E
ElloinmorninJ
Gold
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2021
- Posts
- 851
- Reputation
- 1,000
Which would you choose?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Alright 5’7 with a 9/10 then.lol this thread
MAke it 5"7 and 9/10 face, not average height like 5"9
I still go with 5"7 and 9 faceAlright 5’7 with a 9/10 then.
Obviously 9/10 face
A 9/10 face is giga rare and has a lot of value, while 6'2 height is very common
1 inch below average is considered short yet 3 inches above average isn't considered tall, just lol @ this forumwtf 5'9 is considered so manlet these days that someone on a blackpilled forum could suggest this comparison.
Except it’s actually accurate…
6’2 is a 9/10 (90%+) height
5’8 is the equivalent to a 4/10 height
Face is clearly more important when you make an equal comparison.
Of course. Because face matters more. Way mo
You aren’t understanding me.
I completely agree with everything you said in this paragraph.
‘would you rather have a top 1% net worth or top 1% ability at playing checkers’
It is a valid comparison, and everyone would choose net worth.
Same for the OP. The comparison is ACCURATE and everyone would choose the top face and below average height
But, if the goal was to compare whether or not net worth vs checkers is more important, its perfect.
Yes I totally agree. That would be a comparison where the choice would be more difficult. However, if the goal was to compare the importance between height and face, it is a bad comparison.
6’2 height= chad face
But, HTN face is 75%, while 5’8 is about 30% for whites.
So you are nerfing the chad with a 30% attribute while ‘nerfing’ the tallfag (chad height) with a 75% attribute
So, the fact that this is even a discussion, shows an equally good face is a much bigger halo than a equally good height.
However,^ If that wasn’t the goal of the post, then yeah, its an awful comparison.