99.9% of you RETARDED n*****s should not be allowed to rate

[cripple]

MUH AVERAGE IS MLTN-HLTN
IN A YEAR AVERAGE WILL BE LOW TIER SUBHUMAN TO MID TIER SUBHUMAN
ITS A FIXED RATING SCALE YOU INCOHERENT RETARDS

 

[twinkdestroyer]

why am I an invisible incel man

 

[Kittystrophic]

it always has been mltn-hltn…
roughly 4.7 is the average
only people who say mtn is average are uneducated and don’t know how to rate (you)

 

[cripple]

it always has been mltn-hltn…
roughly 4.7 is the average
only people who say mtn is average are uneducated and don’t know how to rate (you)

Just spam ‘it always has been mltn-hltn’ without providing any evidence theory

 

[Kittystrophic]

“ If u want a coherent fucking rating system there needs to be a fixed standard for each category”

there literally is son did u just come from tik tok

 

[cripple]

“ If u want a coherent fucking rating system there needs to be a fixed standard for each category”

there literally is son did u just come from tik tok

Yeah which means the average is fixed n****r. The average doesn’t drop down to ltn cuz the human average is ltn
Otherwise what we consider an mtn today would rise to a htn and THE FIXED STANDARD WOULD BE INVALID you retarded n****r

 

[Sink]

MUH AVERAGE IS MLTN-HLTN
IN A YEAR AVERAGE WILL BE LOW TIER SUBHUMAN TO MID TIER SUBHUMAN
ITS A FIXED RATING SCALE YOU INCOHERENT RETARDS

You might be a little retarded
Everyone who has their own formula have the average set at roughly 4.75 (mltn-hltn)
You obv don't know shit about ratings so you shouldn't embarrass yourself further jfl

 

[Kittystrophic]

Yeah which means the average is fixed n****r. The average doesn’t drop down to ltn cuz the human average is ltn
Otherwise what we consider an mtn today would rise to a htn and THE FIXED STANDARD WOULD BE INVALID you retarded n****r

do you even know what you’re saying??
The average is what the human average is It’s mltn-hltn
+Ad hominem

@Sink humble him…

 

[cripple]

do you even know what you’re saying??
The average is what the human average is It’s mltn-hltn
+Ad hominem

@Sink humble him…

The average for the normie scale isn’t the human average or else the references for each category would have to be constantly changing relative to the human population
It’s not an ad hominem cuz im supporting the claim not solely insulting you

 

[Kittystrophic]

The average for the normie scale isn’t the human average or else the references for each category would have to be constantly changing relative to the human population
It’s not an ad hominem cuz im supporting the claim not solely insulting you

Do you think normies don’t have faces what

 

[sinedKunt]

I get it yes the median should be average

 

[cripple]

Do you think normies don’t have faces what

Here you go friend Accuse me of an ad hominen and ill provide you with my friend chatgit

The distinction comes down to what you want the scale to measure.


Option 1: A fixed scale (how most internet looks scales are used)


Imagine attractiveness is measured on a hypothetical scale from 0 to 10.

• LTN = 3–4
• MTN = 4–5
• HTN = 5–6
• Chadlite = 6–7
• Chad = 7+

The numbers don’t change.


Suppose the average attractiveness of the population drops from 5.0 to 4.2.


Under a fixed scale:

• MTN is still 4–5.
• HTN is still 5–6.
• Chad is still 7+.

The consequence is that the average person is now in LTN or the lower end of MTN instead of the center of MTN.


This is logically consistent because the scale measures an absolute level rather than a person’s position within the population.





Option 2: A relative scale


Instead, suppose you define the categories by percentiles.


For example:

• Bottom 25% = LTN
• Middle 50% = MTN
• Top 20% = HTN
• Top 4% = Chadlite
• Top 1% = Chad

Now MTN always contains the average person.


If everyone becomes less attractive, the cutoffs move downward.


If everyone becomes more attractive, the cutoffs move upward.


The categories are no longer fixed—they float with the population.





Why fixed scales are often preferred


Suppose John has exactly the same face for 20 years.


A relative scale could produce this:

• 2020: MTN
• 2030: LTN
• 2040: HTN

John never changed.


Only everyone else changed.


Many people see this as unintuitive because the rating changes despite the object being rated remaining identical.


A fixed scale avoids this.


John stays MTN unless his appearance changes.





The analogy with temperature


Imagine saying:


“20°C is comfortable.”


If temperatures worldwide increased by 5°C, would you redefine “20°C” to mean 25°C?


Usually no.


You keep the temperature scale fixed.


Instead you say:


“The average day is warmer.”


The reference stays constant.


A fixed attractiveness scale works the same way.





The analogy with height


Suppose average male height increased from 175 cm to 182 cm.


Would we redefine:

• “Tall” from 185 cm to 192 cm?

You could.


But then a man who stayed 187 cm would go from “tall” to merely “average” without shrinking.


Most scientific measurements avoid this by keeping the units fixed.





Which system is more useful depends on the question


If you want to know:


“How attractive is this person?”


A fixed scale is more appropriate because the score depends only on the individual.


If you want to know:


“How attractive is this person compared with everyone else alive today?”


A relative scale is more appropriate because it measures rank rather than an absolute standard.





Why internet communities usually keep the tiers fixed


Communities that use terms like LTN, MTN, HTN, Chadlite, and Chad generally discuss them as stable archetypes rather than percentile groups. People compare individuals across different countries, eras, and contexts as though the categories themselves are constant.


If the categories were redefined every time the population changed, statements like “this actor is HTN” or “that model is Chadlite” would become unstable over time even if those people’s appearances never changed.


Using fixed categories avoids that problem and makes the labels function more like stable descriptive ratings rather than moving rankings. That doesn’t make the scale objective or scientific—it simply makes it internally more consistent for the purpose those communities typically use it for.

 

[gimp]

MUH AVERAGE IS MLTN-HLTN
IN A YEAR AVERAGE WILL BE LOW TIER SUBHUMAN TO MID TIER SUBHUMAN
ITS A FIXED RATING SCALE YOU INCOHERENT RETARDS

Don’t raise your voice, I can hear you just fine.
I understand your pain, but this isn’t going to end the way you think it will. I won’t allow it to, so calm down.

 

[Kittystrophic]

Here you go friend Accuse me of an ad hominen and ill provide you with my friend chatgit

The distinction comes down to what you want the scale to measure.


Option 1: A fixed scale (how most internet looks scales are used)


Imagine attractiveness is measured on a hypothetical scale from 0 to 10.

• LTN = 3–4
• MTN = 4–5
• HTN = 5–6
• Chadlite = 6–7
• Chad = 7+

The numbers don’t change.


Suppose the average attractiveness of the population drops from 5.0 to 4.2.


Under a fixed scale:

• MTN is still 4–5.
• HTN is still 5–6.
• Chad is still 7+.

The consequence is that the average person is now in LTN or the lower end of MTN instead of the center of MTN.


This is logically consistent because the scale measures an absolute level rather than a person’s position within the population.





Option 2: A relative scale


Instead, suppose you define the categories by percentiles.


For example:

• Bottom 25% = LTN
• Middle 50% = MTN
• Top 20% = HTN
• Top 4% = Chadlite
• Top 1% = Chad

Now MTN always contains the average person.


If everyone becomes less attractive, the cutoffs move downward.


If everyone becomes more attractive, the cutoffs move upward.


The categories are no longer fixed—they float with the population.





Why fixed scales are often preferred


Suppose John has exactly the same face for 20 years.


A relative scale could produce this:

• 2020: MTN
• 2030: LTN
• 2040: HTN

John never changed.


Only everyone else changed.


Many people see this as unintuitive because the rating changes despite the object being rated remaining identical.


A fixed scale avoids this.


John stays MTN unless his appearance changes.





The analogy with temperature


Imagine saying:


“20°C is comfortable.”


If temperatures worldwide increased by 5°C, would you redefine “20°C” to mean 25°C?


Usually no.


You keep the temperature scale fixed.


Instead you say:


“The average day is warmer.”


The reference stays constant.


A fixed attractiveness scale works the same way.





The analogy with height


Suppose average male height increased from 175 cm to 182 cm.


Would we redefine:

• “Tall” from 185 cm to 192 cm?

You could.


But then a man who stayed 187 cm would go from “tall” to merely “average” without shrinking.


Most scientific measurements avoid this by keeping the units fixed.





Which system is more useful depends on the question


If you want to know:


“How attractive is this person?”


A fixed scale is more appropriate because the score depends only on the individual.


If you want to know:


“How attractive is this person compared with everyone else alive today?”


A relative scale is more appropriate because it measures rank rather than an absolute standard.





Why internet communities usually keep the tiers fixed


Communities that use terms like LTN, MTN, HTN, Chadlite, and Chad generally discuss them as stable archetypes rather than percentile groups. People compare individuals across different countries, eras, and contexts as though the categories themselves are constant.


If the categories were redefined every time the population changed, statements like “this actor is HTN” or “that model is Chadlite” would become unstable over time even if those people’s appearances never changed.


Using fixed categories avoids that problem and makes the labels function more like stable descriptive ratings rather than moving rankings. That doesn’t make the scale objective or scientific—it simply makes it internally more consistent for the purpose those communities typically use it for.

DNR you’re using AI for something that AI can’t give a good response to

You don’t base your ratings off of an AI, you base it off of a formula you either made or paid for jfl

 

[cripple]

Don’t raise your voice, I can hear you just fine.
I understand your pain, but this isn’t going to end the way you think it will. I won’t allow it to, so calm down.

Couples therapy

 

[Sink]

Here you go friend Accuse me of an ad hominen and ill provide you with my friend chatgit

The distinction comes down to what you want the scale to measure.


Option 1: A fixed scale (how most internet looks scales are used)


Imagine attractiveness is measured on a hypothetical scale from 0 to 10.

• LTN = 3–4
• MTN = 4–5
• HTN = 5–6
• Chadlite = 6–7
• Chad = 7+

The numbers don’t change.


Suppose the average attractiveness of the population drops from 5.0 to 4.2.


Under a fixed scale:

• MTN is still 4–5.
• HTN is still 5–6.
• Chad is still 7+.

The consequence is that the average person is now in LTN or the lower end of MTN instead of the center of MTN.


This is logically consistent because the scale measures an absolute level rather than a person’s position within the population.





Option 2: A relative scale


Instead, suppose you define the categories by percentiles.


For example:

• Bottom 25% = LTN
• Middle 50% = MTN
• Top 20% = HTN
• Top 4% = Chadlite
• Top 1% = Chad

Now MTN always contains the average person.


If everyone becomes less attractive, the cutoffs move downward.


If everyone becomes more attractive, the cutoffs move upward.


The categories are no longer fixed—they float with the population.





Why fixed scales are often preferred


Suppose John has exactly the same face for 20 years.


A relative scale could produce this:

• 2020: MTN
• 2030: LTN
• 2040: HTN

John never changed.


Only everyone else changed.


Many people see this as unintuitive because the rating changes despite the object being rated remaining identical.


A fixed scale avoids this.


John stays MTN unless his appearance changes.





The analogy with temperature


Imagine saying:


“20°C is comfortable.”


If temperatures worldwide increased by 5°C, would you redefine “20°C” to mean 25°C?


Usually no.


You keep the temperature scale fixed.


Instead you say:


“The average day is warmer.”


The reference stays constant.


A fixed attractiveness scale works the same way.





The analogy with height


Suppose average male height increased from 175 cm to 182 cm.


Would we redefine:

• “Tall” from 185 cm to 192 cm?

You could.


But then a man who stayed 187 cm would go from “tall” to merely “average” without shrinking.


Most scientific measurements avoid this by keeping the units fixed.





Which system is more useful depends on the question


If you want to know:


“How attractive is this person?”


A fixed scale is more appropriate because the score depends only on the individual.


If you want to know:


“How attractive is this person compared with everyone else alive today?”


A relative scale is more appropriate because it measures rank rather than an absolute standard.





Why internet communities usually keep the tiers fixed


Communities that use terms like LTN, MTN, HTN, Chadlite, and Chad generally discuss them as stable archetypes rather than percentile groups. People compare individuals across different countries, eras, and contexts as though the categories themselves are constant.


If the categories were redefined every time the population changed, statements like “this actor is HTN” or “that model is Chadlite” would become unstable over time even if those people’s appearances never changed.


Using fixed categories avoids that problem and makes the labels function more like stable descriptive ratings rather than moving rankings. That doesn’t make the scale objective or scientific—it simply makes it internally more consistent for the purpose those communities typically use it for.

yea someone r**e and kill this retarded n****r already

 

[sinedKunt]

Allat just for me to drop a nasty DNR

 

[gimp]

Couples therapy

I work as a therapy for retired terrorist in south Algeria

 

[cripple]

DNR you’re using AI for something that AI can’t give a good response to

You don’t base your ratings off of an AI, you base it off of a formula you either made or paid for jfl

There’s no point arguing with you

 

[twinkdestroyer]

Here you go friend Accuse me of an ad hominen and ill provide you with my friend chatgit

The distinction comes down to what you want the scale to measure.


Option 1: A fixed scale (how most internet looks scales are used)


Imagine attractiveness is measured on a hypothetical scale from 0 to 10.

• LTN = 3–4
• MTN = 4–5
• HTN = 5–6
• Chadlite = 6–7
• Chad = 7+

The numbers don’t change.


Suppose the average attractiveness of the population drops from 5.0 to 4.2.


Under a fixed scale:

• MTN is still 4–5.
• HTN is still 5–6.
• Chad is still 7+.

The consequence is that the average person is now in LTN or the lower end of MTN instead of the center of MTN.


This is logically consistent because the scale measures an absolute level rather than a person’s position within the population.





Option 2: A relative scale


Instead, suppose you define the categories by percentiles.


For example:

• Bottom 25% = LTN
• Middle 50% = MTN
• Top 20% = HTN
• Top 4% = Chadlite
• Top 1% = Chad

Now MTN always contains the average person.


If everyone becomes less attractive, the cutoffs move downward.


If everyone becomes more attractive, the cutoffs move upward.


The categories are no longer fixed—they float with the population.





Why fixed scales are often preferred


Suppose John has exactly the same face for 20 years.


A relative scale could produce this:

• 2020: MTN
• 2030: LTN
• 2040: HTN

John never changed.


Only everyone else changed.


Many people see this as unintuitive because the rating changes despite the object being rated remaining identical.


A fixed scale avoids this.


John stays MTN unless his appearance changes.





The analogy with temperature


Imagine saying:


“20°C is comfortable.”


If temperatures worldwide increased by 5°C, would you redefine “20°C” to mean 25°C?


Usually no.


You keep the temperature scale fixed.


Instead you say:


“The average day is warmer.”


The reference stays constant.


A fixed attractiveness scale works the same way.





The analogy with height


Suppose average male height increased from 175 cm to 182 cm.


Would we redefine:

• “Tall” from 185 cm to 192 cm?

You could.


But then a man who stayed 187 cm would go from “tall” to merely “average” without shrinking.


Most scientific measurements avoid this by keeping the units fixed.





Which system is more useful depends on the question


If you want to know:


“How attractive is this person?”


A fixed scale is more appropriate because the score depends only on the individual.


If you want to know:


“How attractive is this person compared with everyone else alive today?”


A relative scale is more appropriate because it measures rank rather than an absolute standard.





Why internet communities usually keep the tiers fixed


Communities that use terms like LTN, MTN, HTN, Chadlite, and Chad generally discuss them as stable archetypes rather than percentile groups. People compare individuals across different countries, eras, and contexts as though the categories themselves are constant.


If the categories were redefined every time the population changed, statements like “this actor is HTN” or “that model is Chadlite” would become unstable over time even if those people’s appearances never changed.


Using fixed categories avoids that problem and makes the labels function more like stable descriptive ratings rather than moving rankings. That doesn’t make the scale objective or scientific—it simply makes it internally more consistent for the purpose those communities typically use it for.

caged

 

[Kittystrophic]

There’s no point arguing with you

you’re using AI to tell you what LTN is, Sink litt told you what the average is and this n***a has an actually good formula rather than an AI making up shit

 

[sinedKunt]

caged

Did you know that "cagefuel" stems from Nicolas Cage laughing

 

[sinedKunt]

you’re using AI to tell you what LTN is

Should i post myself as a reference pic for hhtn?

 

[Kittystrophic]

Should i post myself as a reference pic for hhtn?

Chatgpt told me it’s true stacy so it’s true

 

[cripple]

I work as a therapy for retired terrorist in south Algeria

Can you help my friend? He has breeding white women syndrome?

 

[cripple]

you’re using AI to tell you what LTN is, Sink litt told you what the average is and this n***a has an actually good formula rather than an AI making up shit

That’s not what I asked it n****r maybe read what it said

 

[sinedKunt]

Can you help my friend? He has breeding white women syndrome?

How strange i got bred by a man with breeding white women syndrome

 

[Kittystrophic]

That’s not what I asked it n****r maybe read what it said

It’s what it gave you r****d
How is a 4 a MTN i’m fucking crying based off of what

 

[Kittystrophic]

“Joined Saturday at 12:16 PM”
Probably best not to argue with you you’re just uneducated

 

[sinedKunt]

Chatgpt told me it’s true stacy so it’s true

Oh you don't get it.....
Anyways:

This is what i use as a reference for myself or else just me...

 

[Kittystrophic]

Oh you don't get it.....
Anyways:

View attachment 380515View attachment 380516

This is what i use as a reference for myself or else just me...

Ur being ironic when u rated yourself hhtn right

 

[cripple]

It’s what it gave you r****d
How is a 4 a MTN i’m fucking crying based off of what

Just ignore everything else it said theory THEORY THEORY THEORY

 

[sinedKunt]

“Joined Saturday at 12:16 PM”
Probably best not to argue with you you’re just uneducated

Thos who do not share that particular piece of knowledge

 

[sinedKunt]

Ur being ironic when u rated yourself hhtn right

Shut up hypergamous foid i bet you have hip dips

 

[cripple]

Thos who do not share that particular piece of knowledge

Those who don’t deserve to know

 

[Kittystrophic]

Just ignore everything else it said theory THEORY THEORY THEORY

I dnr’d it

 

[cripple]

I dnr’d it

Yeah clearly

 

[arisu]

MUH AVERAGE IS MLTN-HLTN
IN A YEAR AVERAGE WILL BE LOW TIER SUBHUMAN TO MID TIER SUBHUMAN
ITS A FIXED RATING SCALE YOU INCOHERENT RETARDS

some ppl say average is lmtn-mmtn and that’s crazy to me
that’s not true unless they live in some irl agartha

 

[sinedKunt]

Ur being ironic when u rated yourself hhtn right

No because i have appeal which is more important than psi

 

[Kittystrophic]

No because i have appeal which is more important than psi

View attachment 380527

i’m just gonna assume you’re being ironic

 

[sinedKunt]

i’m just gonna assume you’re being ironic

Quit playing dumb

 

[Kittystrophic]

Quit playing dumb

I’m autistic I can’t tell irony
But you’re obviously not hhtn

 

[sinedKunt]

I’m autistic I can’t tell irony
But you’re obviously not hhtn

Saying this while i have a whole harem of hmtbs laying around in my bed