I
imdelusional
Professionally sub-1
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2025
- Posts
- 83
- Reputation
- 89
If you know me, which you probably don't, you will know that I put a lot of thought because I find that the PSL scale, although it has the potential to be almost completely objective, it is usually misused to a degree that makes it arguably even more subjective than the normal, 1-10 scale.
One of the things I was wondering, is, when rating, how many falios/flaws/non-ideal features are permissible?
And how do we determine when something is a falio, a flaw, or a non-ideal feature?
For example, we know that the ideal ESR ratio is 0.46, because assesing the ideals is the easiest part.
Now, my ESR is 0.459. This is not ideal, but it's certainly not a flaw or falio.
I have researched this and other forums, nothing could be found on how to assess falios (beyond the basic "if you have a crooked nose/negative canthal tilt etc" type of stuff).
Without a clear scheme of things, a large portion of ratings is left to depend upon the personal tastes of the rater in question. Even if it is a blackpilled rater, maybe he doesn't like THOSE noses in particular and, knowing they are not ideal, he goes on and says "oh, it's a falio".
Most of the times, (to my knowledge), there seems to be no clear distinction between a falio and a flaw or a non ideal feature, and on top of that, we have no clear grounds on how many falios and flaws put you at which tier. (Also, there seems to be some controversy regarding the tiers as well, because I have seen guides saying that a LTN is somewhere between 1.5-3 PSL; meanwhile I have also seen people placing LTN as the next tier after a sub-5, which kind of doesn't make sense. Another thing that doesn't make sense is claiming stuff such as that a Mid Tier Normie is top 20% of looks or that most people are LTN. No, most people must be, by definition, Mid Tier Normie because that's what the "Mid" and "normie" in "Mid Tier Normie" stand for)
We give ratings left and right shouting "LTN" "HTN" "Chadlite", but we don't really much about that, and it ends being a purely subjective, personal rating. Thus meaning, we are using the PSL scale for the opposite of the thing it was made for: objective ratings based on percentiles.
Which, by the way, we also don't agree on the percentages of people on each tier. I have found several sources that explain the PSL scale (from this forum and from Incel.Wiki). All of them are Low-IQ. For example, in Incel.Wiki, the percentages only add up to 95.611% JFL.
In the "Concise Guide for Evaluating PSL ratings and male beauty characteristics", only adds up to 65% something.
For the PSL scale to be objective we need:
- A clear scheme on how many falios and deviations are permissible at which tier
- A PSL scale where the % actually add up to 100 lmao.
However, since we don't have studies and will have studies of these sort, any attempt at assigning percentages at different tiers (ex: "A HTN is one in 92 people") is complete and utter bullshit based on guesses that almost random, so we should leave that aside.
If we know how percentiles work, in a scale of 1-8 based on a standart deviation (bell curve), we know that:
- The overwhelming majority of people will fall under the 3-5 PSL tiers, more specifically, under the 4 PSL.
4 PSL would be the 50th percentile, which would mean that 4 PSL is MTN, or mid tier normie, and this would encapsule the MAJORITY of people, so enough with this "majority of people are ltn" "mtn is top 20% os looks" bullshit. According to Chatgtp, 68% of people should fall under this rating, but once again this is just a guess. Although I think it is much closer to reality.
3-5 Are Low and High Tier normies, anything below 3 would be subhumans, 6 are chads, etc.
It's important to note that the closer we get to 0 and 8, the more drastic the changes are, and the rarer people are. This is not proportional but exponential, and it that sense, it is more likely to go from 3 to 5 PSL that to go from 7.5 to 7.75 PSL, and likewise, the proportion in the percentages between 3 and 5 PSL is far smaller than the proportion between 7.5 and 7.75.
In the reverse, it easier to descend from 5 to 3 PSL that it is to descend from 1 to 0.75 PSL.
It's also problematic to use a model based on standart deviation due to the fact that there is way too much difference between the higher and lower tiers.
In statistics, two standart deviations (equivalent to 6 PSL in this discussion) would put you in the 93rd percentile, aka you are better looking than 93% of people.
But wait! THat implies that 7 in every 100 people are Chads....But I have never seen a chad in real life, in fact, I have only seen 2 chadlites at most. The percentages make no sense, why we should stay away from them.
With this in mind, I open the discussion:
How many flaws, falios and non-ideal features are premissible for each tier, and how do we define each of those concepts?
One of the things I was wondering, is, when rating, how many falios/flaws/non-ideal features are permissible?
And how do we determine when something is a falio, a flaw, or a non-ideal feature?
For example, we know that the ideal ESR ratio is 0.46, because assesing the ideals is the easiest part.
Now, my ESR is 0.459. This is not ideal, but it's certainly not a flaw or falio.
I have researched this and other forums, nothing could be found on how to assess falios (beyond the basic "if you have a crooked nose/negative canthal tilt etc" type of stuff).
Without a clear scheme of things, a large portion of ratings is left to depend upon the personal tastes of the rater in question. Even if it is a blackpilled rater, maybe he doesn't like THOSE noses in particular and, knowing they are not ideal, he goes on and says "oh, it's a falio".
Most of the times, (to my knowledge), there seems to be no clear distinction between a falio and a flaw or a non ideal feature, and on top of that, we have no clear grounds on how many falios and flaws put you at which tier. (Also, there seems to be some controversy regarding the tiers as well, because I have seen guides saying that a LTN is somewhere between 1.5-3 PSL; meanwhile I have also seen people placing LTN as the next tier after a sub-5, which kind of doesn't make sense. Another thing that doesn't make sense is claiming stuff such as that a Mid Tier Normie is top 20% of looks or that most people are LTN. No, most people must be, by definition, Mid Tier Normie because that's what the "Mid" and "normie" in "Mid Tier Normie" stand for)
We give ratings left and right shouting "LTN" "HTN" "Chadlite", but we don't really much about that, and it ends being a purely subjective, personal rating. Thus meaning, we are using the PSL scale for the opposite of the thing it was made for: objective ratings based on percentiles.
Which, by the way, we also don't agree on the percentages of people on each tier. I have found several sources that explain the PSL scale (from this forum and from Incel.Wiki). All of them are Low-IQ. For example, in Incel.Wiki, the percentages only add up to 95.611% JFL.
In the "Concise Guide for Evaluating PSL ratings and male beauty characteristics", only adds up to 65% something.
For the PSL scale to be objective we need:
- A clear scheme on how many falios and deviations are permissible at which tier
- A PSL scale where the % actually add up to 100 lmao.
However, since we don't have studies and will have studies of these sort, any attempt at assigning percentages at different tiers (ex: "A HTN is one in 92 people") is complete and utter bullshit based on guesses that almost random, so we should leave that aside.
If we know how percentiles work, in a scale of 1-8 based on a standart deviation (bell curve), we know that:
- The overwhelming majority of people will fall under the 3-5 PSL tiers, more specifically, under the 4 PSL.
4 PSL would be the 50th percentile, which would mean that 4 PSL is MTN, or mid tier normie, and this would encapsule the MAJORITY of people, so enough with this "majority of people are ltn" "mtn is top 20% os looks" bullshit. According to Chatgtp, 68% of people should fall under this rating, but once again this is just a guess. Although I think it is much closer to reality.
3-5 Are Low and High Tier normies, anything below 3 would be subhumans, 6 are chads, etc.
It's important to note that the closer we get to 0 and 8, the more drastic the changes are, and the rarer people are. This is not proportional but exponential, and it that sense, it is more likely to go from 3 to 5 PSL that to go from 7.5 to 7.75 PSL, and likewise, the proportion in the percentages between 3 and 5 PSL is far smaller than the proportion between 7.5 and 7.75.
In the reverse, it easier to descend from 5 to 3 PSL that it is to descend from 1 to 0.75 PSL.
It's also problematic to use a model based on standart deviation due to the fact that there is way too much difference between the higher and lower tiers.
In statistics, two standart deviations (equivalent to 6 PSL in this discussion) would put you in the 93rd percentile, aka you are better looking than 93% of people.
But wait! THat implies that 7 in every 100 people are Chads....But I have never seen a chad in real life, in fact, I have only seen 2 chadlites at most. The percentages make no sense, why we should stay away from them.
With this in mind, I open the discussion:
How many flaws, falios and non-ideal features are premissible for each tier, and how do we define each of those concepts?
