Psl makes no sense

J

JeyJeyJoey

Iron
Joined
Nov 16, 2020
Posts
130
Reputation
94
Many psl scales ive seen suffer from the same problems. First of all they list top 1% people as like top 10%. Ive never even seen someone even close to that good looking irl in many of these and statistically i should have seen many. The second problem is they do not factor in height and frame which are massively important, id argue height and frame are half of psl maybe slightly less. So in conclusion the psl scale is deeply flawed. Most people seen as chads are 1/1000 if not more when factoring frame and height.
 
  • +1
Reactions: magnificentcel, Deleted member 10177, Deleted member 5574 and 4 others
.
 
  • +1
Reactions: mogstar
Yes. A robust PSL scale should be created and pinned by the mods. It seems people just rate the face out of 10 and then convert it to out of eight. More senior members should take the charge, otherwise they should quit using derogatory terms such as "greycel".
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 10177, magnificentcel, IdiAmin and 3 others
i agree, i see tons of people that brutally mog me in terms of individual facial features and just overall attractiveness, but they're always like 5'7 or st kek, so my height and skullmog kind of compensates for their facemog.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Hightwolf
PSL is pseudoscience made up by basement dwellers
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Deleted member 6475, Deleted member 11406, mogstar and 11 others
i agree, i see tons of people that brutally mog me in terms of individual facial features and just overall attractiveness, but they're always like 5'7 or st kek, so my height and skullmog kind of compensates for their facemog.
Facts, I agree there are generally attractive features but at a certain point it’s ridiculous. Too me theres Deformed, ugly, average, good looking, Chad. True chad being like 6’2 big frame, good face easily 1/1000. Broad frame is rare when tall, 6’2 is like 2% of pop so make that like .1% for broad frame too, then add good bone structures its like .01%-.001%
 
  • Love it
  • Woah
Reactions: mogstar, EverythingMattersCel and Deleted member 7521
greycel moment
Also OP is 100% a redditor :soy:
Inject T asap
 
Last edited:
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Deleted member 6423, slayer69 and Lux
Basement dweller spotted
ec0.gif
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Entschuldigung and Lux
I’ve always factored in height and frame when talking about PSL. Many here don’t, though.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 6997, WadlowMaxxing, BigBoy and 1 other person
Fair post, most guys here think the top 10% are male models when they are mainly above average guys, mainly out of insecurity.

However, PSL is only used to rate a person's face, height and broad shoulders are accounted in your overall smv. That would differentiate what your def of psl is and what actually is.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 4106, kingu2020 and Deleted member 11221
Many psl scales ive seen suffer from the same problems. First of all they list top 1% people as like top 10%. Ive never even seen someone even close to that good looking irl in many of these and statistically i should have seen many. The second problem is they do not factor in height and frame which are massively important, id argue height and frame are half of psl maybe slightly less. So in conclusion the psl scale is deeply flawed. Most people seen as chads are 1/1000 if not more when factoring frame and height.
It doesnt matter if PSL is only about face everyone takes into consideration height and body for attractiveness
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 6423
PSL follows the model aesthetic more so than irl appeal. The original PSL gods are good examples. It also places too much importance on dimorphism and striking features than the law of averages.
 
  • +1
Reactions: BigBoy and Deleted member 3043
Many psl scales ive seen suffer from the same problems. First of all they list top 1% people as like top 10%. Ive never even seen someone even close to that good looking irl in many of these and statistically i should have seen many. The second problem is they do not factor in height and frame which are massively important, id argue height and frame are half of psl maybe slightly less. So in conclusion the psl scale is deeply flawed. Most people seen as chads are 1/1000 if not more when factoring frame and height.
give some examples ?
 
PSL follows the model aesthetic more so than irl appeal. The original PSL gods are good examples. It also places too much importance on dimorphism and striking features than the law of averages.
 
  • +1
Reactions: WadlowMaxxing
i agree but certain areas are super concentrated with chads and chadlites such as tinder .Frame >face irl , ig or tinder face>frame
 
I have never seen a 6psl+ face irl in my entire life.
 

Similar threads

itsover_
Replies
102
Views
4K
itsover_
itsover_
A
Replies
10
Views
393
Olivecel
Olivecel
enchanted_elixir
Replies
5
Views
363
diditeverbegin
D

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top