone structure + average jock futures + good coloring and low body fat halos what he lacks in harmony (altough his harmony is definetly not bad).

6.25 psl"


I think its a preety accurate rating taking into consideration body, face, coloring, real life. Crisick looks like a typical Chad, but his harmony isn't super great thats why i rated him lower than Nibba. Whats your reasoning?


----------



## Nibba (Jan 1, 2019)

VST said:


> Yeah, I'm sure you did.
> 
> The entire looksmax.org community is very proud of your extremely inspiring comeback story, where you went from packing groceries as a 3 PSL male to getting into several med schools, creating a very "complex" facial rating software that is so complex that it requires quantum computing (nevermind that quantum computing is still an experimental technology that is extremely inefficient and thus wouldn't be suitable for your meme facial rating software) and has multiple NYC plastic Surgeons GAGGING to use it, even though all your "software" does is use image recognition and is no different than all these meme rating websites such as prettyscale for which you charge $60/hour which is 124.8k/year based on a 40/h workweek, which is an exorbitant amount of money to pay for a piece of software considering how little benefit it offers.
> 
> ...


Yeah he told me that he's a 4 PSL loooool. Legit retard hypocrite scammer. To all the newcels: don't trust this beautiful bones guy. He's an ugly poser. I actually was ugly af and became beautiful, so maybe listen to me instead of some guy who's so ugly he won't even post his pics lol


----------



## Jaded (Jan 1, 2019)

Nigger


----------



## VST (Jan 1, 2019)

Nibba said:


> Yeah he told me that he's a 4 PSL loooool. Legit retard hypocrite scammer. To all the newcels: don't trust this ugly black poser. I actually was ugly af and became beautiful, so maybe listen to me instead of some.guy who's so ugly he won't even post his pics lol


He said that he slayed 5-6 PSL females (which according to his "PSL scale" is the 80th percentile for PSL 5 women and 97.5th percentile for PSL 6 women [which is literally model tier]) you know what the best part is? He did all of this while he was still a self proclaimed PSL 2-3.


----------



## Nibba (Jan 1, 2019)

VST said:


> He said that he slayed 5-6 PSL females (which according to his "PSL scale" is the 80th percentile for PSL 5 women and 97.5th percentile for PSL 6 women [which is literally model tier]) you know what the best part is? He did all of this while he was still a self proclaimed PSL 2-3.


Oh yeah but he somehow thinks he mogs me as a 6'3 WHITE broad-shouldered man with perfect glowing skin and perfect hair...even disregarding face which most people here most likely destroy him in. Just lol at his narcy copes he'll be bullied out of here when the noobies realize he's a fag scammer bitch

@BeautifulBones bro leave this site


----------



## Dude420 (Jan 1, 2019)

VST said:


> He said that he slayed 5-6 PSL females (which according to his "PSL scale" is the 80th percentile for PSL 5 women and 97.5th percentile for PSL 6 women [which is literally model tier]) you know what the best part is? He did all of this while he was still a self proclaimed PSL 2-3.



This follows his improve your personality ascension program though maybe he is on to something


----------



## VST (Jan 1, 2019)

Nibba said:


> Oh yeah but he somehow thinks he mogs me as a 6'3 WHITE broad-shouldered man with perfect glowing skin and perfect hair...even disregarding face which most people here most likely destroy him in. Just lol at his narcy copes he'll be bullied out of here when the noobies realize he's a fag scammer bitch
> 
> @BeautifulBones bro leave this site


He is the worst kind of person, praying on desperate men to push him his overpriced "ascension strategies" without providing any proof that they actually work. 

Desperate people are willing to try anything, and he knows it, trying to benefit from it financially. You'd think that since he earns SOOOOOO much money, he wouldn't need to shill his bullshit on here?


----------



## Nibba (Jan 1, 2019)

VST said:


> He is the worst kind of person, praying on desperate men to push him his overpriced "ascension strategies" without providing any proof that they actually work.
> 
> Desperate people are willing to try anything, and he knows it, trying to benefit from it financially. You'd think that since he earns SOOOOOO much money, he wouldn't need to shill his bullshit on here?


Exactly. Like another user called.him out on yesterday when he talked about mogging people, "empty words and baseless claims without any proof"

Oh of course he's so inspiring! Everyone here wants to be a loser scammer on an incel board while making up stories of him slaying chicks that are probable landwhales. 



Dude420 said:


> This follows his improve your personality ascension program though maybe he is on to something


Lmao just b urself face software! Just be ignorant and use empty, big words to make the idiots here think you're smart, even tho it actually has nothing to do with what you're trying to explain!


----------



## dodt (Jan 1, 2019)

Nibba said:


> No man. People here sometimes rate Nick batemen as a 5 PSL and others as 7+ PSL lol. In this way it IS subjective.
> 
> That's dumb lol


Well, for me its much more efficient to use the scale, rather than not use it. Cuz I have my own subjective sense of beauty which often corresponds with some of people whom I consider people that understand something about aesthetics. From my own experience, people who say that psl shit does not matter, often do not know much about aesthetics. I am not saying psl is the ultimate reflection of the level of attraction a guy receives, but it attempts to represent it and does the job quite well tbh.

Obv, there are cases of trolling, and people using psl that have little to no understanding, but well, there always will be a minority and majority about looks part, cuz we are not robotic machines that can predict everything with any accuracy we want, but we can get reasonably close to that to be suitable for our needs.


----------



## Nibba (Jan 1, 2019)

dodt said:


> Well, for me its much more efficient to use the scale, rather than not use it. Cuz I have my own subjective sense of beauty which often corresponds with some of people whom I consider people that understand something about aesthetics.


I agree with this. I sort of use my own scale since I happen to be pretty knowledgable about looks theory, having studied it for a few years now in addition to looking at real life interactions with those around me and myself



dodt said:


> From my own experience, people who say that psl shit does not matter, often do not know much about aesthetic


Its a good baseline, but has a lot of missing gaps. What r ur thoughts


----------



## dodt (Jan 1, 2019)

Nibba said:


> I agree with this. I sort of use my own scale since I happen to be pretty knowledgable about looks theory, having studied it for a few years now in addition to looking at real life interactions with those around me and myself


Yes, and in that sense I have my own scale which I dont adjust to other people's rating, but I can make it comparable to their ratings If I have a view at how they rate others. My scale is similar to this, almost identical, with percentiles etc, which sounds useful for me. I had 4.5 as a median which I then shifted to 4. Btw, percentiles are a good attempt to make the scale of one person comparable to others', you just need to say that the median for you is 4 or 5 or 10. And my rating of bateman of 7 psl (for the sake of example) suddenly becomes more reasonable, so it is a good idea to make a unified comparison mechanism, not just bare numbers with words like normie or psl following it.



Nibba said:


> Its a good baseline, but has a lot of missing gaps. What r ur thoughts


Well, that's my personal opinon, maybe I am too ignorant about that. If psl dont correspond to you reality, create your own rating to describe it, then compare to others. And the common sense says there should be some close results of our view of how one's aestethics compares to another man's. That will be a good representation of a male's sucess on dating platforms or IRL.


----------



## BeautifulBones (Jan 1, 2019)

HorseFace said:


> I said this
> 
> "Im not good with psl, but dude got twink and Chad asthethics, dark coloring, and wide frame. I think he is atleast 7 psl. Maybe 7.25
> 
> ...



Same height, Crisick slight broader shoulder broadness, but Crisicks face is better. If you ran a Tinder experiment with them both Crisick would get 2-3x more matches. Thats how much 1 PSL point makes 

The biggest slayer on Looksmax.org is ..


----------



## Nibba (Jan 1, 2019)

dodt said:


> My scale is similar to this, almost identical, with percentiles etc, which sounds useful for me. I had 4.5 as a median which I then shifted to 4


Ah yeah I'm glad someone else uses medians instead of means, cuz with looks you have outliers and medians are resistent to those said outliers. But yea curious as to why you have the median less than the mean? Imo it should be higher as looks are skewed to the left (more lower outlier than higher ones)




dodt said:


> Well, that's my personal opinon, maybe I am too ignorant about that. If psl dont correspond to you reality, create your own rating to describe it, then compare to others.


Yep I've sort of intrisically done this over the past years to create a pretty accurate scale that predicts irl interactions. Of course, there are always outliers and special cases to take into consideration


----------



## dodt (Jan 1, 2019)

Nibba said:


> Ah yeah I'm glad someone else uses medians instead of means, cuz with looks you have outliers and medians are resistent to those said outliers. But yea curious as to why you have the median less than the mean? Imo it should be higher as looks are skewed to the left (more lower outlier than higher ones)


No, I basically meant that the median I used was 4.5, but then I decided to modify my scale and made 4.0 as a median. Mean concept is not applicable to this looks scale, cuz it makes no sense even to discuss it, cuz 4 being the median from 0 to 8 is a coincidence because we decided that a number "4.0" to represent the median of our normal distribution. So, the number in the looks scale represents the "number of SD's from the mean - the number we decided to represent mean.". So bateman with 7 psl, with 4 being the average means he is 3SDs from the median (cuz we assumed the normality of distribution beforehand). Thus, we have no information of the mean and if we try to even calculate the mean with psl numbers, it will not give accurate results cuz that numbers are showing SDs rather than the "perfect number that ideally reflects looks as a measure". In short, if we assume that numbers show the percentile, mean has no sense, but if we assume that numbers ultimately show the comparable looks measure, then we can collect results and create our distribution of looks, and then judge whether it is skewed or not, find the formula which descibes the non normal distribution and judge about percentiles


Nibba said:


> Of course, there are always outliers and special cases to take into consideration


I am interested in ways to incorporate height to the psl scale, only height, not body.


----------



## AncapFAG (Jan 22, 2019)

I rewant my 6.5 psl. I miss longhair ???


----------



## Hunter (Jan 22, 2019)

this PSL shit is autistic. just go by 1-10 ratings.


----------



## medialcanthuscel (Mar 1, 2019)

Stupid thread, PSL 5 Is 50%, psl 6 is like 80%


----------



## Heirio (Mar 1, 2019)

medialcanthuscel said:


> Stupid thread, PSL 5 Is 50%, psl 6 is like 80%


then why would you bump it nigga


----------



## Death Tourist (Apr 3, 2019)

BeautifulBones said:


> There are 102 PSL 9+'s
> 
> But there are no PSL 10's theoretically there only 1 in 10 billion which means there might be one every 5 generations
> 
> https://measuringu.com/pcalcz/


----------



## dogtown (Jun 1, 2019)

Bump


----------



## Soulsmaxx (Jun 1, 2019)

dogtown said:


> Bump


Mods should sticky this tbh


----------



## Sizzurp (Jun 1, 2019)

dogtown said:


> Bump


----------



## dogtown (Jun 1, 2019)

Sizzurp said:


>




I miss this shit


----------



## VisageVotarian (Jul 10, 2019)

too convoluted, simp it down, 5 tier system

1- unattractive
2- below average
3- average
4- above average
5- attractive


----------



## Usum (Jul 25, 2019)

BeautifulBones said:


> Only PSL 6-8 can get laid on any given night reliably. Only PSL 7 and 8 can constantly lay high quality girls as a ONS. The PSL actually correlates well to how you will be treated in the world. A PSL 5.5 and 6 are in similar water, but a PSL 6 might have low self esteem after a night out with a PSL 8


Shit. I guess I am PSL 5 at best.


----------



## Deleted member 2721 (Aug 16, 2019)

tfw 3


----------



## Okiwaga (Aug 16, 2019)

Just stop...Votes are subjective everyone got a type for example for me chico is a 7 i see him as average if not for his height and so on for many people we all have preferences
the average guy in america is not even a 4 he is fat and obese


----------



## Deleted member 2227 (Mar 19, 2020)

bump


----------



## Deleted member 6908 (May 21, 2020)

Good thread


----------



## Deleted member 245 (Aug 1, 2020)

itsOVER said:


> If only 3% of people are a 6 and a negligible amount are 7+, then all the numbers above 6 are essentially meaningless.
> 
> Muh PSL rating is bullshit. How many tinder matches you get is your actual rating. If you get loads, you're not, and if you dont, then you're not hot. That's all that matters, not what some 'expert' on a forum thinks.



Legit


----------



## johncruz12345 (Oct 13, 2020)

The ogs


----------



## EverythingMattersCel (Oct 13, 2020)

theropeking said:


> OP good thread BUT
> 
> >Yes there's only 3 out of 100,000 people who are PSL 8. There might be 1-2 on this entire forum
> 
> ...



Orb is not PSL 7. He is 6.5 at the absolute max. Amnesia and Salludon mog Orb. Both are in the range of 6.5 - 6.7 PSL. If we're talking about the whole package PSL 8 is something else. Even male supermodels like O'Pry and Maher have failos. In the case of O'Pry, he is only 5'11.5 and Maher is a massive framelet. This has no basis irl but if we're looking to rationalise a true PSL 8 it's someone with only halos and no failos.

PSL 8 min requirements:
- *FACE (most important):* Good ratios, good harmony, forward grown, mass pheno appeal, good colouring, perfect glowing skin with good collagen, NW1 minimum and maesthetic.
- *Height:* 6'3+ barefoot night height minimum. Should be able to height mog at least 85% of the population in any Northern European country.
- *Frame:* Good fat distribution, good insertions, good shoulder-waist ratio (min. 1.8). This is where a lot of male models in the PSL 7 range fall short... Gandy has a terrible frame, Chico, Barrett and O'Pry are slim. Part of the reason is that putting on muscle would be detrimental to their modelling careers but even then their frames are on the smaller side.

Prime Hernan Drago comes to mind when I think of someone around 7.2 PSL.

PSL 8 is about perfection and mass appeal. There might not be a single person in the world who is PSL 8. It sounds plausible for someone to have all of the traits above but the reality is that PSL 7 candidates with perfect FACES will likely fall short in one or another of the aforementioned areas. There might not be a single human being born since the evolution of the cro-magnon that meets the criteria for PSL 8. PSL 8 is literally something out of a comic book or a manga. It's an abstraction...an unmoggable god that transcends the space-time continuum. It has been added to the scale for the sole purpose of creating an unattainable goal that will never leave any looksmaxxer satisfied. It simply can't be achieved...


----------

