- Joined
- Feb 15, 2025
- Messages
- 255
- Reputation
- 908
Reviewing the current requirements:
In this thread I covered how many of these threads had pseudoscientific reasonings mixed in with some water, common facts. The titles are also extremely misleading. https://shorturl.at/EcOj9
I just now realized that those are just 4 threads, and that the criteria must be incredibly low for them to get here. But I was shocked to see the criteria was actually not that steep but reasonable but most of the threads probably shouldn't be in there. Here's my analysis
Here are the requirements, and here's how I searched for them: https://shorturl.at/tpHvQ
"Comprehensive research and information, delve into nitty gritty details' So we should be seeing solid explanations for most of the things
"Evidence-Based Advice: Backing up claims with evidence is key. A thread worthy of the Must-Read section should cite reputable sources, studies, or expert opinions. This ensures that the advice is not just anecdotal but grounded in scientific understanding." So good evidence based sources that back up our claims, completely valid.
Visuals, that show before and afters, or of other things. Pretty easy to do
"Accessible Language and Clarity: Complex jargon or convoluted language can alienate readers. A Must-Read thread should present information in a clear, concise, and accessible manner. Remember, the goal is to help others, not confuse them."So good solid explanations
"Engagement and Community Involvement: A vibrant community is the backbone of any successful looksmaxxing thread. Encourage discussions, answer questions, and foster a supportive environment where members can share their experiences and tips. This not only adds value but also builds a sense of community." For this criteria, I'd say a thread would need 5+ replies because there should always be previously engaged conversation and discussion of it for it to be a "Must Read"
"Regular Updates: The world of looksmaxxing is dynamic, with new trends and techniques emerging regularly. A Must-Read thread should stay current by providing updates and revisions based on the latest information. This ensures that readers always have access to the most relevant advice."
Up to date info, updating the threads
Last point covers inclusivity, won't cover that
"Testimonials and real life stories of this supposed mechanism or thing working" he says most, so maybe you can go without 2 of these requirements
I organized them as such in a table, and got to work.
I then poured over these threads, observing each one carefully
From picking over evidence, effort, images, clarity, and fact checking, here are my conclusions.
Out of 55 threads, only 12 had linked evidence/sources. That is just under 22% that have legitimate evidence to back up the claims.
Out of those 12 threads, only 8 had legitimate evidence to fully back up their claims. Out of those 12 that is around 67%, and out of all the "Must-Read" threads that is around an abysmal 14.5%.
Out of the 34 threads that could have been made better with some testimonials, only 5 had them. While testimonials are more of a minor part, they are still essential to a good thread. That is around 14.7%.
Out of the full 55 threads, 12 had false info, were purely hypothetical, or had no info at all.
Out of the 55, 3 had completely misleading titles.
Out of the 55 threads, 21 had broken or no visuals.
Out of the 55 threads, 16 were low effort or non blackpill/ actually helpful looksmaxxing related
Here is the spreadsheet I used to calculate this:
So, by following the criteria and using my judgement, how many of these threads were actually worth of a must read, to be held behind account registry?
14 passed. Around 25%, which isn't terrible but would reduce most of the section into nothingness.
If we go by strict criteria, going across all of the useful markers of a must read thread, requiring evidence or at the very least outside links, images, correct information, and high effort, looksmaxxing or at least blackpill related, this number reduces down to, 7 threads. Of these 7, 0 threads were actually related to a looksmaxx or looksmaxxing. They were all high effort lookism/blackpill theories, which do have their place in the must reads. Without the strict criteria, and purely threads that provided good evidence (8) , one of these was a supposed looksmax. (Melatonin). Evidence doesn't have to be a lengthy PubMed article, or a bajillion studies, but at least some links that legitimize the statement, outside of YouTube videos. Using a study and then manipulating what it says to describe a potential mechanism is not proof, and would require lots of reasoning and some links around it to be legitimized.
Out of the 14 that passed my lessened criteria, based on the reasonings the moderators give for what is deserving of a must read,
Now, why are these threads even up? They barely meet the sites own requirements (14 threads pass), and those numbers are cut in half when strictly applied(7 threads).
My only hypothesis, for this occurrence is that the site and it's owner's keep them up to be at the very least similar or on par with L00ksmax, when it clearly is not.
Looksmax has over 2.9x the amount of Best of the Best/ Must-Read threads, and while I haven't fully reviewed them they have a much stricter rubric.
In this thread I covered how many of these threads had pseudoscientific reasonings mixed in with some water, common facts. The titles are also extremely misleading. https://shorturl.at/EcOj9
I just now realized that those are just 4 threads, and that the criteria must be incredibly low for them to get here. But I was shocked to see the criteria was actually not that steep but reasonable but most of the threads probably shouldn't be in there. Here's my analysis
Here are the requirements, and here's how I searched for them: https://shorturl.at/tpHvQ
"Comprehensive research and information, delve into nitty gritty details' So we should be seeing solid explanations for most of the things
"Evidence-Based Advice: Backing up claims with evidence is key. A thread worthy of the Must-Read section should cite reputable sources, studies, or expert opinions. This ensures that the advice is not just anecdotal but grounded in scientific understanding." So good evidence based sources that back up our claims, completely valid.
Visuals, that show before and afters, or of other things. Pretty easy to do
"Accessible Language and Clarity: Complex jargon or convoluted language can alienate readers. A Must-Read thread should present information in a clear, concise, and accessible manner. Remember, the goal is to help others, not confuse them."So good solid explanations
"Engagement and Community Involvement: A vibrant community is the backbone of any successful looksmaxxing thread. Encourage discussions, answer questions, and foster a supportive environment where members can share their experiences and tips. This not only adds value but also builds a sense of community." For this criteria, I'd say a thread would need 5+ replies because there should always be previously engaged conversation and discussion of it for it to be a "Must Read"
"Regular Updates: The world of looksmaxxing is dynamic, with new trends and techniques emerging regularly. A Must-Read thread should stay current by providing updates and revisions based on the latest information. This ensures that readers always have access to the most relevant advice."
Up to date info, updating the threads
Last point covers inclusivity, won't cover that
"Testimonials and real life stories of this supposed mechanism or thing working" he says most, so maybe you can go without 2 of these requirements
I organized them as such in a table, and got to work.
I then poured over these threads, observing each one carefully
From picking over evidence, effort, images, clarity, and fact checking, here are my conclusions.
Out of 55 threads, only 12 had linked evidence/sources. That is just under 22% that have legitimate evidence to back up the claims.
Out of those 12 threads, only 8 had legitimate evidence to fully back up their claims. Out of those 12 that is around 67%, and out of all the "Must-Read" threads that is around an abysmal 14.5%.
Out of the 34 threads that could have been made better with some testimonials, only 5 had them. While testimonials are more of a minor part, they are still essential to a good thread. That is around 14.7%.
Out of the full 55 threads, 12 had false info, were purely hypothetical, or had no info at all.
Out of the 55, 3 had completely misleading titles.
Out of the 55 threads, 21 had broken or no visuals.
Out of the 55 threads, 16 were low effort or non blackpill/ actually helpful looksmaxxing related
Here is the spreadsheet I used to calculate this:
So, by following the criteria and using my judgement, how many of these threads were actually worth of a must read, to be held behind account registry?
14 passed. Around 25%, which isn't terrible but would reduce most of the section into nothingness.
If we go by strict criteria, going across all of the useful markers of a must read thread, requiring evidence or at the very least outside links, images, correct information, and high effort, looksmaxxing or at least blackpill related, this number reduces down to, 7 threads. Of these 7, 0 threads were actually related to a looksmaxx or looksmaxxing. They were all high effort lookism/blackpill theories, which do have their place in the must reads. Without the strict criteria, and purely threads that provided good evidence (8) , one of these was a supposed looksmax. (Melatonin). Evidence doesn't have to be a lengthy PubMed article, or a bajillion studies, but at least some links that legitimize the statement, outside of YouTube videos. Using a study and then manipulating what it says to describe a potential mechanism is not proof, and would require lots of reasoning and some links around it to be legitimized.
Out of the 14 that passed my lessened criteria, based on the reasonings the moderators give for what is deserving of a must read,
Now, why are these threads even up? They barely meet the sites own requirements (14 threads pass), and those numbers are cut in half when strictly applied(7 threads).
My only hypothesis, for this occurrence is that the site and it's owner's keep them up to be at the very least similar or on par with L00ksmax, when it clearly is not.
Looksmax has over 2.9x the amount of Best of the Best/ Must-Read threads, and while I haven't fully reviewed them they have a much stricter rubric.
Spoilers on the full looksmax rubric:
Reactions:
Relevance:
Effort:
Evidence and Quality:
Get the facts right. Know what you're talking about. Demonstrate your understanding. Threads explaining things that the author doesn't know about can't be added to BOTB due to possible misinformation or the lack of crucial information. Please, always do as much research as possible and learn as much about the topic as possible. You'd be amazed at how much you don't know. Trust me. I removed almost all of my own BOTB threads in November 2023 for a reason, this reason specifically.
Example: Someone makes a guide on how to grow taller, and they know nothing about how HGH converts to IGF-1 in the liver and the whole thread assumes more HGH = more growth, not knowing that things like protein, minerals aromatase inhibitors, and vitamins also are important. This person's thread can't go to BOTB.
Outside of that, if the thread is on things that are objective, like ways to grow taller, the information on the thread should be as truthful as possible. Threads that have misinformation on objective topics or that don't have good reasoning on topics that might be subjective (like opinions) won't qualify.
You don't have to cite evidence or anything if the topic is susceptible to subjectivity. Fashion is a good example, since fashion is susceptible to subjectivity. Anything that is susceptible to subjectivity will be assessed based on the thread's reasoning and consensus among users and moderators. If you're making a thread recommending people to wear dresses, the reasoning is bad (why would a straight male wear a dress as a looksmax?), and it won't gain consensus, therefore, it won't qualify.
When it comes to conjectural threads (A conjecture is a statement that is believed to be true, but has not yet been proven. Conjectures are based on intuition, observation, or experience, but lack formal proof and are based on incomplete information). The reasoning for the conjecture has to be solid.
For example, if you hypothesize or theorize something is likely to be true, like maybe you think a certain supplement can do something nobody (not even in the scientific community) has thought about in terms of looksmaxing, display good reasoning for it.
Opinions and theories. are touchy, since they can actually be good ones. If it's opinion-based or a theory, please add as many sources, pieces of evidence, or as much solid reasoning to back it up, to avoid the thread look like pure opinion or an uncredible theory or a hypothesis. With opinions and theories, consensus and great reasoning is the key to qualifying, so be extremely persuasive.
Presentation:
Good Title: "Ultimate Health Guide: How To Maximize Your Health & Why Health is ESSENTIAL For Looksmaxing"
Bad Title: "health guide (high effort everyone GTFIH NOW)"
Originality:
- The thread must receive at least 20 positive reactions from the community.
Relevance:
- The thread must be about looksmaxing, blackpill, or self-improvement.
- It should either be educational and/or instructional.
- The thread demonstrates what it promises.
- The thread should be the best thread on that topic, and not inferior to what is already in the best of the best. If there's already another fashion thread, for example in the BOTB section that is superior to your fashion thread, your thread isn't eligible.
- The information in it also shouldn't be mostly or entirely water (aka common sense) to most of the target audience. This would basically mean that if the thread contains information that most non-blackpilled normies would know, it wouldn't qualify. Example: A thread solely dedicated to "Why acne destroys your looks" would violate this one.
Effort:
- The thread must demonstrate a high level of effort, and thoughtfulness. 500 words minimum.
Evidence and Quality:
- The thread should comprehensively explain the topic it promises to discuss.
- The author must demonstrate a good (preferably deep) understanding of what is being discussed. Threads that demonstrate a shallow understanding or no understanding will not be added to BOTB.
Get the facts right. Know what you're talking about. Demonstrate your understanding. Threads explaining things that the author doesn't know about can't be added to BOTB due to possible misinformation or the lack of crucial information. Please, always do as much research as possible and learn as much about the topic as possible. You'd be amazed at how much you don't know. Trust me. I removed almost all of my own BOTB threads in November 2023 for a reason, this reason specifically.
Example: Someone makes a guide on how to grow taller, and they know nothing about how HGH converts to IGF-1 in the liver and the whole thread assumes more HGH = more growth, not knowing that things like protein, minerals aromatase inhibitors, and vitamins also are important. This person's thread can't go to BOTB.
- The thread should be as truthful as possible on objective topics, display solid conjecture, or backed by great reasoning and consensus on subjective subjects.
Outside of that, if the thread is on things that are objective, like ways to grow taller, the information on the thread should be as truthful as possible. Threads that have misinformation on objective topics or that don't have good reasoning on topics that might be subjective (like opinions) won't qualify.
You don't have to cite evidence or anything if the topic is susceptible to subjectivity. Fashion is a good example, since fashion is susceptible to subjectivity. Anything that is susceptible to subjectivity will be assessed based on the thread's reasoning and consensus among users and moderators. If you're making a thread recommending people to wear dresses, the reasoning is bad (why would a straight male wear a dress as a looksmax?), and it won't gain consensus, therefore, it won't qualify.
When it comes to conjectural threads (A conjecture is a statement that is believed to be true, but has not yet been proven. Conjectures are based on intuition, observation, or experience, but lack formal proof and are based on incomplete information). The reasoning for the conjecture has to be solid.
For example, if you hypothesize or theorize something is likely to be true, like maybe you think a certain supplement can do something nobody (not even in the scientific community) has thought about in terms of looksmaxing, display good reasoning for it.
Opinions and theories. are touchy, since they can actually be good ones. If it's opinion-based or a theory, please add as many sources, pieces of evidence, or as much solid reasoning to back it up, to avoid the thread look like pure opinion or an uncredible theory or a hypothesis. With opinions and theories, consensus and great reasoning is the key to qualifying, so be extremely persuasive.
Presentation:
- The thread must be titled properly. Poorly titled threads like "skin guide BOTB" will not qualify.
Good Title: "Ultimate Health Guide: How To Maximize Your Health & Why Health is ESSENTIAL For Looksmaxing"
Bad Title: "health guide (high effort everyone GTFIH NOW)"
- The thread must be written properly. Frequent grammar, spelling, punctuation mistakes, among others, will not qualify.
- The thread must be coherent, structured (having chapters, sections or table of contents) and formatted properly.
- If relevant, the thread must explain what the topic and content is about and why it is important. Unless it's super obvious, like getting rid of acne, explaining to people why it's important is necessary.
- The thread must be clear, lucid, and easy to understand for the average person. Terms that are not commonly known must be explained simply and comprehensively.
Originality:
- The majority of the text must be written by the author. Threads written mostly or entirely generated by A.I. language models, mostly comprised of copypasta, information from external sources, or other's writing won't be added to BOTB.
If this site wants to be anything similar to looksmax, or even rival it, we must hold the best of our posters and posts to the highest of quality. It's a bad sign when the majority of the threads don't even make the basic rubric.
While this site has a fantastic offtopic culture, it is severely lacking in the looksmaxxing department despite the majority of the threads pre April of 2024 being looksmaxxing threads.
HDm7CoQ, signing off.
While this site has a fantastic offtopic culture, it is severely lacking in the looksmaxxing department despite the majority of the threads pre April of 2024 being looksmaxxing threads.
HDm7CoQ, signing off.
