A
ArabIncel
Solstice
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2019
- Posts
- 2,491
- Reputation
- 2,975
I never understood why the scale is out of 8 as opposed to being out of 10. Isn't it a bit arbitrary to settle for a number like 8?
Potential reason (1): 10/10s don't exist. So we shouldn't rate out of 10.
Counter reply to (1): Well that can't be because when we're rating people out of 8 the 8 is the new 10 so then 8/8s don't exist either (and this is evident in practice too when the top male models here are rated like 7.5/8 at best).
Potential reason (2): When rating out of 10 lots of other things, aside from face, get factored in such as neck, frame, body, height, and race. So we shouldn't rate out of 10.
Counter reply to (2): We don't have to factor in these things. We can make a distinction here. We can note that when normies generally rate people out of 10 in real life they tend to include various things into their rate: face, neck, frame, body, height, race, etc. So they don't only include face. That's fine. But we can rate people out of 10 here where we just include face (and nothing else). So it will STRICTLY be a facial rate out of 10. No problem with doing that. I mean, we're already facially rating people out of 8. I see no issue with facially rating people out of 10 instead.
Potential reason (3): That's just how it is historically speaking. The people who made the scale (back in the day on the P/S/L forums) made it out of 8. Hence we should follow them. So we shouldn't rate out of 10.
Counter reply to (3): That doesn't make sense to me. Why should we follow them? Firstly it is important to determine the reason WHY they made the scale out of 8. Secondly it is important to determine whether their reason for making the scale out of 8 is a good one or not. If, for example, their reason for making the scale out of 8 was either (1) or (2) from above, then, as my counter replies show, they are simply wrong. If their reason was something other than (1) or (2) from above, then, by all means, let's hear it.
Potential reason (1): 10/10s don't exist. So we shouldn't rate out of 10.
Counter reply to (1): Well that can't be because when we're rating people out of 8 the 8 is the new 10 so then 8/8s don't exist either (and this is evident in practice too when the top male models here are rated like 7.5/8 at best).
Potential reason (2): When rating out of 10 lots of other things, aside from face, get factored in such as neck, frame, body, height, and race. So we shouldn't rate out of 10.
Counter reply to (2): We don't have to factor in these things. We can make a distinction here. We can note that when normies generally rate people out of 10 in real life they tend to include various things into their rate: face, neck, frame, body, height, race, etc. So they don't only include face. That's fine. But we can rate people out of 10 here where we just include face (and nothing else). So it will STRICTLY be a facial rate out of 10. No problem with doing that. I mean, we're already facially rating people out of 8. I see no issue with facially rating people out of 10 instead.
Potential reason (3): That's just how it is historically speaking. The people who made the scale (back in the day on the P/S/L forums) made it out of 8. Hence we should follow them. So we shouldn't rate out of 10.
Counter reply to (3): That doesn't make sense to me. Why should we follow them? Firstly it is important to determine the reason WHY they made the scale out of 8. Secondly it is important to determine whether their reason for making the scale out of 8 is a good one or not. If, for example, their reason for making the scale out of 8 was either (1) or (2) from above, then, as my counter replies show, they are simply wrong. If their reason was something other than (1) or (2) from above, then, by all means, let's hear it.
Last edited: