Hypothesis PSL Rating Scale Explained + A better approach

[Ladiesman217]

The Full PSL Rating Scale

• 1.0 – 2.0: Deformed / Subhuman (Extremely rare physical deformities or severe asymmetry)
• 2.0 – 3.0: Very Unattractive (Highly noticeable flawssevere lack of facial harmony)
• 3.0 – 3.5: Low-Tier Normie (LTN) (Below average; generally ignored or viewed as plain)
• 3.5 – 4.5: Mid-Tier Normie (MTN) (The exact global average; completely blending into a crowd)
• 4.5 – 5.0: True Mid-Tier Normie (Slightly above average; possesses decent facial symmetry)
• 5.0 – 6.0: High-Tier Normie (HTN) (Visibly attractive, stands out positively in normal daily life)
• 6.0 – 7.0: Chadlite (Local model tier, striking features)
• 7.0 – 8.0: Chad / True Adam (International supermodel tier, flawless facial harmony and ideal proportions, almost unheard of)

The better way to rate n*****s


Instead of the PSL scale where rating inflation and deflation is very common. We can move to a percentile scale, (How attractive a person would be in a room of 100 people). It clearly explains how attractive a person is.

Since the PSL scale is based on a normal distribution curve we can map PSL scales to population percentiles

2PSL = Bottom 2.28%
3PSL = Bottom 15.87%
3.5PSL = Bottom 30.85%
4PSL = Top 50%
4.5PSL = Top 30.85%
5.3PSL = Top 15.87%
5.5PSL = Top 9.86%
6PSL = Top 2.28%
7PSL = Top 0.13%
8PSL = Top 0.003%

The main problem with this percentile scale is it starts to get innacurate as we move up the scale, statistically speaking out of 8 billion people, 24 million are 8PSL, which is plainly untrue, there are probably 10-20 8PSL individuals in the entire world, which is why I believe we must abolish this entire rating system and come up with a different rating system

My idea for a different rating system is a 3D cube, the volume of the cube will be your total attractiveness weight. Since the values are multiplied, a low score on one axis will reduce your overall weightage greatly

X Axis - Structure and Dimo (Angularity)
Y Axis - Facial Harmony (Ratios)
Z Axis - Vitality (Youthfulness, Health indicators etc. This will vary depending on age and must be compared with the age range rather than the full populous)

Moreover your (X,Y,Z) rating will also be able to map your archetype and strengths as well as weaknesses better than the PSL scale

Don’t r**e me for this please, do give constructive criticism

 

[Ladiesman217]

Spoiler: Im sorry but I did what had to be done

@TonyDr @Arya @giga.mia @Dean @Randomized@Penalizer69 @Ghoultune @pompompurino@Currycelloser @Auggy @Blackpillirony@Incognito @taffy @tuberculosisinmybal@BigDihDiddy ⚦ @gimp @ecoli @Nbernical @Kaari@Nihilus @Insomnia @kifykify @Ceeday💯@Deleted Member 78476 @Deleted Member 61421 @Glamour @Chifuyu @Huntergirl@Molotongo @junebug @LaWi @Motivated Dandelions @trvecel @chuu @emeraldpill @diskhat@Anna @PingPong @vamp @Mandy? @draftLexy@Starlet @Histy @James @benny @scotfield@mjölk @Superior @muscipla @WhitepiII@kissmyaxe @𐲀 𐲢 𐲠 𐲀 𐲇 𐲰 @Nenestar @RRM@Shkypot @SkinnyDennis @vespertine @genio@foidslayer @catlady @David🦢 @donsa@pslgodduckz @submissivechud @Clone @limo8@ZyzzReincarnate @neymar @Ladiesman217@Becky4L @The cat from The Matrix @doll @ᴬᵈᵃᵐ@ToryToad @Askinov @knightmaxxer @rand anon@arisu @zaycism @kimothy@rickydickydoodahgrimes @mtren @Kira @Hernan@chudlite67 @True Spaniard @jony🖤bp @ruby@Pearex @broccoli @1894 @Scandi @soylent@Spongebob CirclePants @</3 @Improvedlook@nomi @IMPORTANT: @Cortisol @uglyisbeautiful@boxeur @GermanAngel @Jeremy Peaks @God@Pendejo @joestar @RottingCarrie @Rkelly@Azraell @Xx_Sh4tteredHe4rt_xX @nonu@batluvr158 @oath @SASALELE @True_Fakecell@nervous @zero @BradyT @2R0I2P0@Bananachip @Kittystrophic @signatureharry @dipenhydramine @nun @Faster&Harder @Hector of Troy @Looks Crusader @splanky @xy2m@perculez @rope_maxxer @Shedontluv-U@Hypertrophy @Visionary @ltb @jest @[email protected] @Apathetic @Byro @VoniLa@Robynn @Garce @Inanimate Pragmatist@Fattiepattiecookie @misclick @AClonedTyrone@isntnotrepellent @Lola @Monsieur Meow@wxnter @Ladiesran217 @Lydia @KittyBreath@changfromkk @P1et @kind soul @unon @Cat.@Krusty @Short @comma @tami_26@Slayer_inTraining @nani @Emo @bunnilover67@derpy @avzrael @pig @Hibiscus @lazerdim@shigeharu @_wayland @Ivy @Cash💸 @Foid@Idontknow- @Acumenis @Pinksunglasses @Sal@ErmErm @sinedKunt @lightning_mc@HerculesJr. @alacrity @MikuL0vr:3@Tealovingfool @Thinasadime @fatfuckingchud@glamora @Suomi Volksgrenadier @hersheykiss@balenci @dent @yourfavLTB @iletheile@lowtiersubhuman @0das0ky0 @minxfrz@Idontknowbrah @sullyy @arrowsinmyback@Rololongs @Intellect @Noahmillss @internetbirth@p30x4hidxsmk680fgdyn34nlw @seaweedyum@killmenowpt2 @BrazilianKen @Epic09 @roper.@slim_jim001 @Trevor @Niggard @The Centipede@socio @saccharinesaint @loserfoid @Pentatonic@Luxe @klyro @aquamarine1488 @ramu@Iblamemyeyes @levithedudebro @papichulo_@fawngirl @Mao Zedong @twinkslayrr @bythorn@suz22 @neurodivergenthltb @wolzy @Cougars@exvh @ermhilol @Euphoric @primal_shitmuncher@brizi is jester @fair @OldSpice @Jayan_3 @tit@NoIamHuman @settings @Gesandt @1-NIN3R@buggy47 @Not2beau @foidmogger@Ldar_till_htn @jessicaballs123 @pauseboicarti@SevenColorCrystalBall @QuantaGeetsy@yussimania @Tempname12834 @ilovelarping67@femboysNaddie @meh.guy @negativ @Leoy soprano @lolokokok @iqmaxx @Forsaken Destiny@pua @viasco @thushebecame @larpgod @tmpll@bloodprincess @Syniq @foidless @EK0@Mrpoopdog @Foidhater @Canthopexular@andrewbeta98 @icone @FairnessandEquality@cbt @feeq @orthodoxmaxxer @unknownwisdom@johnarcabob @chero @Matty The Patty @TheDivaaXXX @quartermaster @Best looksmaxxer @Nika.ekat @Blinkers@amandamrtinez @rafidhi @tripledownkoy@Omar_ @Autisticgreycell @kloud @princessgrl@theduff @vuknewgen @Choppedmf @Kill Bill@eyes33 @hikikomorcide @Rei @Viggo7 @lotuus@Fantasie @clownin @SHWSA322 @[email protected] @Jjkkk90 @TechnoBoss @[email protected] @Andie @Hannia @Jackiechains@Abbycloud @stacy201 @itsneverover @squiddcel@Pfizer @TrueOgr3 @Evilemofoid @nacerskates@TFC @miamigz @Zillophone @OVER^3@satanicrapeterrorist @zennn @Anondude @Ybg yelnats @GasHuffer8732 @pickledonions @cass@paulyune @Abi @Almighty Sigma Wolf @tospaks@methamphetamine @princessaurora

 

[Byro]

The Full PSL Rating Scale

• 1.0 – 2.0: Deformed / Subhuman (Extremely rare physical deformities or severe asymmetry)
• 2.0 – 3.0: Very Unattractive (Highly noticeable flawssevere lack of facial harmony)
• 3.0 – 3.5: Low-Tier Normie (LTN) (Below average; generally ignored or viewed as plain)
• 3.5 – 4.5: Mid-Tier Normie (MTN) (The exact global average; completely blending into a crowd)
• 4.5 – 5.0: True Mid-Tier Normie (Slightly above average; possesses decent facial symmetry)
• 5.0 – 6.0: High-Tier Normie (HTN) (Visibly attractive, stands out positively in normal daily life)
• 6.0 – 7.0: Chadlite (Local model tier, striking features)
• 7.0 – 8.0: Chad / True Adam (International supermodel tier, flawless facial harmony and ideal proportions, almost unheard of)

The better way to rate n*****s


Instead of the PSL scale where rating inflation and deflation is very common. We can move to a percentile scale, (How attractive a person would be in a room of 100 people). It clearly explains how attractive a person is.

Since the PSL scale is based on a normal distribution curve we can map PSL scales to population percentiles

2PSL = Bottom 2.28%
3PSL = Bottom 15.87%
3.5PSL = Bottom 30.85%
4PSL = Top 50%
4.5PSL = Top 30.85%
5.3PSL = Top 15.87%
5.5PSL = Top 9.86%
6PSL = Top 2.28%
7PSL = Top 0.13%
8PSL = Top 0.003%

The main problem with this percentile scale is it starts to get innacurate as we move up the scale, statistically speaking out of 8 billion people, 24 million are 8PSL, which is plainly untrue, there are probably 10-20 8PSL individuals in the entire world, which is why I believe we must abolish this entire rating system and come up with a different rating system

My idea for a different rating system is a 3D cube, the volume of the cube will be your total attractiveness weight. Since the values are multiplied, a low score on one axis will reduce your overall weightage greatly

X Axis - Structure and Dimo (Angularity)
Y Axis - Facial Harmony (Ratios)
Z Axis - Vitality (Youthfulness, Health indicators etc. This will vary depending on age and must be compared with the age range rather than the full populous)

Moreover your (X,Y,Z) rating will also be able to map your archetype and strengths as well as weaknesses better than the PSL scale

Don’t r**e me for this please, do give constructive criticism

Well this is a lot easier said then done. How would you go about with actually calculating the individual scorers. Also how are archtype mappings different and how would one be considered more attractive then another. I can somewhat see the idea but the execution is an issue

 

[Ladiesman217]

Well this is a lot easier said then done. How would you go about with actually calculating the individual scorers. Also how are archtype mappings different and how would one be considered more attractive then another. I can somewhat see the idea but the execution is an issue

Calculating the individual scorers as we would do usually out of 10 for each but isolating each axis, for example let’s say somebody has really good angularity and dimo, okay harmony (some ratios are off), and terrible health indicators, we could classify that person as (8,6,4) this can help in identifying his archetype as well. And one cannot exactly be determined to be more attractive than another just in the same plane, like for example if 8x6x4=192, and 4,6,8=192 they would be weighted to be both equally attractive but they possess a different archetype

 

[avzrael]

Well explained

 

[dimorph.ic]

The Full PSL Rating Scale

• 1.0 – 2.0: Deformed / Subhuman (Extremely rare physical deformities or severe asymmetry)
• 2.0 – 3.0: Very Unattractive (Highly noticeable flawssevere lack of facial harmony)
• 3.0 – 3.5: Low-Tier Normie (LTN) (Below average; generally ignored or viewed as plain)
• 3.5 – 4.5: Mid-Tier Normie (MTN) (The exact global average; completely blending into a crowd)
• 4.5 – 5.0: True Mid-Tier Normie (Slightly above average; possesses decent facial symmetry)
• 5.0 – 6.0: High-Tier Normie (HTN) (Visibly attractive, stands out positively in normal daily life)
• 6.0 – 7.0: Chadlite (Local model tier, striking features)
• 7.0 – 8.0: Chad / True Adam (International supermodel tier, flawless facial harmony and ideal proportions, almost unheard of)

The better way to rate n*****s


Instead of the PSL scale where rating inflation and deflation is very common. We can move to a percentile scale, (How attractive a person would be in a room of 100 people). It clearly explains how attractive a person is.

Since the PSL scale is based on a normal distribution curve we can map PSL scales to population percentiles

2PSL = Bottom 2.28%
3PSL = Bottom 15.87%
3.5PSL = Bottom 30.85%
4PSL = Top 50%
4.5PSL = Top 30.85%
5.3PSL = Top 15.87%
5.5PSL = Top 9.86%
6PSL = Top 2.28%
7PSL = Top 0.13%
8PSL = Top 0.003%

The main problem with this percentile scale is it starts to get innacurate as we move up the scale, statistically speaking out of 8 billion people, 24 million are 8PSL, which is plainly untrue, there are probably 10-20 8PSL individuals in the entire world, which is why I believe we must abolish this entire rating system and come up with a different rating system

My idea for a different rating system is a 3D cube, the volume of the cube will be your total attractiveness weight. Since the values are multiplied, a low score on one axis will reduce your overall weightage greatly

X Axis - Structure and Dimo (Angularity)
Y Axis - Facial Harmony (Ratios)
Z Axis - Vitality (Youthfulness, Health indicators etc. This will vary depending on age and must be compared with the age range rather than the full populous)

Moreover your (X,Y,Z) rating will also be able to map your archetype and strengths as well as weaknesses better than the PSL scale

Don’t r**e me for this please, do give constructive criticism

Not bad but cl being a 6 def not true also didn’t @ me

 

[True_Fakecell]

The Full PSL Rating Scale

• 1.0 – 2.0: Deformed / Subhuman (Extremely rare physical deformities or severe asymmetry)
• 2.0 – 3.0: Very Unattractive (Highly noticeable flawssevere lack of facial harmony)
• 3.0 – 3.5: Low-Tier Normie (LTN) (Below average; generally ignored or viewed as plain)
• 3.5 – 4.5: Mid-Tier Normie (MTN) (The exact global average; completely blending into a crowd)
• 4.5 – 5.0: True Mid-Tier Normie (Slightly above average; possesses decent facial symmetry)
• 5.0 – 6.0: High-Tier Normie (HTN) (Visibly attractive, stands out positively in normal daily life)
• 6.0 – 7.0: Chadlite (Local model tier, striking features)
• 7.0 – 8.0: Chad / True Adam (International supermodel tier, flawless facial harmony and ideal proportions, almost unheard of)

The better way to rate n*****s


Instead of the PSL scale where rating inflation and deflation is very common. We can move to a percentile scale, (How attractive a person would be in a room of 100 people). It clearly explains how attractive a person is.

Since the PSL scale is based on a normal distribution curve we can map PSL scales to population percentiles

2PSL = Bottom 2.28%
3PSL = Bottom 15.87%
3.5PSL = Bottom 30.85%
4PSL = Top 50%
4.5PSL = Top 30.85%
5.3PSL = Top 15.87%
5.5PSL = Top 9.86%
6PSL = Top 2.28%
7PSL = Top 0.13%
8PSL = Top 0.003%

The main problem with this percentile scale is it starts to get innacurate as we move up the scale, statistically speaking out of 8 billion people, 24 million are 8PSL, which is plainly untrue, there are probably 10-20 8PSL individuals in the entire world, which is why I believe we must abolish this entire rating system and come up with a different rating system

My idea for a different rating system is a 3D cube, the volume of the cube will be your total attractiveness weight. Since the values are multiplied, a low score on one axis will reduce your overall weightage greatly

X Axis - Structure and Dimo (Angularity)
Y Axis - Facial Harmony (Ratios)
Z Axis - Vitality (Youthfulness, Health indicators etc. This will vary depending on age and must be compared with the age range rather than the full populous)

Moreover your (X,Y,Z) rating will also be able to map your archetype and strengths as well as weaknesses better than the PSL scale

Don’t r**e me for this please, do give constructive criticism

Rating is too ND to be used bro. How will the tiktok people understand

 

[Apollonius]

I agree the scale is fucked up. It doesn't make sense to reduce it to 8, either; the more you shrink the interval, the less accurate you are. Same thing if we are rating a movie with 5, 10, or 100 stars. The further we go, the more we can look into things without handing out harsh penalties, therefore being better to represent the reality

 

[Ladiesman217]

Not bad but cl being a 6 def not true also didn’t @ me

What would cl be?

 

[Byro]

What would cl be?

High 7s you have to add the bell curve to those ratings as numerical value doesn’t determine the masses

 

[dimorph.ic]

What would cl be?

7+

 

[Ladiesman217]

High 7s you have to add the bell curve to those ratings as numerical value doesn’t determine the masses

7+

My scale is out of 8 tho

 

[dimorph.ic]

My scale is out of 8 tho

Gotcha didn’t see that at the start lol prob shoulda been out of 9-9.5 there truly is no 10 and there never will be there might not even be a 9.5